Suggestion : Kill your ally.

[Nail]

Are there any examples in the PH that allow multiple clauses as part of the suggestion? ....

Even the example in the PHB shows a preface and an action.

Normally, I2K, your reading skills are impeccable.

 

[KarinsDad]

Says you. I personally think the POINT of D&D is to tell a story, and I ENJOY following the plot to see how things turn out. Hell, that's the reason why I play the game. If the "plot" is that we need to travel to Exotic Location, fight Evil Guy and retrieve the Artifact of Awesomeness and there is no other way to get to Exotic Location besides hiring Cranky Old Wizard to get us there, you may call it railroading, but to me that's a story and it's what I enjoy.

It's not telling a story. It's creating a story.

There is a significant difference.

If you want to have a story told to you, read a book or watch TV.

If you want to create a story, get 4 or more people around a table and play DND.

4 or more. Not 1.

I think the problem is that players expect everything to cater to them and won't give anything back. They ignore the obvious plot hooks, deliberately go off in unforseen directions and expect the world to revolve around them and what they want with no consideration for how things are SUPPOSED to be. I chalk that up as being the player's fault, not the DM's.

I agree that this happens. Players can make good logical roleplaying decisions without having to be overly disruptive to the DMs plotlines.

However, DMs also have to realize that PCs can and will go off in unforeseen directions, especially when roleplaying their PCs, and it is not the DMs job to force the PCs back to the plotline he created.

For example, I was in a game were we traveled to a "dungeon" and when we got inside, we got trapped. The players immediately attempted in every way to escape. The DM purposely put roadblocks in front of the PCs to prevent escape not because that is what he originally set up the dungeon to do, but rather because he wanted the players to explore every aspect of his wonderfully crafted dungeon.

As it turned out, there was quite a bit of conflict between the DM and the Players over this until the Players finally found a way out (there was a tower above the dungeon that the players ended up getting into and we widened an arrow slit until we could squeeze out). Once we had a viable escape route, we then went back to exploring the tower and dungeon. We went straight back to doing what the DM wanted us to do in the first place.

But until our goal of escape was met, it did not matter to us as players how well crafted the dungeon was. The goal of the PCs was to escape and that was what we were going to try to do.

This is also not a case of purposely being disruptive. It is a conflict between the adventure and the personality / roleplaying motivations of the PCs. The PCs do not know there is a "benevolent DM". They should react to environments in a reasonable manner for them.

And DMs should respect this. There is no "how things are SUPPOSED to be", there is only "how things become".

The DM's job is to be a storyteller and weave the story, it's up to the players to fill in the gaps and add depth to it.

By definition, a storyteller is the one who fills in the gaps and adds depth.

The Dungeon Master adds to the overall story, but he is the world / adventure creator and a mediator, not a storyteller.

The scenario should be dynamic, not static.

However, this is getting rather off-topic so I will refrain from further comments on this subject; anyone wishing to continue it is encouraged to make a seperate topic that I would be glad to participate in.

I consider it peripherally on topic. When a DM makes an NPC be immune to a Suggestion spell not because he rolled the save and not because the suggestion was unreasonable, but because it disrupts the plans of the DM, then he is railroading the storyline.

This is not a reason to prevent the spell from working. The spell should work if it is reasonably worded and the NPC fails his save every time (shy of other intervening factors that were already present), just like any other spell.

Purposely preventing a Suggstion from working is no different than the PC casting Magic Missile and doing 10 points of damage when the NPC villain has 5 hit points remaining and the DM "pretends" that it did not really happen and the villain gets away.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Normally, I2K, your reading skills are impeccable.

Thanks for being at least the third person to point that out. Now I really feel like crap.

 

[Nail]

Ack.

Sorry 'bout that. My post came out way more critically than it should have.

There are several posters on this board whose views and critical thinking I respect. FWIW, you are one of them.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I would argue following the precise advice in the RotG makes Suggestion very weak in some ways.

A suggestion effect ends when the subject follows the course of action the caster specifies. You should be careful to word suggestions so that they can't be fulfilled in a round or two. For example, a suggestion to "flee" or "hide" can be completed pretty quickly, and nothing in those suggestions prevents the subject from rejoining a battle immediately afterward.

So if I make an attack against my allies whom I believe are dopplegangers the Suggestion effect ends, and now I know that they are not dopplegangers.

Can you Suggest that I need to kill them all? Under most circumstances that would be obviously suicidal because I am outnumbered and probably being simultaneously attacked by other enemies to boot.

as a rule of thumb a suggestion should be something that the subject might decide to do on his own if the circumstances were appropriate or if the subject shared the caster's point of view.

That little bit of advice outright forbids Suggestions like jumping into the pool of acid. Does the target share the caster's POV or not? This would seem to say the doppleganger gimmick is impossible, as well.

 

[KarinsDad]

That little bit of advice outright forbids Suggestions like jumping into the pool of acid. Does the target share the caster's POV or not? This would seem to say the doppleganger gimmick is impossible, as well.

The RotC article is not RAW.

Jumping into the Pool of Acid is already forbidden by the obviously harmful clause unless the target is unaware that it is acid.

If he is unaware, then he should not easily become aware while under the influence of Suggestion unless something obvious occurs. For example, some other creature falling into the pool of acid and getting harmed.

But, just bubbles in the pool or faint odors or mists coming off the pool should not clue him in. He is still under a Mind Affecting spell.


The Doppleganger trick should generally be unreasonable since I suspect that most creatures in most campaigns have never met a doppleganger, should probably not know about one, and wouldn't know one if they did meet one. It might work against a learned scholar, but not your run of the mill Orc.


Suggestion is a third level spell. It should have the power to change the outcome of a combat, just as easily as Fireball can. But, the DM should require a reasonable suggestion.

 

[sirwmholder]

Power of Suggestion

In our last game we had a green dragon use Suggestion on the dwarven berserker... the dragon very cryptically said, "Your allies will betray you." Moments later the dragon was finished off by the rest of the party and the dwarf spent the rest of the adventure looking over his shoulder. He started muttering to himself and became very paranoid... over all it made convicing him to go first into battle very tricky . Lesson learned... one battle can set the stage and change a character forever. If the game had continued I'm willing to bet the DM would have had a high level wizard, that was no doubt scrying on us, order a minon to cast suggestion again and convince the dwarf to turn on his party just before the final encounter... he was a tricky one...

Wm. Holder

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Suggestion is a third level spell. It should have the power to change the outcome of a combat, just as easily as Fireball can. But, the DM should require a reasonable suggestion.

As Suggestion has significant potential outside of combat, there is no necessity for it to be nearly as good as a Fireball in combat.

 

[KarinsDad]

As Suggestion has significant potential outside of combat, there is no necessity for it to be nearly as good as a Fireball in combat.

As Fireball has significant potential to affect multiple targets, there is a necessity for Suggestion to be better than Fireball in combat for a single target.

And, if Suggestion can be used outside of combat, so can Fireball.


In other words, both spells have Pros and Cons. Suggestion is Close Range. Suggestion is single target. Suggestion requires reasonable wording. Fireball is Long Range. Fireball can be multiple target.


So yes, Suggestion is still a third level spell and should not be watered down. If a Fireball save is failed in combat, then a given target might still survive and might still be capable of being a threat. If a Suggestion save is failed in combat, then the target should no longer be a threat depending on the actual suggestion.

Suggestion is a third level spell between the first level Charm Person and the fifth level Dominate Person and as such, it should be stronger than the former and weaker than the latter.

Making it weaker than the former is lame.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Making it weaker than the former is lame.

And making it as strong as or stronger than the latter is equally lame.