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

[TiQuinn]

And I have said multiple times I feel Command was quietly enabling problem players to ignore what was established in session zero to do this stuff anyway, in the name of "being creative".

The issue is problem players ignoring what was agreed on, not the spell.

 

[Alzrius]

Mate, get a grip. The issue is not with the spell, it is with the people. If people are inclined to insert poop humour, they will; there are endless opportunities with or without this one spell. Don't play with people who have tastes incompatible with yours. This is not something the rules can mandate.

Our group had a player who would, not always but sometimes, make a "thpbbbb" sound when someone failed a saving throw against a fear effect, i.e. the sound of them making a mess in their pants. No one floated the idea of removing fear effects, we just told that person to knock it off (we later kicked him out of the group, albeit for different reasons).

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Again, why are we proving tools to enable that kind of players?

Because this is an RPG where by definition people are allowed to make stuff up. Like I can already decide what my character says or does, so there is endless possibility of juvenile humour there if I want (I don't.) By your logic we should do away with that freedom too, and only have preapproved things the characters can say and do like in a computer game.

 

[MarkB]

Why do you assume every player is on that level, especially when I have been talking about how this spell enables people to try to force games NOT on this level into going down to it?

No spell in the game is going to significantly affect peoples' ability to do that, and if you are playing with people like that in your group, no rule amendment is going to rein them in.

I can speak from my experience, if someone did thing like that on my table as a player I would probably have to leave the room, maybe vomit, because this is bloody disgusting. I think it owuld ruin the game night for me, I do not come to RPGs to be grossed out and be told I'm stupid for being invested into a collaborative story we're together creating.

And again, the problem with that is the player, not the spell. No spell description in any rulebook will prevent a player from dropping some toilet humour into your game. How you have come to the conclusion that this is an issue with a spell rather than with a person is quite unfathomable.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Why should we allow the game to be designed to carter to that kind of people and to allow any of them to try and drag any other type of game to their level?

Is not specifically ruling out the behavior you seem to so dislike the same as "designing to cater to it"? I don't think so.

 

[TiQuinn]

And again, the problem with that is the player, not the spell. No spell description in any rulebook will prevent a player from dropping some toilet humour into your game. How you have come to the conclusion that this is an issue with a spell rather than with a person is quite unfathomable.

Better get rid of every illusion spell in the game too! (Will not discuss what we’ve done with illusions in all our time playing…)

 

[Not a Decepticon]

The issue is problem players ignoring what was agreed on, not the spell.

Because this is an RPG where by definition people are allowed to make stuff up. Like I can already decide what my character says or does, so there is endless possibility of juvenile humour there if I want (I don't.) By your logic we should do away with that freedom too, and only have preapproved things the characters can say and do like in a computer game.

No spell in the game is going to significantly affect peoples' ability to do that, and if you are playing with people like that in your group, no rule amendment is going to rein them in.

And again, the problem with that is the player, not the spell. No spell description in any rulebook will prevent a player from dropping some toilet humour into your game. How you have come to the conclusion that this is an issue with a spell rather than with a person is quite unfathomable.

Is not specifically ruling out the behavior you seem to so dislike the same as "designing to cater to it"? I don't think so.

And yet I somehow do not see this kind of behavior in more open-ended games, so I do not believe this argument. it's not just that the players ignore session zero and you canjnot stop this kind of behavior, it's that in a more strict game some people's desire to "break it" through exploits may override respect for fellow players and poorly-designed spells like Command enable them to do exactly that. Maybe if D&D was overall more open-ended game, this would not be a problem. But not only it isn't, we're literally on forum of a website selling version of the game with 200% more specific rules. Command being so open-ended does not fit design philosophy and enables people trying to "break" the game to feel clever.

 

[Shardstone]

As usual, dnd woes come down to your group.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And yet I somehow do not see this kind of behavior in more open-ended games, so I do not believe this argument. it's not just that the players ignore session zero and you canjnot stop this kind of behavior, it's that in a more strict game some people's desire to "break it" through exploits may override respect for fellow players and poorly-designed spells like Command enable them to do exactly that. Maybe if D&D was overall more open-ended game, this would not be a problem. But not only it isn't, we're literally on forum of a website selling version of the game with 200% more specific rules. Command being so open-ended does not fit design philosophy and enables people trying to "break" the game to feel clever.

The whole point of this thread is a concern that the design philosophy in question for the current revision of the current edition is not meeting the needs and desires of the OP (and others; I'm right there with them).

 

[TiQuinn]

As usual, dnd woes come down to your group.

Yeah, this is it in a nutshell.