D&D 5E Command spell as reaction

[Rya.Reisender]

Let's say a paladin fights a rogue. The rogue keeps hiding.
The paladin uses the ready action and defines "When the rogue comes out of hiding to attack, I cast Command "Approach" on it."
The rogue fails the wisdom saving throw.

Questions:
1. Is the attack of the rogue still executed?
2. Can the attack of the rogue hit the paladin and break concentration before the reaction is triggered?
3. Does the rogue carry out the "Approach" command immediately or on his next turn? What if the rogue already used all its movement before attacking?

 

[Swarmkeeper]

The Command spell causes a creature who fails its save to carry out the order and end its turn. Yeah, one could try to Rules Lawyer their way out of the “Approach” Command allowing the attack in certain circumstances, but reading all the Command options, that is the intended interpretation IMO.

So...

1. Since worded specifically, “when the Rogue comes out of hiding to attack” the Command can take place before the attack. In the scenario, I’m going to say “hiding” is really “coming out from behind full cover”. It is highly unlikely that if the Rogue and Paladin are engaged in fighting that the Rogue is going to succeed in actually hiding after each attack.

2. See 1...

3. Yes, the Rogue carries out the Approach Command immediately for as far as it can move that turn then ends its turn.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Presumably the first thing the Paladin knows about when the Rogue comes out of hiding is when they get stabbed or shot. If they spot the rogue before the rogue executes their attack, then the rogue isn't going to get their sneak attack off.

You have to concentrate to hold a spell as a reaction, so the rogue's attack could cause the Paladin to lose their spell before they get to cast it.
After the rogue has attacked, if the paladin maintained their concentration, then they can cast the spell.
By the book, the rogue would have to follow the command on their next turn, rather than their current. So even if they had movement left, they would not have to approach the paladin on the round that they attacked. - This is something that a DM might decide to make a ruling on.

 

[jaelis]

It really depends what you mean by coming out of hiding, and what the rogue is really doing.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

Why does it matter how the rogue comes out of hiding? The rogue comes out of hiding because he attacks as per basic rules:

"If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses"

There is by the way no cover involved. The rogue has that trait in where he can hide anywhere as long as he is lightly obscured, so he can actually even hide right in front of his enemy's eyes. I don't see how this should affect the answers to my questions, though...

But I think Cap 'n Kobold's reply makes sense when going by the rules.

The "Command" spell specifically refers to "The target's next turn" not immediately. So if the reaction is on the target's current turn, there is actually a whole round delay. The problem with this is that the "Command" spell does not say anything about stopping what the target is currently doing, so the rogue is hit by the Command spell but then can still hide and move away until his next turn.

Maybe it really requires a ruling in this particular situation, like:
"If the target is hit on its own turn, it ends its current turn and then executes the action and ends its turn on the next turn."

But that seems to be a bit abusable because then everyone will use Ready Action with Command to effectively make the target unable to do something for two rounds rather than one.

So maybe it should be phrased like this:
"If the target is hit on its own turn, it only does the actions the player declared before knowing he is hit by the Command spell and then ends its current turn and then executes the action and ends its turn on the next turn."

 

[Maxperson]

Presumably the first thing the Paladin knows about when the Rogue comes out of hiding is when they get stabbed or shot. If they spot the rogue before the rogue executes their attack, then the rogue isn't going to get their sneak attack off.

You have to concentrate to hold a spell as a reaction, so the rogue's attack could cause the Paladin to lose their spell before they get to cast it.
After the rogue has attacked, if the paladin maintained their concentration, then they can cast the spell.
By the book, the rogue would have to follow the command on their next turn, rather than their current. So even if they had movement left, they would not have to approach the paladin on the round that they attacked. - This is something that a DM might decide to make a ruling on.

I think this is a ruling over rules situation. It's pretty clear from reading the spell that the creature has to immediately follow the command, which is why it happens on its next turn. The spell assumes that the paladin is casting the spell normally, which means that the creature on it's next turn would be immediately responding. If used as a reaction, I would rule that the creature has to come on its current turn and keep with the intent of the spell.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I think this is a ruling over rules situation. It's pretty clear from reading the spell that the creature has to immediately follow the command, which is why it happens on its next turn. The spell assumes that the paladin is casting the spell normally, which means that the creature on it's next turn would be immediately responding. If used as a reaction, I would rule that the creature has to come on its current turn and keep with the intent of the spell.

If you go this way, you create additional complications, though. Like what if the creature has already used its movement before being hit by the spell. Does the spell have no effect then? It has a duration listed as "1 Round", so the spell should effectively last 6 seconds, enough to move a full round worth of movement.

 

[jaelis]

Why does it matter how the rogue comes out of hiding?

Two factors. First, reactions happen immediately after the triggering action, and second, command requires you to see the target.

The best way to phrase the trigger would be "I cast command on the rogue as soon as I see him." There's three ways that could resolve, depending on what is going on with the rogue:

A. The rogue can attack without causing himself to become visible. Certainly he is no longer hidden after attacking, but that could just mean the paladin knows where the rogue is. If you think the rogue's ability effectively renders him invisible, then he would remain unseen. In that case, the reaction would never be triggered.

B. The act of attack renders the rogue visible. In that case the spell would be cast after the attack resolves, assuming the paladin can maintain concentration.

C. The rogue becomes visible before he can attack. That would be the typical case if the rogue is stepping out from behind cover to attack. In that case the spell would be cast before the attack.

AFAIK, it is up the to DM to decide which ruling applies. I would probably rule B here myself, that the paladin can see the rogue once he knows where to look, but he doesn't know where to look until the rogue attacks.

 

[Hussar]

IMO, the key point here is that reactions (barring some specific rulings) occur after the triggering action. So, rogue attacks (and becomes visible), and then the command spell would go off, presuming that the spell isn't lost from the rogue's attack.

 

[Shiroiken]

The "Command" spell specifically refers to "The target's next turn" not immediately. So if the reaction is on the target's current turn, there is actually a whole round delay. The problem with this is that the "Command" spell does not say anything about stopping what the target is currently doing, so the rogue is hit by the Command spell but then can still hide and move away until his next turn.

It seems lawyery, but that was how I first thought of it. Next turn would be after the Rogue's current turn, so they would still be able to sneak attack and re-hide. Their next turn will be bad, however, since they'll approach the paladin, probably to receive a full smite smack-down.