Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gadget" data-source="post: 8108177" data-attributes="member: 23716">Well, I've always viewed the "reasonable" part of the spell as the caster having to not only refrain from immediate harm to the target, but as an invitation for the caster to give the target a, well, reason for doing so.  In a sense, it allows the caster to become the ultimate Iago/wormtongue.  So just directly ordering the target to do something, especially something completely contrary to their intentions/desires, is more along the lines of domination rather than suggestion. Where it differs from a persuasion check is that A) the target has to listen to the suggestion, and B) the suggestion has much greater magical weight added to it than would otherwise be the case.  If the suggestion is given some form of plausibility/reason, then the target must role a Saving Throw and follow the suggested course if failed.  There is still some wiggle room for interpretation, but when adjudicating the spell it is also a good idea to take into account what the caster is trying to accomplish: A total encounter by-passing "I win button" vs weakening the encounter/putting the opposition in a bad position or disadvantage.  Say if the Cult Leader was convinced to send half his force to defend against an 'ambush' over there, or something. That said, I agree it was bad form for the DM to agree to the Saving Throw with advantage and than ignore the results.  There should have been more of negotiation phase between the player and DM upon attempting to cast the spell.</blockquote>

Verification