Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DinoInDisguise" data-source="post: 9443511" data-attributes="member: 7045806">To be clear. I actually don't care at all about the change to command, personally.  I was unaware the spell was ever used.For your specific example, I feel it's out of the scope of what I'm discussing. But in my opinion, people are weird. It is not "bad DMing" to not allow abusive uses that are obviously against the intent, and rules, of the spell. In the specific case, I would simply have the "walking" end at the edge of the boat. I would have the enemy end their turn there. In the case of swim, it really doesnt matter if you follow the command. Unless danger was present in the water, its fine. It's not a big deal.I think there is a lot of hyperbole in this discussion, and much of it is unproductive. But that is, largely, the norm around here and it does make discussions more interesting. So I am happy people feel free to engage in such wild discussions.First question, it only applies to the DM because the player "bad faith" is filtered through that same DM. Players have no objective agency. They can't do anything without the DM's permission. So attempts at player bad faith just hit a wall and ends. Good DMs will have limited patience for this behavior, so with the attempt at bad faith ending with the DM, so may that player's time at the table if its a recurring issue.I will reiterate. I am not arguing against the spell changes, per say. I really don't care. I was arguing that a justification being used was deeply flawed.Finally, on clerics getting mind control. The answer is because people find it fun. And it doesn't actually hurt anything if good faith is the norm. Remember that WotC, per the DMG, expects DMs to act as referees. So individual DMs can, and do, interpret the spell differently - and this is by design.I DM for randoms off reddit constantly. Probably, on average, for 9 months out of the year, I have a game running with randoms in it. Never had an issue. I adore DMing for people I've never met. It is very freeing in a strange way. Most players I've played with, and the number is over 100, have never caused an issue. If they were cheating it simply didnt make any difference to the game.I'm not interested in the actual change. I don't think it matters. At best I think the change is pointless.This is a hot take. I don't think class balance is a concern. In fact, I think its a battle that can't be won by any real world metric. DM's have a far larger impact on class balance than the rules do. DMs should be setting things up so players each get the spotlight. If a player hogs the spotlight when it's not intended for them, it's a player problem. So any balance issue, presuming a good DM, fades away in my experience. Even the lauded caster-martial divide is largely a by-product of DMs not wanting to design encounters that favor martials and not wanting to run more encounters. Dead magic zones, heavily resistant enemies, and the list goes on.Giving martials more choice is fine. But this is a far smaller issue than the game breaking issue some would lead us to believe it is.</blockquote>

Verification