Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Suggestion Sucks
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JDowling" data-source="post: 1697497" data-attributes="member: 12596"><p>I agree with you that this is not how the spell is intended to work, unless your character is always blindly charging into stupid situations. A command spell makes you drop everything and do just the one word command, suggestion doesn't seem to.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't mean to say "the mind flayer says XXX" that XXX acctually means something. I mean - if you DM can't think up a good way to word it he should say, "the mind flayer casts Suggestion on you, and makes you run away." Then the players need to understand - "okay, maybe the DM isn't being swift on his feet, but mind flayers have high INT, WIS, and CHR, he can probably pull it off".</p><p></p><p>Likewise as a player if you cast suggestion and can't think of how to word it but you know the desired result - you should be allowed to get away with it if your character has a high stat (I was using INT).</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes. Instead of saying specifically what you say, say, "I want the mind flayer to eat his buddies brain".</p><p></p><p>Let me quote for you the guidelines of the spell: ". . . The <em>Suggestion</em> must be worded in such a manner as to make the activity sound reasonable. Asking a creature to stab itself, throw itself onto a spear, immolate itself, or do some other obviously harmful act automatically negate the effect of the spell. . ."</p><p></p><p>What we learn from this is-</p><p>1 - the only things that are automatically unreasonable are to hurt youself, or the like.</p><p>2 - The activity doesn't have to be reasonable, it has to be worded in such as way as to *sound* reasonable.</p><p></p><p>"Your high commander standing next to you has been plotting against you, if I were you I'd eat his brain before he stabs you in the back" - there you go, a reasonable reason the mind flayer would eat his buddies brain.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Acctually, reread the spell. you are mistaken, it *totally* matters how it is worded, and not if the action is reasonable or not. Reread the spell.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>so if they fail their save - you win, yay. I only suggested allowing an INT check if someone was uncomfortable just assumeing the creature / monster was smart enough to come up with something.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>as the whole idea of a check would be a house rule - sure, why not? However, mind flayers are smart (19 int), wise (17 wis), and charasmatic (17) so you're looking at a +1 / -1 difference between the stats in this case.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>then change it to your primary casting stat. Coming up with a reasonable way to word things could be based off any of the mental stats, that whole idea would be a house rule so the specifics aren't important.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't agree that it's difficult to handle - I think that it's rather easy acctually. go with what's written in the book.</p><p></p><p>1 - self inflicted harm automatically negates the spell. (EDIT: self inflicted harm that can't be worded nicely - swimming in acid is self inflicted harm, but it works just fine if you say it's water in the suggestion)</p><p>2 - the activity only needs to sound reasonable, and not acctually *be* reasonable.</p><p></p><p>I think the whole issue is two problems (from what I've read)</p><p>1 - the DM is being stubborn about how the suggestion is carried out.</p><p>2 - the players are trying to warp the spell around to make it weaker.</p><p></p><p>for the players - read the spell again. no where in the discription does it say "the action must be reasonable" but rather is specifically says that the action only needs to "sound reasonable". Then accept the fact that if you have a low will save that creatures can make your character do things you don't like.</p><p></p><p>Suggestion can: ". . . For example, you might suggest that a noble knight give her warhorse to the first beggar she meets. . ." under the caveat that if the knight doesn't meet a begger in the duration of the spell that there is no end result. Suggestion *can* make you do unreasonable things, as long as they *sound* reasonable.</p><p></p><p>Also - the DMs word is final. However, if he's a good DM, then he will be consistant. If your DM insists that Suggestion makes you a mindless zombie - use it on all his BBEG, fair is fair.</p><p></p><p>for you DM - how to you make it even sound reasonable to drop your defenses and mindlessly walk through a horde of enemies while they cut you down? I don't think you can. Then accept the fact that while suggestion is a powerful tool for manipulating actions - it doesn't do everything, and it doesn't make you a mindless zombie to carry out the task for the duration (like Command does).</p><p></p><p>for both of you - if you can't think up ways to make suggestions sound reasonable on the fly, and are opposed to turning it into an ability check of some kind, or simply can't come to an agreement about how these spells work. Don't use them.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JDowling, post: 1697497, member: 12596"] I agree with you that this is not how the spell is intended to work, unless your character is always blindly charging into stupid situations. A command spell makes you drop everything and do just the one word command, suggestion doesn't seem to. I don't mean to say "the mind flayer says XXX" that XXX acctually means something. I mean - if you DM can't think up a good way to word it he should say, "the mind flayer casts Suggestion on you, and makes you run away." Then the players need to understand - "okay, maybe the DM isn't being swift on his feet, but mind flayers have high INT, WIS, and CHR, he can probably pull it off". Likewise as a player if you cast suggestion and can't think of how to word it but you know the desired result - you should be allowed to get away with it if your character has a high stat (I was using INT). Yes. Instead of saying specifically what you say, say, "I want the mind flayer to eat his buddies brain". Let me quote for you the guidelines of the spell: ". . . The [i]Suggestion[/i] must be worded in such a manner as to make the activity sound reasonable. Asking a creature to stab itself, throw itself onto a spear, immolate itself, or do some other obviously harmful act automatically negate the effect of the spell. . ." What we learn from this is- 1 - the only things that are automatically unreasonable are to hurt youself, or the like. 2 - The activity doesn't have to be reasonable, it has to be worded in such as way as to *sound* reasonable. "Your high commander standing next to you has been plotting against you, if I were you I'd eat his brain before he stabs you in the back" - there you go, a reasonable reason the mind flayer would eat his buddies brain. Acctually, reread the spell. you are mistaken, it *totally* matters how it is worded, and not if the action is reasonable or not. Reread the spell. so if they fail their save - you win, yay. I only suggested allowing an INT check if someone was uncomfortable just assumeing the creature / monster was smart enough to come up with something. as the whole idea of a check would be a house rule - sure, why not? However, mind flayers are smart (19 int), wise (17 wis), and charasmatic (17) so you're looking at a +1 / -1 difference between the stats in this case. then change it to your primary casting stat. Coming up with a reasonable way to word things could be based off any of the mental stats, that whole idea would be a house rule so the specifics aren't important. I don't agree that it's difficult to handle - I think that it's rather easy acctually. go with what's written in the book. 1 - self inflicted harm automatically negates the spell. (EDIT: self inflicted harm that can't be worded nicely - swimming in acid is self inflicted harm, but it works just fine if you say it's water in the suggestion) 2 - the activity only needs to sound reasonable, and not acctually *be* reasonable. I think the whole issue is two problems (from what I've read) 1 - the DM is being stubborn about how the suggestion is carried out. 2 - the players are trying to warp the spell around to make it weaker. for the players - read the spell again. no where in the discription does it say "the action must be reasonable" but rather is specifically says that the action only needs to "sound reasonable". Then accept the fact that if you have a low will save that creatures can make your character do things you don't like. Suggestion can: ". . . For example, you might suggest that a noble knight give her warhorse to the first beggar she meets. . ." under the caveat that if the knight doesn't meet a begger in the duration of the spell that there is no end result. Suggestion *can* make you do unreasonable things, as long as they *sound* reasonable. Also - the DMs word is final. However, if he's a good DM, then he will be consistant. If your DM insists that Suggestion makes you a mindless zombie - use it on all his BBEG, fair is fair. for you DM - how to you make it even sound reasonable to drop your defenses and mindlessly walk through a horde of enemies while they cut you down? I don't think you can. Then accept the fact that while suggestion is a powerful tool for manipulating actions - it doesn't do everything, and it doesn't make you a mindless zombie to carry out the task for the duration (like Command does). for both of you - if you can't think up ways to make suggestions sound reasonable on the fly, and are opposed to turning it into an ability check of some kind, or simply can't come to an agreement about how these spells work. Don't use them. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Suggestion Sucks
Top