D&D 5E Suggestion spell, AKA: the importance of session zero(ish) discussions with your DM

[ZeshinX]

That's always a good idea. I dont think this a case where it was the issue though. I've had that conversation with DMs and when it sounds like that it's almost always plot point related. That's why prescripted plot without flexibility can make for an awkward game.

That's a conversation I have with my players before any campaign starts. They know my style in that I like to have a pre-scripted plot, so we discuss it early so they can offer suggestions for their characters that might be useful to work into said plot. They don't get details of said plot, but offer interesting things they'd like their characters to do, or interesting aspects related to their characters they'd like to explore. So they rely on me to find interesting ways to take those suggestions and work them into the plot, to whatever degree makes sense (they allow for me to manipulate suggestions so long as it hews close to their desired intent). That way, they don't get too rankled about the game feeling overly railroad-y, and as often happens, makes me change my plot for the better.

Some moments still occur where it seems like I'm being somewhat unfair or NPCs seem overly protected with plot armor, but they do understand it's not a "forever like that" state of affairs. They do still tease the hell outta me for it, but we all recognize it as necessary and constructive (and fun!) venting for moments they feel reek a tad too much of DM abuse.

I've also made strong efforts to highly minimize moments like that and roll with whatever wild and wacky "solutions" the PCs might dream up...mostly in the form of trapdoor options for when actions by the PCs take my written plot elements and wipe their metaphorical bottoms with them.

In that particular example by the OP, I'd likely have let the PCs succeed...the cultists return to their master, get absolutely chewed out for being so susceptible to such an "amateurish" tactic, then sent on one final test to prove their value to said master, probably in the form of some kind of ambush, with any subsequent failure being punishable by death or implied threat of death (so they have at least a plausible reason to not be susceptible to any lower-levelled mind affecting spells of effects). I'd roll with it from there...the cultists might get slaughtered...the PCs might somehow find a way to turn the cultists against the master, etc.

 

[Retreater]

Also the OP describes "a bunch of cultists." The spell specifically works on one target. It absolutely should not have worked. At best, it would've saved you from a single cultist in the mob.

 

[Fenris-77]

Also the OP describes "a bunch of cultists." The spell specifically works on one target. It absolutely should not have worked. At best, it would've saved you from a single cultist in the mob.

Hit the leader and it's all stormtroopers. We aren't the droids you're looking for.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Also the OP describes "a bunch of cultists." The spell specifically works on one target. It absolutely should not have worked. At best, it would've saved you from a single cultist in the mob.

Hit the leader and it's all stormtroopers. We aren't the droids you're looking for.

that's what it was. I directed the spell at the leader, and even used subtle spell to help hide the suggestion "We aren't what you want, tell your squad to stand aside and let us pass."

I even literally joked the star wars reference at the time because that's essentially what it was lol.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Yeah, I agree with @Retreater on this one and your DM, but I also see the other point of view.

The spell affects a single target. The DM could easily rule that target gets advantage because it knows following your suggestion will put it at odds with the other cultists anyway.

Now, since the target failed the save, the DM could have ruled the suggested cultist tries to command the others to let you go with your treasure, making a CHA (persuasion or intimidation?) check. If it succeeds, it convinces the other cultists to let you leave. If it fails, maybe the other cultists rebel or perhaps a subordinate in the group challenges the leader for dominance?

Regardless, as a DM, once I allow the spell and make the save against it, I am just was bound by the dice as my players. Personally, I don't think your DM handled it well. The DM should have told you upfront the request was unreasonable, or since it was high-risk for the cultist, grant advantage (which he did), but should then follow through with it.

Like others have said, it could have led to more interesting play later on.

Part of this also sounds like it was a planned encounter the DM just didn't want to let go of. He wanted the fight (for whatever reason) and was disappointed bad rolls on his part made it avoidable. It sucks when you're the DM and plans get messed up like that, but we all know it happens.

I would definitely hash things out after the session and suggest if the DM will run the spell like that, ask if you can select a different spell for your character (if you want to, of course) and I think your DM should allow a swap.

 

[iserith]

I would find it reasonable for the leader to turn to the other cultists, tell them that these aren't the adventurers they're looking for, then have some cultists balk at this. A subsequent Charisma check could then be made by the DM with success meaning they all agree with the cult leader and failure meaning only some do, leaving the rest to have at the PCs (a schism, if you will). It could very well be an amusing scene.

 

[CleverNickName]

It's weird, isn't it? If a request is reasonable enough, why do you even need magic in the first place? It becomes an act of persuasion...not a magic trick. Depending on the situation and the request, of course.

Maybe a quick way to rule it on the fly is to make a "reasonable course of action" a Charisma (Persuasion) check, and have the suggestion spell grant a +10 bonus to the roll?

 

[LordEntrails]

Session Zero is always a good idea. But it's never going to cover every eventuality. Faith and trust in each other (players and GM) is always more important.

Most times I allow my players to alter my plots, because I have faith and trust that they see a path as fun that I might have missed. And on the few occasions I don't, they have faith and trust that I have something fun for them.

My current group has been together for over a year now, so I think we are doing something right.

 

[jayoungr]

Maybe a quick way to rule it on the fly is to make a "reasonable course of action" a Charisma (Persuasion) check, and have the suggestion spell grant a +10 bonus to the roll?

The spell already requires a wisdom save from the target, so maybe a good Persuasion check could up the difficulty of the save.

 

[Flamestrike]

For example, we had just left a dungeon and were pretty beat up. Waiting outside for us were a bunch of cultists demanding we give them all of the treasure. I had one spell left, so I cast suggestion on him to tell his squad to step aside and let us pass unaccosted. The DM ruled they would have advantage, since they were fanatic cultists. He still failed.

Thats actually a feature of Cultists:

Dark Devotion: The cultist has advantage on Saving Throws against being Charmed or Frightened.

the DM ruled they still wouldn't follow the suggestion since failure in his mission would amount to suicide by his master, and thus, wouldn't be considered a reasonable request as described above.

So why allow the save in the first place?

Your DM got that one wrong.