D&D 5E Does the "Friends" cantrip need a fix?

[Saeviomagy]

[MENTION=5890]Saeviomagy[/MENTION]

Yikes. I guess I don't understand. Fundamentally the charisma check shouldn't allow someone to convince someone of something they wouldn't do. Advantage on a Charisma check grants a small bonus to what is a 'possible' check. Getting an item for 25-33% off is an example of what I would suggest is a possible check. Getting an item for free isn't.

I guess we're talking at cross purposes here. Normally the merchant would not give you an item for 25-33% off. You're convincing him to make that reduction. That is what I mean by convincing someone of something they don't already agree to.

After all, if you're not convincing someone of something, there's no check needed - they already agree.

Your example would probably not fly with me - after all, you're making a skill check right from the start of negotiations. Otherwise are you trying to tell me that your negotiation cannot possibly succeed until after you cast friends? The merchant has already decided not to give you the item at that point - the roll has been made and you failed. The alternative is that the interaction consisted of multiple rolls.

Minor illusion, message, prestidigitation and even true strike all have uses that align with their stated purpose.

Like you pointed out, the only benefit to friends is that it makes you enemies. I'm not sure how I see this as a benefit worth spending a cantrip slot on. Would you typically play a high charisma character and then consider it to improve the game if you punched people in the face 1 minute after having successfully convinced them of something?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

No. Charm Person specifies that they are aware, and leaves it up to them to decide how to react. They might feel that it was totally reasonable for you to use the spell to calm them down so they'd listen when you passed on vitally important information, they might not, but it is possible for them to not be angry at you.

Friends guarantees that they will be angry at you. They become hostile, period. Doesn't matter what their prior opinion was, doesn't matter how you treated them, they become hostile.

Does that mean if someone casts it on my pc then leads him to his fav restaurant I hAve to act hostil... Can't laugh it off?

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Does that mean if someone casts it on my pc then leads him to his fav restaurant I hAve to act hostil... Can't laugh it off?

Clearly no! Even if its another PC who cast it. You must murder them right then and there!

 

[keterys]

Hey, now. You don't need to murder them right there and then.

You can wait until later to poison them.

 

[redrick]

I am confused as to why the primary metric for evaluating Friends is how effectively it can be used in a bartering situation. That is far from the only circumstance in which charisma checks come up in my game! In fact, it almost never comes up in my game, and if it did, I wouldn't want Friends to give an automatic discount on everything.

Friends should be for pulling off some sort of short-term con, where the caster is gone the moment the spell wears off. This sort of stuff happens in movies all the time.

The question then becomes, in what situations is Friends more useful than another character just taking the "aid another" action? And that is a good question. Here are my thoughts at the moment:
* The caster is either alone, or the other characters are busy while the caster is chatting up the target. For instance, if Friends is being used to create a distraction so that the rest of the party can do something else.
* The other available characters are not proficient in the required charisma skill.
* As a GM, I would probably allow a slightly greater latitude on possible outcomes when a character is being magically suggested. This isn't exactly RAW, but it's not exactly not RAW either. It's entirely my discretion as the DM to determine what can be attempted with a check and what the DC would be, and I like it that way.

And, again, I think the word "hostile" is being misinterpreted and overblown here. Nobody is getting murdered for an innocuous use of friends, and there are plenty of uses of the spell that could cause hostility that is non-violent and not a major impediment. I live in a city. I encounter people who are hostile to me all the time.

Same with the duration of a minute. If somebody pulls out a pen and paper and works out that, actually, from the time of casting this spell, to approaching the target, to attempting to persuade the target, a total of 103 seconds would have elapsed, I will throw a die at that person. It's a ball-park duration, folks. Just like the actual duration of actions that can be taken in a combat round of 6 seconds varies from one action to the other. It gives us a general sense of how much time is available, but it's not to handcuff us to some sort of imaginary in-game clock that none of us can actually see. The next level up, 10 minutes, is a long time, allowing for multiple extremely complex interactions. With a duration of that long, I could con a guard and then run 2 miles. Or, well, I couldn't anymore because I'm a fat old man, but my character could. His background is high school athlete.

 

[zago]

I guess we're talking at cross purposes here. Normally the merchant would not give you an item for 25-33% off. You're convincing him to make that reduction. That is what I mean by convincing someone of something they don't already agree to.

hmm. Yeah we are talking in circles. Merchant has a basic item price (longsword:15g). Merchant also has a price that is the lowest he 'willing' negotiate to (Longsword 10g). Merchant has a certain prices he would never sell an item for weather it be for pride, or because he would lose money on the deal (let's say longsword 9g-free). When I say normal, I mean somewhere within 15g-10g. In a barter society it would actually NOT be normal to sell an item for it's actual 'list' price. I only say normal in the sense that D&D doesn't assume all deals are bartering.

All skill checks are, in my impression, used to determine the result of something possible although difficult. My players don't make a check to perform something impossible.

The benefit of friends is that it allows you to gain adv on charisma checks, that is its stated purpose. It's a short term benefit, but the size of the risk greatly depends on who you use it on. You might say that 'hostility' is a negative, but 'hostility' is the logical conclusion of a lot skill uses. If I choose to intimidate, deceive, or pick pocket, the result is likely at some point hostility. If a player uses Guidance, minor illusion, prestidigitation or other abilities to swindle, unfairly negotiate, or trick someone and the target is aware that they are doing it, they will become hostile. If friends were better, it would be more or less broken imo.

The idea of using it to to 'make someone hostile' is actually the weirdest use I have seen, although plausible. In the sense that making someone hostile should be pretty easy, and definitely does not require a cantrip. Guard 1 becomes hostile with Guard 2 because -A- He thinks Guard 2 used a cantrip to unfairly manipulate him or -B- Guard 1 is under the impression that Guard 2 has been Boasting about his 'accomplishments' last eve with his daughter.

Even if I had a player say he was using that cantrip for the 'anger' purpose, I would be like, well.... What do you say that really gets him angry? The purpose of the hostility is to keep in check the usage, using friends on the king is a bad idea, using it to barter for equipment, gather rumors amongst townfolk, slip past a guard on entrance to a large city, or just to stall for time while party members surround a camp are all great, simple, logical uses.

Either way, you say it's not useful, and I am saying, I have used it to great effect many times. Your suggestion, I guess, is that if I can make it useful I am somehow doing it wrong. I think you just need to get into the trenches and use it, it might change your mind.

 

[zago]

It says in DMG what Hostile is, pg 244

A hostile creature opposes the adventurers and their goals but doesn't necessarily attack them on sight.

It goes on to explain that it might require multiple charisma checks to convince a 'hostile' creature to do something on BEHALF of the players. So again hostile means "doesn't like" doesn't mean "Has to kill."

A hostile neighbor doesn't wave hi, probably complains to the other neighbors about you, and definitely won't let you borrow his mower (unless of course you very convincingly beg).

 

[jgsugden]

You're focusing on this too much - as the 'Help' action basically negates the need for this spell, it isn't worth spending so much time on it. The only time it is worth using is when you only get one shot to convince someone to do something and your friends are not available. It is better used *against* the party than *by* the party.

 

[jgsugden]

Does that mean if someone casts it on my pc then leads him to his fav restaurant I hAve to act hostil... Can't laugh it off?

Yeah, after all, if someone gave you drugs and dumped you at a restaurant it'd be funny... right?

While a PC (or NPC) might, at the discretion of the DM bypass the hostile condition, it is safe to say that the vast majority of those falling under such a mental invasion would not react kindly.

 

[redrick]

You're focusing on this too much - as the 'Help' action basically negates the need for this spell, it isn't worth spending so much time on it. The only time it is worth using is when you only get one shot to convince someone to do something and your friends are not available. It is better used *against* the party than *by* the party.

But sometimes the Help action is not an attractive option. If a character is "helping" you, that character can't be doing something else useful, and that character has to be in a position that they could help you. The "help" action only works when it is actually feasible for two people to perform an action together. Sometimes, a second person would hinder things. Maybe a disguise is involved. Now both characters need to be disguised. Maybe you are distracting a guard so other characters can get into position to attack. Now you have one less character in combat position, because two characters are distracting the guard. Maybe the target understands a language that only the caster speaks.

You don't need the Friends cantrip. A lot of character concepts don't even make sense with the Friends cantrip, but for a character who wants to play a bit of a swindler, or fast talker, or whatever, it is totally a reasonable trick to have up your sleeve. If it is part of your character concept, you will use it. The limitations on the cantrip require more creativity from the player, which, I think, makes things more fun.

I should also add that, in our game, we maintain a loose understanding of initiative out of combat as well as in combat. We go around the table, and every player describes what they are doing at a given time. One of the benefits of this is that it makes the cost of things like guidance or "aid another" more clear, because that action basically takes up your turn around the table. Sometimes, there's only one thing happening, and it makes sense for all characters to be focused on that action, but, other times, players will want their character to be doing something else while the sorcerer is chatting up the guard, or merchant, or what have you.