D&D (2024) Command is the Perfect Encapsulation of Everything I Don't Like About 5.5e

[Hussar]

A. Taking the exact reading into the exact wording of "the berry provides enough nourishment to sustain a creature for one day" an jumping from there to "so it must make you feel full, therefore it must make food that you eat after eating a goodberry less appetizing" needs several logical leaps and inferences to do something that the designers didn't really foresee or intend (giving you an edge on a pie baking contest).

B. Reading the spell description of Command and seeing in black and white "You might issue a command other than one described here. If you do so, the DM determines how the target behaves." and then doing exactly what the spell says to do.

Because you are operating from the presumption that I'm cool with the idea of "You might command... behaves" as a "black and white thing. See, "Eating a berry that provides 24 hours of nourishment" is not exactly a stretch. But, a spell that INCLUDES vague phrasing is the entire problem in a nutshell.

There's nothing vague open about "eating this provides 24 hours of nourishment". That's not an open ended description.

"This spell can do whatever you can convince your DM to let you get away with" is open ended and very poor game design.

 

[Hussar]

Here's some Commands I've used personally:

-Climb

-Repent

-Spin

-Hug

-Throw

-Give

-Dismantle

-Dismount

Ok, let's walk through these.

Climb - requires a skill check which may fail, causing the target to fall and take damage. It's entirely possible that the target literally is not capable of climbing whatever it is that you want it to climb. Also, it's vague. Up or down? You are abusing the definition of the spell where the examples are all move towards the caster or move away from the caster or just not move at all.

Repent - I don't even have any idea how this would be adjudicated. Note, when you use Command, the target does not even take the full round to take the action. It simply does something and ends its turn. What does "repent" even mean?

Spin - ummm, okay? How is this any different than "Halt"?

Hug - Now you are forcing the target to attack another target? Hug who? Yourself? Another target, initiating a grapple check? What effect are you expecting here?

Throw - again, beyond the scope of the spell. The spell can cause you to drop something at your feet, but, that's it. Now you are making the NPC actually take an action, again, not permitted by the spell, and potentially attacking someone - after all, I can throw my spear at someone and attack, again expressly not permitted by the spell.

Give - Same as throw really. Give what? My opinion? My attention? The spell permits me to cause someone to drop what they are holding, but, handing it to someone else? Fantastic disarming spell - after all now all I have to do is get the NPC to give their weapon to another PC and we're golden. Clearly more powerful than "Drop".

Dismantle - What does this even mean? I now have to break something? I have to take something apart? This isn't clearly a far more powerful option?

Dismount - How is this any different than Grovel?

So, five of your seven examples are clearly up powering the spell by abusing the terms of the spell to grant power to the spell that it should not have. The other two are covered by the existing commands.

Now do you see why this is a problem?

 

[SableWyvern]

Ok, let's walk through these.

Climb - requires a skill check which may fail, causing the target to fall and take damage. It's entirely possible that the target literally is not capable of climbing whatever it is that you want it to climb. Also, it's vague. Up or down? You are abusing the definition of the spell where the examples are all move towards the caster or move away from the caster or just not move at all.

Repent - I don't even have any idea how this would be adjudicated. Note, when you use Command, the target does not even take the full round to take the action. It simply does something and ends its turn. What does "repent" even mean?

Spin - ummm, okay? How is this any different than "Halt"?

Hug - Now you are forcing the target to attack another target? Hug who? Yourself? Another target, initiating a grapple check? What effect are you expecting here?

Throw - again, beyond the scope of the spell. The spell can cause you to drop something at your feet, but, that's it. Now you are making the NPC actually take an action, again, not permitted by the spell, and potentially attacking someone - after all, I can throw my spear at someone and attack, again expressly not permitted by the spell.

Give - Same as throw really. Give what? My opinion? My attention? The spell permits me to cause someone to drop what they are holding, but, handing it to someone else? Fantastic disarming spell - after all now all I have to do is get the NPC to give their weapon to another PC and we're golden. Clearly more powerful than "Drop".

Dismantle - What does this even mean? I now have to break something? I have to take something apart? This isn't clearly a far more powerful option?

Dismount - How is this any different than Grovel?

So, five of your seven examples are clearly up powering the spell by abusing the terms of the spell to grant power to the spell that it should not have. The other two are covered by the existing commands.

Now do you see why this is a problem?

Do you honestly believe spin is a synonym for halt? Are you genuinely asking for someone to explain the difference to you?

Do you honestly believe a hug must be an attack?

Where did you get the idea the spell cannot make someone take an action? I didn't see that anywhere in the quoted text of the 2014 version provided earlier.

Do you honestly believe dismount is a synonym for grovel?

"grant power to the spell that it should not have." Are you aware that whether or not dismantle is too powerful is a subjective question?

And to then use those bizarre claims as evidence, not of thing you simply don't like, but actual abuse is utterly mind-boggling to me.

 

[Daztur]

Now you are making the NPC actually take an action, again, not permitted by the spell

Not permitted? Not permitted where? By who? Where does it say that in the text of the spell? You're just making stuff up and claiming that I'm breaking the rules of the spell because I'm following the clear text of the spell instead of the houserules that you've made up.

I can't debate the rules of a spell when I'm arguing about what the rules text says and you're arguing about houserules that you've made up out of thin air.

 

[mellored]

Do you honestly believe spin is a synonym for halt? Are you genuinely asking for someone to explain the difference to you?

Spin takes 5' of movement.
Halt uses all your movement.

Do you honestly believe a hug must be an attack?

Depends on who's nearby and how they feel about you.

Do you honestly believe dismount is a synonym for grovel?

Dismount is half your speed.
Mount is half your speed.
The mount can still move.

Not sure what you accomplished.

"grant power to the spell that it should not have." Are you aware that whether or not dismantle is too powerful is a subjective question?

If they are standing next to a lock with a DC 18 to dismantle it, do they dismantle it, or does the spell fail?

 

[Older Beholder]

Do you honestly believe a hug must be an attack?

Yeah, it's hard for me not to see hugging someone as a grapple.

 

[Hussar]

Do you honestly believe spin is a synonym for halt? Are you genuinely asking for someone to explain the difference to you?

Do you honestly believe a hug must be an attack?

Where did you get the idea the spell cannot make someone take an action? I didn't see that anywhere in the quoted text of the 2014 version provided earlier.

Do you honestly believe dismount is a synonym for grovel?

"grant power to the spell that it should not have." Are you aware that whether or not dismantle is too powerful is a subjective question?

And to then use those bizarre claims as evidence, not of thing you simply don't like, but actual abuse is utterly mind-boggling to me.

You didn't ask for synonyms. I was saying that the results of these commands are already covered. Spin is just halt. What would be the difference? What does hug mean? Dismount would cause the target to drop prone and stop moving. Same as Grovel.

SInce you provide no actual context for these commands and provide no indication on what you expect the results of these commands to be, I can only respond with how I would rule them. Hug would be an attack. Dismount would effectively be the same as Grovel. Spin would be the same as Halt. How would they give different results?

See, this is the thing. Of the 20 or so examples given of creative Commands in this thread, about a quarter of them are already covered in the rules. About half of them are pretty clear over reaching - Change being a prime example, and the remaining quarter are so vague or obscure that I have no idea what they actually mean. As in, if the player commanded a character to "Hug", I honestly have no idea what that means. What is supposed to be the result of that command?

 

[Hussar]

Not permitted? Not permitted where? By who? Where does it say that in the text of the spell? You're just making stuff up and claiming that I'm breaking the rules of the spell because I'm following the clear text of the spell instead of the houserules that you've made up.

I can't debate the rules of a spell when I'm arguing about what the rules text says and you're arguing about houserules that you've made up out of thin air.

Ummm, nope? None of the examples of Command actually force the target to take an action. Not one. And none of them allow for the target to take an action against something or someone else. Every example is a free action combined with a movement and then end the turn. Anything more than that is clearly not within the RAI of the spell.

This has nothing to do with house rules. How can it WHEN THE DEFINITION OF THE SPELL IS THAT THE DM IS TO RESOLVE ANY NON STANDARD COMMANDS? You keep claiming that you're following the "black and white" of the spell, but, there is no actual black and white and that's the entire problem of the spell mechanic. This is why this spell is poorly written. Because there is no actual answer to be had here. The description of the 2014 version basically says, "ask your DM". There are no actual rules there.

So, I follow what's intended by the examples given. None of the examples allow the caster to force the target to take an action. None of the examples allow the caster to force the target to interact with anything other than what the target personally has in his or her hand. And, even then, the only interaction is a free one - drop the object.

You keep adding effects beyond the examples and then claiming that these are permitted because there is no text saying they aren't, while ignoring the context of the examples given in the spell description.

 

[Daztur]

Spin takes 5' of movement.
Halt uses all your movement.

Spin might make them dizzy or nauseated a the DM's discretion. Or not.

Depends on who's nearby and how they feel about you.

Dismount is half your speed.
Mount is half your speed.
The mount can still move.

Not sure what you accomplished.

If the dude is on a howdah on top of an elephant I can get him to get down off the elephant instead of fall prone on the floor of the howdah. Little edge cases like that are why is LOVE Command.

If they are standing next to a lock with a DC 18 to dismantle it, do they dismantle it, or does the spell fail?

They try. If the DM is feeling cheeky they can also take off their clothes since that's another meaning of dismantle. I'd probably roll a luck dice to see what they do.

 

[mellored]

If the dude is on a howdah on top of an elephant I can get him to get down off the elephant instead of fall prone on the floor of the howdah. Little edge cases like that are why is LOVE Command.

And now you can prone the elephant.

They try.

Per RAW.