disguise self + friends cantrip = cool combo enemies infighting against each other?

[Joe dirt]

what would you allow?

i think friends spell is awesome but not as most people typically use it

here is the set up. say you wanted to get your antagonist and their allies to turn against each other here are the steps

1 cast disguise self as the antagonist

2 go up to antagonist ally and cast friends spell

3 ask your new "friend" for favors like loan me some money disguised as the antagonist

4 walk away before 1 min ends

5 antagonist now has 1 less ally and you might have some quick cash... = two birds with 1 stone

Friends: Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute
For the duration, you have advantage on all Charisma checks directed at one creature of your choice that isn't hostile toward you. When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you. A creature prone to violence might attack you. Another creature might seek retribution in other ways (at the DM's discretion), depending on the nature of your interaction with it.

[RickAllison]

With this, there are two different interpretations that affect how successful the tactic is. For text reference:


When the spell ends, the creature
realizes that you used magic to influence its mood
and becomes hostile toward you

The different interpretations come from whether it recognizes you, the one that it talked to while under the effects of the spell, or you, the true person behind the mask. I have seen the interpretation go both ways with those of the second camp claiming that the reason it recognizes the user is magical and so transcends the effects of the Disguise Self spell. I prefer the former as it is open to more shenanigans.

[Segev]

Them recognizing you due to "magic" no matter how you disguise yourself means that somehow, a cantrip is more powerful than even true polymorph. None of the spells suggested for disguising you are cantrips. Yet somehow, friends instantly breaks any deception built up by a masterful disguise? Nonsense.

[brainface]

I'd imagine that the drawback of friends isn't magical at all. Once friends ends, they know someone messed with their head, and that it looked like whatever disguise you were wearing. I'd say if they know their friend is an oaf that couldn't speak a spell to save their life, they also know their head was messed with by a shapeshifter and theyre going to start looking for a doppelganger or illusionist.

If their friend is an enchanter or hedge wizard or whatnot then, well, the charade might continue a bit--but I still imagine close associates of reasonable intelligence would sort things out given enough time.

[Corran]

Disguise self does nothing for your voice. You must find a way tochange it. Also, if you disguise yourelf as someone that the person you intend on casting friends at knows very well, the DM might force a deception vs investigation check (even at disadvantage if your roleplaying suggests so). But that falls under DM's discretion. Lastly, friends is balanced by its duration. You need to roleplay te whole situation very quickly and in a veryclever fashion for this whole plan to work, and you surely need additional features besides disguise self and friends.

[RickAllison]

Disguise self does nothing for your voice. You must find a way tochange it. Also, if you disguise yourelf as someone that the person you intend on casting friends at knows very well, the DM might force a deception vs investigation check (even at disadvantage if your roleplaying suggests so). But that falls under DM's discretion. Lastly, friends is balanced by its duration. You need to roleplay te whole situation very quickly and in a veryclever fashion for this whole plan to work, and you surely need additional features besides disguise self and friends.

Assassin 13, Actor feat, or obtaining the Mimicry trait will be your friend in that regard.

[JoeJ]

Friends doesn't work if the target is hostile toward you. If you can get around that (maybe find an enemy of your enemy who is neutral toward you), this would be difficult to arrange. If you can pull it off, though, it should have a chance of working. Whether it ultimately succeeds of fails, the attempt would probably be entertaining. My only real reservation as a DM would be that all of the players need to be involved in making it happen, not just one.

[Corran]

Assassin 13, Actor feat, or obtaining the Mimicry trait will be your friend in that regard.
Yes! Those are some clever ways to go about it. To add to that, alter self can do the trick too, since it allows you to take up another voice (perhaps even match the voice of a creature you have heard talking -maybe a deception takes place here at DM's discretion ofc, I would rule one with advantage for the PC). This can perhaps spare you a feat o use elsewhere (when comparing with the actor route), though it can burn through your resources a lot more quickly. Concentration usually is not a big deal, since this is almost exclusively an out of combat option (due to the restrictions of casting friends).


Friends doesn't work if the target is hostile toward you.
There is where your guise comes into play. If the enemy does not see throuh it, and you select an appropriate disguise, he doesnt have to feel hostile towards you prior casting friends, as you could very well disguise yourself as one of his friends/allies or sth. This is one of the reasons this combo is useful.

[RickAllison]

Yes! Those are some clever ways to go about it. To add to that, alter self can do the trick too, since it allows you to take up another voice (perhaps even match the voice of a creature you have heard talking -maybe a deception takes place here at DM's discretion ofc, I would rule one with advantage for the PC). This can perhaps spare you a feat o use elsewhere (when comparing with the actor route), though it can burn through your resources a lot more quickly. Concentration usually is not a big deal, since this is almost exclusively an out of combat option (due to the restrictions of casting friends).


There is where your guise comes into play. If the enemy does not see throuh it, and you select an appropriate disguise, he doesnt have to feel hostile towards you prior casting friends, as you could very well disguise yourself as one of his friends/allies or sth. This is one of the reasons this combo is useful.

Remember that Friends is also concentration, so any method to change your voice must be concentration-free.

[JoeJ]

There is where your guise comes into play. If the enemy does not see throuh it, and you select an appropriate disguise, he doesnt have to feel hostile towards you prior casting friends, as you could very well disguise yourself as one of his friends/allies or sth. This is one of the reasons this combo is useful.

Except that the spell says hostile toward you not hostile toward whomever you happen to be disguised as. Depending on how the DM interprets that, it might not matter whether the target can recognize you or not.

[wunderkid]

My two cents. Friends make them friendly towards you with magic. It doesn't necessarily effect them (well it does by try to bear with me).

You can see this working in the same way as pheromones. So it's you personally as the caster who is effected. And they roll their save to see if this effect changes their disposition towards you. So when the spell wears off that change you made in your magical 'scent' becomes something that turns them hostile. After all them turning hostile is as much a part of the magic as anything.

You could refluff it however you like.

Personally if a player goes to that level to cause infighting then I'd possibly allow it unless it got too cheesy.

[Shaofoo]

if you are disguised as the antagonist you still will have to actually know how the antagonist acts, more than just get his looks and voice you must also be able to perform is mannerisms and his demeanor. Unless you have actually studied the antagonist and how he acts I would say that you are either at a disadvantage (which the Friends will cancel out) or you can't do it because Friends is not mind control and will still know what is up.

Also a check is not necessarily an action, unless the person you are trying to dupe is willing to part with their money at the first mention of someone asking for it I would assume that most people will ask where will the money go and even if they are willing they will still have to probably go over to where they will get the money. The duration of the check could last for afar more than a minute and if you fail they will probably get physical (which will defeat the Disguise) or they will arouse suspicion (which activates the investigation checks against you and you acting suspicious might cause you to fail).

Basically it'll only work for a person who is always carrying money and is willing to part with it at the first sight on it. I can't see this working in any normal scenario, I doubt even a lowly grunt will be willing to part with his money at the sight of the BBEG and will probably activate suspicion enough to try and investigate the Disguise.

Diplomacy is not mind control, you might as well ask the DM directly for cash to rain on you if he thinks that this is going to work as expected.

[Corran]

Remember that Friends is also concentration, so any method to change your voice must be concentration-free.
You shattered my plans! Now I am crying :(

Except that the spell says hostile toward you not hostile toward whomever you happen to be disguised as. Depending on how the DM interprets that, it might not matter whether the target can recognize you or not.It is a stretch for a DM to interpret it the way you suggested, but to each their own I guess.

[RickAllison]

You shattered my plans! Now I am crying :(
It is a stretch for a DM to interpret it the way you suggested, but to each their own I guess.

To quote Cartman:


Mm, your tears are so yummy and sweet!

Oh, the tears of unfathomable sadness! My-yummy!

Courtesy of the episode Scott Tenormen Must Die.

[Segev]

You could use minor illusion for the voice. It doesn't even require concentration. Though I suppose you have to be able to lip sync.

[Shaofoo]

You could use minor illusion for the voice. It doesn't even require concentration. Though I suppose you have to be able to lip sync.

Considering that it takes an action to cast and has somatic components I doubt you'll be able to keep a convincing ruse with Minor Illusion unless the BBEG has Tourettes that makes him constantly move around and always pauses before he speaks.

[mer.c]

Considering that it takes an action to cast and has somatic components I doubt you'll be able to keep a convincing ruse with Minor Illusion unless the BBEG has Tourettes that makes him constantly move around and always pauses before he speaks.

Minor Illusion should be OK as long as you cast it ahead of time. It lasts for a minute (just like Friends), and you can cause it to make discrete sounds at will. Other than effectively taking 6 seconds off your ability to interact (cast Minor Illusion, cast Friends immediately after), I don't see it conflicting.

[Shaofoo]

Minor Illusion should be OK as long as you cast it ahead of time. It lasts for a minute (just like Friends), and you can cause it to make discrete sounds at will. Other than effectively taking 6 seconds off your ability to interact (cast Minor Illusion, cast Friends immediately after), I don't see it conflicting.

The whole minute thing is what is the hardest to swallow in this whole debacle. I think you'll need more than a minute to convince someone to part with the cash and not be suspicious to start making checks to see if anything is wrong. I know if a good friend of mine just started to ask for money I would definitely interrogate him and ask for an explanation. Just playing logically causes this entire scenario to fall apart without doing anything more. Friends gives you advantage to checks, if a check is impossible then you can't make that check and a check might take a lot more than an action to perform or might even take multiple checks.

[NNescio]

In this specific instance I play by RAW as a DM -- it says You, not whoever you're disguised as. How? Magic. That's how the backfire effect works.

The alternative is to allow a no-save enchantment effect that can turn NPCs against one another. This can potentially be too abusive (and I know my players).

[mer.c]

The whole minute thing is what is the hardest to swallow in this whole debacle. I think you'll need more than a minute to convince someone to part with the cash and not be suspicious to start making checks to see if anything is wrong. I know if a good friend of mine just started to ask for money I would definitely interrogate him and ask for an explanation. Just playing logically causes this entire scenario to fall apart without doing anything more. Friends gives you advantage to checks, if a check is impossible then you can't make that check and a check might take a lot more than an action to perform or might even take multiple checks.

The short duration is a major and very necessary limiter. That said, I think the whole conversation so far has been taking that into account.

[Joe dirt]

interesting responses and i figured lots of people would object

I only asked this because this feat was almost performed by "jim dark magic" in front of a live audience with the DM being one of the lead designers of 5th ed... chris perkins
jim wasn't able to complete the task because one of his party members killed the bad guy first ;( who knows how chris perkins would have ruled but i am guessing he is one of the "cool" gms that reward creativity and uses some measure of common sense.

quite entertaining actually... he starts the tactic at 1:30 and 1:40 is the meat of it... enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S39NeK3Ho10

[Shaofoo]

The short duration is a major and very necessary limiter. That said, I think the whole conversation so far has been taking that into account.

It seems that most conversations treat "1 check = 1 action = 6 seconds". To me 1 minute makes this check basically impossible to do unless you found the perfect person that was willing to drop money at a mere moment and your disguise, voice and mannerisms are all but flawless. Sure you could say that the check is an action but the DM can just as easily rule out that it isn't and considering the nature of the request it would still be shocking.

It takes way too much to go right to even entertain the thought in my mind. It might help if the disguise was to ask for something that the BBEG would normally ask, say open the door or leave me alone with the prisoner or that stuff, trying to frame him and get some money seems too farfetch'd to work with such low level magic.

[JoeJ]

The short duration is a major and very necessary limiter. That said, I think the whole conversation so far has been taking that into account.

If I was DMing this, I'd roleplay out the conversation while keeping an eye on the time. Don't count time spent rolling dice, but everything that's said is on the clock.

[mer.c]

If I was DMing this, I'd roleplay out the conversation while keeping an eye on the time. Don't count time spent rolling dice, but everything that's said is on the clock.

That's exactly what I'd do, too. :)

[Vogonjeltz]

what would you allow?

i think friends spell is awesome but not as most people typically use it

here is the set up. say you wanted to get your antagonist and their allies to turn against each other here are the steps

What's to allow? That's how those spells function. Results in: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/WhatTheHellHero


The different interpretations come from whether it recognizes you, the one that it talked to while under the effects of the spell, or you, the true person behind the mask. I have seen the interpretation go both ways with those of the second camp claiming that the reason it recognizes the user is magical and so transcends the effects of the Disguise Self spell. I prefer the former as it is open to more shenanigans.

Unless specifically stated otherwise, the spells aren't taking into account the existence of other spells. The text on friends only means that the target recognizes that its mood was being manipulated, and it won't be happy about that. In no way is it implying psychic powers on the part of the target that allow it to later recognize someone who was disguised. If the caster looks like a Half-elf, but is really a gnome the target would go searching for the Half-Elf and ignore the Gnome (unless, of course, if something happened to arouse suspicion, or the subject in question successfully passed its Investigation or could otherwise see through Illusions).


Remember that Friends is also concentration, so any method to change your voice must be concentration-free.

How about just affecting a weird voice instead of their normal one? Even if it's blatantly a fake voice, as long as nobody would know the real one, mission accomplished!


Except that the spell says hostile toward you not hostile toward whomever you happen to be disguised as. Depending on how the DM interprets that, it might not matter whether the target can recognize you or not.

The spell isn't taking into account the use of disguises or trickery to not resemble ones self. None of the spell do.

A disguised character who is not recognized would be viewed differently depending on if they were disguised as an Ally, Friend, Neutral party, Enemy, etc...

[Shaofoo]

How about just affecting a weird voice instead of their normal one? Even if it's blatantly a fake voice, as long as nobody would know the real one, mission accomplished!



The point is to get someone to do something in the guise of another person. If you use the wrong voice then you will fail and arouse suspicion instantly. If the point is to sneak across then the best thing is to not say anything and try to sneak by.

And remember that Friends just gives advantage on checks, if the DM says that because you arouse too much suspicion that it should be an auto failure then it is an auto failure. And then there will be investigation checks or even physical handling and thus things will probably go sour quick.

[FaradayCage]

From Friends: "isn't hostile toward you" and "becomes hostile toward you."

The term "you" is used, so I would rule that as long as you successfully impersonated the mark's ally - the mark would become hostile toward the ally. Personally, I think this is a well-established trope (see Disney's "Peter Pan" and "Robin Hood" for examples) for causing short-term chaos. Most halfwits will eventually figure out they've both been duped once they talk it through.

[Vogonjeltz]

The point is to get someone to do something in the guise of another person. If you use the wrong voice then you will fail and arouse suspicion instantly. If the point is to sneak across then the best thing is to not say anything and try to sneak by.

And remember that Friends just gives advantage on checks, if the DM says that because you arouse too much suspicion that it should be an auto failure then it is an auto failure. And then there will be investigation checks or even physical handling and thus things will probably go sour quick.

Yes I'd agree if it's a specific person known to the individual in question, but you could simply say: I have a bad cold, it's affecting my voice, and carry on.

If it's a person the target doesn't specifically know (but knows of) they would probably let it slide. Given that the goal is to alienate them, I don't see how making them angry at you for acting weird could constitute anything other than a success.

Disguise self and Minor Illusion could probably achieve the goal on their own in terms of character assassination. Voice work wouldn't even be required.

[Shaofoo]

Yes I'd agree if it's a specific person known to the individual in question, but you could simply say: I have a bad cold, it's affecting my voice, and carry on.

If it's a person the target doesn't specifically know (but knows of) they would probably let it slide. Given that the goal is to alienate them, I don't see how making them angry at you for acting weird could constitute anything other than a success.

Disguise self and Minor Illusion could probably achieve the goal on their own in terms of character assassination. Voice work wouldn't even be required.

You could make all the excuses you want, you still have only a minute of time left to do whatever is it that you need. Trying to frame someone using Friends I just don't see it working in an actual playing environment. A minute is way too little time in my book.

If the minute is up they'll be mad at you regardless of what kind of disguise you have. They MIGHT think it is the person (and I would like to stress the might part because unless the person has the brain power of a wet fart I don't think they'll be fooled unless you can try to bluff in under a minute including putting excuses) but they might try to get physical or peer closely (if they didn't already) and then the ruse is broken.

[Joe the Rat]

The sweet spot in all this is that friends helps you to convince the other person that you are the person you are impersonating - Advantage on Deception.

So long as you do something else that could fit with mind-altering (Persuasion, or Intimidation), the blame is on that affect, not the part where you are being someone else. A great way to shift blame around.

Of course, you can do a lot of this with disguise self alone. Friends just makes it easier.
If you want to try this out, play a Warlock. At 2nd level you can do this all day long.

[Shaofoo]

The sweet spot in all this is that friends helps you to convince the other person that you are the person you are impersonating - Advantage on Deception.

So long as you do something else that could fit with mind-altering (Persuasion, or Intimidation), the blame is on that affect, not the part where you are being someone else. A great way to shift blame around.

Of course, you can do a lot of this with disguise self alone. Friends just makes it easier.
If you want to try this out, play a Warlock. At 2nd level you can do this all day long.

A DM can rule that you are way too out of character and too much wrong for a person to believe what you are saying. Advantage does not help if the player doesn't get a roll.

Also like I said, if there is too much suspicion the affected might still make checks against your disguise or even get physical and then realize something is amiss.

If you actually make your homework and study your mark so you can effectively blend in then I can see things working out but if you just waltz in with a fake disguise, voice and charms thinking you will be able to impersonate someone else at a moment's notice I ain't gonna work, especially considering the time limit you have on Friends and Minor Illusion and prancing around trying to recast Minor Illusion is another way to arouse suspicion. The only way to work is if you work at it, casting spells isn't going to cut it at all.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Why are people harping so much on the "how will you persuade the guy in only a minute" thing? That part's completely unnecessary for the trip. All you need to do is walk past and say "Morning, Bob." The hostility isn't because they got taken advantage of, it's because they got friggin mind controlled.

[Vogonjeltz]

You could make all the excuses you want, you still have only a minute of time left to do whatever is it that you need. Trying to frame someone using Friends I just don't see it working in an actual playing environment. A minute is way too little time in my book.

If the minute is up they'll be mad at you regardless of what kind of disguise you have. They MIGHT think it is the person (and I would like to stress the might part because unless the person has the brain power of a wet fart I don't think they'll be fooled unless you can try to bluff in under a minute including putting excuses) but they might try to get physical or peer closely (if they didn't already) and then the ruse is broken.

They get hostile because they realize that the person they interacted with was magically manipulating their mood. Not becuase of anything the person is saying or doing otherwise.

You could use Friends, walk up and ask to borrow their hat, and (even if they refused) they'd still recognize after the minute was up (and ideally after you'd walked off) that the caster was using magic to change their emotional reaction, which is generally enough to tee off anyone.

The disguise is so that they think they're mad at the person they saw, not the person they see come around the next corner (undisguised caster).

Getting mad at someone because they used magic on them doesn't grant them any special insight, nor divination powers to realize that it wasn't actually Bob the baker who manipulated them into buying a dozen pastries, but really Pat the Pastry chef dressed up to look like Bob.

[Mellack]

How would some of these DM's respond if the subject is known to not be a magic user? If guard Bob has known guard Steve for years, and knows that he has never cast a spell and knows nothing about magic, why would he automatically get upset at Steve? Wouldn't it be just as likely for him to realize that somebody who can magically charm might also be able to magically appear like Steve or make Bob imagine seeing Steve? It seems logical that Bob is mad at being magically charmed. It doesn't make Bob stupid.
If my best friend were to start swearing at me in fluent Russian, when I know he cannot speak any Russian, I would be more curious than angry.

[Shaofoo]

They get hostile because they realize that the person they interacted with was magically manipulating their mood. Not becuase of anything the person is saying or doing otherwise.

You could use Friends, walk up and ask to borrow their hat, and (even if they refused) they'd still recognize after the minute was up (and ideally after you'd walked off) that the caster was using magic to change their emotional reaction, which is generally enough to tee off anyone.

The disguise is so that they think they're mad at the person they saw, not the person they see come around the next corner (undisguised caster).

Getting mad at someone because they used magic on them doesn't grant them any special insight, nor divination powers to realize that it wasn't actually Bob the baker who manipulated them into buying a dozen pastries, but really Pat the Pastry chef dressed up to look like Bob.

Yes but you still have a time limit and at no point does it make you do impossible requests or checks. And even if you would try to do a simple bait and switch who is to say the person won't be curious and follow you around so that they will be mad at you even though you are disguised.

The problem is that I can't see this working in an actual environment, you ask for the hat and they'll get suspicious. You perform any sort of check you will arouse suspicion and unless you can shake it off regardless if you are disguised or not they will be mad at you and will attack you. I can't think of a single reason why would someone that I know would act out of character. The biggest deal breaker is being able to be convincing.

It cannot work if the characters are actual thinking beings with actual curiosity. You have to actually work and not cast a pair of spells and think autowin.

[Segev]

Yes but you still have a time limit and at no point does it make you do impossible requests or checks. And even if you would try to do a simple bait and switch who is to say the person won't be curious and follow you around so that they will be mad at you even though you are disguised.

The problem is that I can't see this working in an actual environment, you ask for the hat and they'll get suspicious. You perform any sort of check you will arouse suspicion and unless you can shake it off regardless if you are disguised or not they will be mad at you and will attack you. I can't think of a single reason why would someone that I know would act out of character. The biggest deal breaker is being able to be convincing.

It cannot work if the characters are actual thinking beings with actual curiosity. You have to actually work and not cast a pair of spells and think autowin.

The idea that you "arouse suspicion" by making requests is a bit silly, and honestly kind-of metagamey. It feels like looking for an excuse to find out what the DM already knows: who REALLY asked for it.

It's no different than the player who knows that the villain of the module is a vampire going out of his way to ask leading questions in order to get the information IC.

[coredump]

I think some of you guys are reading way too much into this.

Friends makes you hostile to the caster, that doesn't mean it gives you some incredible ability to see through disguises. That isn't necessary.


Some guy you don't know, Bob, uses disguise self to look like someone else, Mary. (lets ignore voice etc for now)
Bob, in disguise as Mary, walks into your shop and uses Friends to get you to agree that orange is a better color than blue. Then walks out.

Later that day, some guy you don't know walks into your shop. And you just really don't like him, and you are not even sure why. Maybe its the way he walks, or maybe he looks like the kid that beat you up in school, or maybe you are just feeling grumpy...... but his guy, whoever he is, (aka Bob) just pushes your buttons and you feel outright hostile towards him.
You don't know he has been in before, you don't know he used to look like Mary; all you know is you really don't like him.

[JoeJ]

I think some of you guys are reading way too much into this.

Friends makes you hostile to the caster, that doesn't mean it gives you some incredible ability to see through disguises. That isn't necessary.


Some guy you don't know, Bob, uses disguise self to look like someone else, Mary. (lets ignore voice etc for now)
Bob, in disguise as Mary, walks into your shop and uses Friends to get you to agree that orange is a better color than blue. Then walks out.

Later that day, some guy you don't know walks into your shop. And you just really don't like him, and you are not even sure why. Maybe its the way he walks, or maybe he looks like the kid that beat you up in school, or maybe you are just feeling grumpy...... but his guy, whoever he is, (aka Bob) just pushes your buttons and you feel outright hostile towards him.
You don't know he has been in before, you don't know he used to look like Mary; all you know is you really don't like him.

"the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you" (PHB p. 244, emphasis mine).

[Shaofoo]

The idea that you "arouse suspicion" by making requests is a bit silly, and honestly kind-of metagamey. It feels like looking for an excuse to find out what the DM already knows: who REALLY asked for it.

It's no different than the player who knows that the villain of the module is a vampire going out of his way to ask leading questions in order to get the information IC.

Maybe I just find being able to make anyone hostile towards someone by casting a spell on yourself while disguised as someone else and asking how the day is and waiting a minute to be cheese. And not even good cheese because RAW states that it is you who will be hostile towards not who you look.

And yes you should arouse suspicion if you are not actually playing the part. It isn't metagaming it is logic and common sense that someone that you know and seems to act weird you would want to check. If you actually did learn the part it is one thing but it seems like we are treating this as a can't miss two spell combo that with enough time you can make everyone hate a single person for no reason, which only works if you are being super generous in the spell reading (and ignore a chunk of the text).

[Segev]

Nobody has suggested not "acting the part." Nor have they suggested that all you have to do is say, "Hey, how's the weather?"

What they've said is that you can, in fact, make a request of somebody in less than a minute, and then get out of their sight. In combination, a cantrip and a first level spell can allow you to trick people into thinking somebody else has used magic to influence their emotions, which makes them hostile towards them. "Hostile" doesn't necessarily mean "actively violent" and "unable and unwilling to forgive." It does mean they're going to be angry.

What is likely to arouse suspicion is when they realize that Mary doesn't, to their knowledge, have magic to use on them.

And let's be honest, even when you're pissed at your friends, you are going to be distrustful and spiteful, but not out-and-out ready to ruin their lives.

This trick can sow discord, but it probably isn't turning boon companions into bitter, intractable foes.


If you're using it "just" to get away with persuading somebody to do something for you without them later pointing you out as "that jerk that used magic on me!" there's no reason to make it somehow more suspicious or make the cantrip useless. Unless you think the cantrip is overpowered.

[Shaofoo]

Nobody has suggested not "acting the part." Nor have they suggested that all you have to do is say, "Hey, how's the weather?"

What they've said is that you can, in fact, make a request of somebody in less than a minute, and then get out of their sight. In combination, a cantrip and a first level spell can allow you to trick people into thinking somebody else has used magic to influence their emotions, which makes them hostile towards them. "Hostile" doesn't necessarily mean "actively violent" and "unable and unwilling to forgive." It does mean they're going to be angry.

You first say that people don't say disregard the acting and not ask how are you yet the next paragraph you are literally walking up to them and asking for stuff just so you can sow a hate bomb in them. That is both disregarding acting and just saying a simple phrase with the intent of cheesing a spell


What is likely to arouse suspicion is when they realize that Mary doesn't, to their knowledge, have magic to use on them.

And let's be honest, even when you're pissed at your friends, you are going to be distrustful and spiteful, but not out-and-out ready to ruin their lives.

This trick can sow discord, but it probably isn't turning boon companions into bitter, intractable foes.

Spell says otherwise, they will be physical if violent or they will seek retribution in other ways. You have basically made them their worst enemy possible, this is the RAW of the spell.

This is why they chose you as the target of the bad vibes because it breaks apart when people are mad over stuff they know someone cannot do. How it works is magic. You seem to be modifying the text of the spell to your specifications.




If you're using it "just" to get away with persuading somebody to do something for you without them later pointing you out as "that jerk that used magic on me!" there's no reason to make it somehow more suspicious or make the cantrip useless. Unless you think the cantrip is overpowered.

I think the cantrip is perfectly balanced as is and I think the cantrip should not be used except in very specific circumstances. There is no need to make no save hate bombs to ruin a person's life in the course of an afternoon.

The cantrip is supposed to burn bridges, you are supposed to use it on the person you know you will never meet again. Either persuading a guard to let you pass or a merchant to give you a deal, you don't mind if you see either of them again. The reason it is a cantrip is because to cost no resources to use because it is such a situational spell they know that even a single slot is too much. You seem to think that because it is a Cantrip I should be able to use it all the time as appropriate.

You are advocating for pure cheese, I am of the mind that game balance goes above logic. You might not think logical but I just have to point at the rules and say that is what it says, the person hates you, not the person you are disguised as. I think making someone their worst enemy a minute a person is way too broken.

[Vogonjeltz]

"the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you" (PHB p. 244, emphasis mine).

Which is why the character assassination method is clever. You disguise yourself, seek an audience before the king and use friends to make a request under someone else's name, afterwards the king (or other dignitary) realizes that the person making the request used magic and is rightfully angry, leading to bad things for whoever the caster claimed to be (i.e. Off with his head!)

[Shaofoo]

Which is why the character assassination method is clever. You disguise yourself, seek an audience before the king and use friends to make a request under someone else's name, afterwards the king (or other dignitary) realizes that the person making the request used magic and is rightfully angry, leading to bad things for whoever the caster claimed to be (i.e. Off with his head!)

Except the magic still states as you. the description of the spell says by RAW you are the one that they know, not the one you pretend that you are. Probably for the same reason to not have mages be able to ruin someone's reputation in an instant because it is cheese.

[Segev]

5e quite explicitly does not use the precise, lawyeristic language of 3e, where you'd be 100% right thta the fact that it says "you" means the victim of friends knows it was you, even if he never saw your face and later meets you looking like somebody else entirely. But in 5e, its clear context is independent of other effects, which means if those other effects are introduced, the shift based on explained cause and effect is to be accepted. i.e., since the reason he is hostile towards "you" is because he knows "you" used magic on him to alter his mood, it's saying he knows his mood was altered by that person who was interacting with him. It does not mean he magically knows that that person is Dastardly Whiplash disguised as Dudley Dooright. He only knows he saw Dudley, and that the person he saw used magic to alter his mood.

Yes, you can drop "hate-bombs" this way. On the up side, how LONG that hostility lasts is not specified. I have no idea if the DMG gives rules for people's moods changing or not with time.


As for "walk up and make a request" being "disregarding acting," that's a silly assertion. "Hey, Bob, no time to explain, but I need to borrow $10. I'll tell you about it when I pay you back tomorrow!"

That takes maybe, at most, 20 seconds. Another 20 for Bob to hand you the $10, and away you go, out of sight by the time 18 more seconds (3 rounds) have passed.

Or impersonate Fred and do the acting thing, then drop friends just before you make the request. Unless Bob thinks Fred's a spellcaster (and thus associates odd utterances and gestures with spellcasting), he might think the action a little odd, but without Arcana he isn't identifying that you (as "Fred") just cast a spell.

[Shaofoo]

5e quite explicitly does not use the precise, lawyeristic language of 3e, where you'd be 100% right thta the fact that it says "you" means the victim of friends knows it was you, even if he never saw your face and later meets you looking like somebody else entirely. But in 5e, its clear context is independent of other effects, which means if those other effects are introduced, the shift based on explained cause and effect is to be accepted. i.e., since the reason he is hostile towards "you" is because he knows "you" used magic on him to alter his mood, it's saying he knows his mood was altered by that person who was interacting with him. It does not mean he magically knows that that person is Dastardly Whiplash disguised as Dudley Dooright. He only knows he saw Dudley, and that the person he saw used magic to alter his mood.

Yes, you can drop "hate-bombs" this way. On the up side, how LONG that hostility lasts is not specified. I have no idea if the DMG gives rules for people's moods changing or not with time.


As for "walk up and make a request" being "disregarding acting," that's a silly assertion. "Hey, Bob, no time to explain, but I need to borrow $10. I'll tell you about it when I pay you back tomorrow!"

That takes maybe, at most, 20 seconds. Another 20 for Bob to hand you the $10, and away you go, out of sight by the time 18 more seconds (3 rounds) have passed.

Or impersonate Fred and do the acting thing, then drop friends just before you make the request. Unless Bob thinks Fred's a spellcaster (and thus associates odd utterances and gestures with spellcasting), he might think the action a little odd, but without Arcana he isn't identifying that you (as "Fred") just cast a spell.

Sorry you can try to justify it all you like I still know the smell of cheese where I see it and I am sure that RAI also doesn't mean that you can easily ruin someone's entire reputation in a few hours just by constantly asking people for things and going away.

Also unless I somehow has $10 to give around because I won the lotto I would inquire why would you need $10. Cause maybe to you it ain't no big thing but to me giving $10 is a huge deal, even giving a buck would still get me to ask why. You are disregarding acting by acting as both participants. It can't seem genuine if you control both people because you can have either act the way you want to regardless.

If you wish to turn friends into a "DM fiat" spell a-la illusions then say so because most spells do rely on things acting exactly the way they say and Friends is clear even if you disagree and even if it doesn't make sense (because magic).

Cause another way that I see it, I don't think players would find it fun if the BBEG suddenly began to be able to easily reverse all good will into hate without any particular effort. Quite frankly I wouldn't like it if as a player the DM tries to cheese me out of any good will I am trying to build (at the very least if someone is trying to frame me I do hope that I can present my case but there is no presenting in Friends) so as a DM I would like it if a player doesn't think he can run around and ruin entire relationships and societies just by asking for money. A lot of things hinges on good will and I think this combo stomps on that.

[Segev]

Sorry you can try to justify it all you like I still know the smell of cheese where I see it and I am sure that RAI also doesn't mean that you can easily ruin someone's entire reputation in a few hours just by constantly asking people for things and going away.1) To "completely ruin" his reputation would require that people stay mad at him; how long does a "hostile" attitude last? At worst, there'll be rumors going around that he was a jerk who tried using mind control magic to influence people's mood. Who will really believe that if he isn't a known magic user? Those upon whom you used this trick, sure, but even they could still be persuaded that it wasn't him...with some effort. I don't see this lasting too terribly long. Just long enough for the mischief you're up to as a tricksy illusionist/enchanter to be accomplished and you to get out of the way.

2) RAI is pretty clearly supposed to be that friends makes people realize their emotions were magically manipulated. Injecting "they know it was YOU and are hostile to YOU because MAGIC, no matter what you looked like then vs. now," is clearly not RAI. Pleading it to justify it doesn't make it so.

3) The logical thing to happen is for most of those influenced to realize that Barbarian Bob doesn't know magic, so whoever it was that influenced your mood was not actually Bob. They may have to stop and think about it, but it shouldn't take much.


Also unless I somehow has $10 to give around because I won the lotto I would inquire why would you need $10. Cause maybe to you it ain't no big thing but to me giving $10 is a huge deal, even giving a buck would still get me to ask why. You are disregarding acting by acting as both participants. It can't seem genuine if you control both people because you can have either act the way you want to regardless.Um...what? Who's controlling "both people?" Trickster Tim is impersonating Barbarian Bob and using friends to ask Bob's friends for $10. Whether they give it or not, he used magic to influence their mood, and after the minute duration of friends wears off, they know that "Bob" did so, and become hostile to him. Whether that transfers to real!Bob or not depends on a number of factors, mostly centering around how likely it is that Bob could or would have done it and how hard the target of friends thinks about it before assuming Bob really was the guy who just did it.

Obviously, this makes it easier to pull off of it was actually Eldritch Knight Bob - who is known to have that spell - whom you were impersonating.


If you wish to turn friends into a "DM fiat" spell a-la illusions then say so because most spells do rely on things acting exactly the way they say and Friends is clear even if you disagree and even if it doesn't make sense (because magic).Nothing in this is "DM fiat." You're trying to muddy the waters with negative terms that don't apply.


Cause another way that I see it, I don't think players would find it fun if the BBEG suddenly began to be able to easily reverse all good will into hate without any particular effort. Quite frankly I wouldn't like it if as a player the DM tries to cheese me out of any good will I am trying to build (at the very least if someone is trying to frame me I do hope that I can present my case but there is no presenting in Friends) so as a DM I would like it if a player doesn't think he can run around and ruin entire relationships and societies just by asking for money. A lot of things hinges on good will and I think this combo stomps on that.There is presenting your case. Hostility doesn't mean you can't try to persuade them otherwise; it just means it's harder. And it's hardly a guaranteed success; as you've noted, you have 1 minute to get the effect up, walk up to the mark, try to persuade them of something, and get out of sight before they realize what you've done. While this can be done a lot of the time, it's not something you can do in all circumstances. And if you're doing it regularly all around town in the open, you'll likely have angry people chasing you down while you're disguised as Bob because you're still out trying to spread ill-will. Since you're in the open, as Bob, and have already done it to James, Judy, Jim, and Jackie. Who now see you trying to do it to Jessie.

[Shaofoo]

1) To "completely ruin" his reputation would require that people stay mad at him; how long does a "hostile" attitude last? At worst, there'll be rumors going around that he was a jerk who tried using mind control magic to influence people's mood. Who will really believe that if he isn't a known magic user? Those upon whom you used this trick, sure, but even they could still be persuaded that it wasn't him...with some effort. I don't see this lasting too terribly long. Just long enough for the mischief you're up to as a tricksy illusionist/enchanter to be accomplished and you to get out of the way.

Sorry you can't bring about your own personal connotations as actual proof. Maybe in your games people might not stay mad too long but there is nothing in the rules that says that there is a time limit as to how long someone should stay mad or even try to rationalize it. They could carry the grudge to their graves and rise as a ghost with the intent to haunt you or even turn into a lich who will make it his entire life and unlife to see your downfall but that is also valid. Saying that you don't see it as terribly lasting too long says nothing. Hostile attitude can last as a second to till the end of time, both and everything in between is valid.


2) RAI is pretty clearly supposed to be that friends makes people realize their emotions were magically manipulated. Injecting "they know it was YOU and are hostile to YOU because MAGIC, no matter what you looked like then vs. now," is clearly not RAI. Pleading it to justify it doesn't make it so.

The spell has two subjects, you and the target. At no point is there a third person that can be affected by the spell. I say that clearly it is you that it is the one being affected considering that it is very cut and dry about the language. You might call it an oversight but quite frankly I think it is clear especially to avoid such cheese.

And yes I am willing to accept it is like that because magic because I believe in game balance a lot more than verisimilitude. I am willing to suspend my disbelief a lot more if it means having a balanced game. I am willing to accept the victim auto knowing you did it (even if he doesn't know who you is in reality) if it means stopping having a single wizard coming with a disguise and ruining the good name of a person and instead having a town out for his blood just because he cast two l;ow level spells.


3) The logical thing to happen is for most of those influenced to realize that Barbarian Bob doesn't know magic, so whoever it was that influenced your mood was not actually Bob. They may have to stop and think about it, but it shouldn't take much.

Then it is a wash. They can't even prove that a magic user did it because he might not even know the spell if that is the logic, unless they work on the guilty until proven innocent. Quite frankly the way you want the spell to work means that it is a waste of a Disguise unless you really work at it.


Nothing in this is "DM fiat." You're trying to muddy the waters with negative terms that don't apply.

Then explain to me how can illusions work without a DM? DM fiat isn't a negative term, it is a term to apply that the DM needs to act for this to proceed at all or the DM overstepping the rules. You are taking a spell with clear definitions and instead applying it to alternate scenarios. You becomes "the person you are trying to represent" and hostile apparently means "Mad" not "violent or planning retribution".


There is presenting your case. Hostility doesn't mean you can't try to persuade them otherwise; it just means it's harder. And it's hardly a guaranteed success; as you've noted, you have 1 minute to get the effect up, walk up to the mark, try to persuade them of something, and get out of sight before they realize what you've done. While this can be done a lot of the time, it's not something you can do in all circumstances. And if you're doing it regularly all around town in the open, you'll likely have angry people chasing you down while you're disguised as Bob because you're still out trying to spread ill-will. Since you're in the open, as Bob, and have already done it to James, Judy, Jim, and Jackie. Who now see you trying to do it to Jessie.

Hostility means attack on spot or plan your downfall, that is within the text of the spell, that isn't my interpretation of hostile that is me taking the presented definition at face value.

You can try to say you would do things different but then that goes beyond RAW and into DM fiat (because you as the DM are bringing your own opinion over a rule that is clear). You can argue as you wish but the fact is that the spell to me is very clear. I will accept that you means the person you are representing because you are also making hostile into a much less dramatic status, I am much more willing to accept having people just be mad instead of out for blood which the spells says.

[Vogonjeltz]

Except the magic still states as you. the description of the spell says by RAW you are the one that they know, not the one you pretend that you are. Probably for the same reason to not have mages be able to ruin someone's reputation in an instant because it is cheese.

I think it's obvious the wording of the spell doesn't imply any awareness by the target of the caster's actual identity per se.

i.e. They don't get extra information about you. If you're disguised as an Orc, they think an Orc influenced their mood, but if you leave and come back as a Halfling, they wouldn't think the Halfling did it, they'd still think the Orc did, because that's all they know.

The spell obviously can't be written to take into account the myriad disguise options for throwing off the offended party, and it doesn't actually say the party knows who you are. Allowing the affected party to know who the caster is (even when their appearance is disguised or altered) is effectively granting the subject true sight.


Sorry you can try to justify it all you like I still know the smell of cheese where I see it and I am sure that RAI also doesn't mean that you can easily ruin someone's entire reputation in a few hours just by constantly asking people for things and going away.

I think it would probably have diminishing returns, and could be stopped entirely if the person being impersonated gets wind of it (presumably from someone saying: "And that's the bloke who bewitched me into giving him a discount on ale!") and then talks their way out of it.

I don't think we can speak to RAI without asking Crawford, but I can't see why it wouldn't be acceptable to leverage the power of one spell off of another in a clever way.

[Shaofoo]

I think it's obvious the wording of the spell doesn't imply any awareness by the target of the caster's actual identity per se.

i.e. They don't get extra information about you. If you're disguised as an Orc, they think an Orc influenced their mood, but if you leave and come back as a Halfling, they wouldn't think the Halfling did it, they'd still think the Orc did, because that's all they know.

The spell obviously can't be written to take into account the myriad disguise options for throwing off the offended party, and it doesn't actually say the party knows who you are. Allowing the affected party to know who the caster is (even when their appearance is disguised or altered) is effectively granting the subject true sight.


The spell says point blank that they know you influenced the target, here is a direct quote.

"When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you. "

There is no wiggle room, the caster of the spell is you and they know you did it. The only thing they allow DM interpretation is a non violent creature's retribution, that is it.

The most I can see it work even tangentially is if you disguise yourself as someone, cast the spell and then when they get mad drop the disguise and go on. I might have them be suspicious but not be openly hostile towards you. I would never allow someone disguised as someone else be able to influence their views, because at this point the you isn't the person you are disguised it is you disguised as that person, basically there is no way to make someone hostile towards someone else with the side effect of the spell. But the victim auto knowing you is 100% within RAW.


I think it would probably have diminishing returns, and could be stopped entirely if the person being impersonated gets wind of it (presumably from someone saying: "And that's the bloke who bewitched me into giving him a discount on ale!") and then talks their way out of it.

You can rule it like that but that isn't how it should go, the rules have no clear definition as to how it should all be resolved. Of course such actions are left to the DM but you can't fault the DM for following the rules text to the letter. You can't disregard the text just because you don't like it.


I don't think we can speak to RAI without asking Crawford, but I can't see why it wouldn't be acceptable to leverage the power of one spell off of another in a clever way.

I wouldn't even allow a Wish to basically ruin someone's reputation in such a large potential scale as this combo without some monkey paw. Also this isn't even remotely clever, a DM can stop this by reading the text of the spell and not allowing it because the rules are clear, the only way this can work in any degree is if the DM somehow is accomplice of your trick. I don't consider a trick that can be stopped by reading the rules to be clever. It is totally within the rules of the game to try to have a bunch of people get mad at a person you are disguised only for when you come back they immediately know it was you and will muderkill you now. You may not like it and you might rule in your own personal interpretation but you can't just disregard the reality of the text. There really can't be any discussion about D&D if people aren't on board with the RAW of the text.

[Segev]

In 5e, everything is in natural language and heavily context-dependent. It is not the precise, legalistic game that 3e was, where words always have consistent game-term meanings that never vary when invoked. Context informs everything. The context here clearly does not include the consideration of a disguise; it assumes you're just you, obviously and openly. It also clearly indicates that the victim of friends realizes his mood was manipulated, and that it was the guy who just talked to him that did it. It in no way implies that he magically knows who it was to the point where he can unambiguously identify that individual in all circumstances. Which, if we go with Shaofoo's overly legalistic reading of "you," he absolutely could.

In fact, if Shaofoo is right, our only conclusion is that the victim of friends not only can forever and always identify the person who used it on him, no matter how he disguises himself, but that he can pick him out of a crowd, that he knows his name, pseudonyms, and everything about the caster of the spell, sufficient to be able to enact his revenge without any impediment that might come from lack of knowledge. After all, he knows it was YOU, which means he must know who YOU are.

Or... you can read it in natural English, as it was written, as all of 5e has been written, and realize that it's saying he's mad at you...but he thinks "you" are whoever that guy was that he saw when his mood was manipulated. Because the spell only gives him the information, "Your mood was manipulated," not that "the guy who was interacting with you when you had it was actually This Specific Individual, who you can now recognize no matter how he tries to disguise himself, because you know it was HIM that did it."

[Shaofoo]

In 5e, everything is in natural language and heavily context-dependent. It is not the precise, legalistic game that 3e was, where words always have consistent game-term meanings that never vary when invoked. Context informs everything. The context here clearly does not include the consideration of a disguise; it assumes you're just you, obviously and openly. It also clearly indicates that the victim of friends realizes his mood was manipulated, and that it was the guy who just talked to him that did it. It in no way implies that he magically knows who it was to the point where he can unambiguously identify that individual in all circumstances. Which, if we go with Shaofoo's overly legalistic reading of "you," he absolutely could.

In fact, if Shaofoo is right, our only conclusion is that the victim of friends not only can forever and always identify the person who used it on him, no matter how he disguises himself, but that he can pick him out of a crowd, that he knows his name, pseudonyms, and everything about the caster of the spell, sufficient to be able to enact his revenge without any impediment that might come from lack of knowledge. After all, he knows it was YOU, which means he must know who YOU are.

Or... you can read it in natural English, as it was written, as all of 5e has been written, and realize that it's saying he's mad at you...but he thinks "you" are whoever that guy was that he saw when his mood was manipulated. Because the spell only gives him the information, "Your mood was manipulated," not that "the guy who was interacting with you when you had it was actually This Specific Individual, who you can now recognize no matter how he tries to disguise himself, because you know it was HIM that did it."

Nope sorry, you are flat out wrong and adding misinformation.

The actual text is " When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you." not "Your mood was manipulated,". I can't really call it natural english when you have to change the text of the spell to better suit your agenda.

You is you, there is no in and out of it. The person is magically convinced that he was manipulated, this isn't some assumed effect (Dominate does not have this clause where the person knows they were dominated but they assume that something is wrong). The spell says that the victim knows the caster used magic on him, that is a direct quote of the spell. In fact even if I were to somehow accept that you can disregard the backlash with a disguise there is no way you can read this that somehow the guy that you were pretending to be will be saddled by the backlash, in no context is "you = someone else other than you".

I am not asking you to like it but that doesn't make you right in a discussion, you can phrase it however you want and saying "how natural language" as if that means something when I can't even begin to think how is it natural that you can take the literal word "you" into meaning "another person", that to me is unnatural reading right there.

It would be funny if somehow you means someone else which means that spells with range of self now only affects the person. It would be funny if this happened

BBEG :Hahaha my super magic items will rule the world!

Caster: I disguise as the BBEG and cast Antimagic Field.

DM: Well since you is BBEG now the BBEG is in the middle of an antimagic field and the items are useless.

Lets just say you is you or the munchkins win. Do you want the munchkins to win?

[Segev]

Nope, sorry, the spell is not powerful enough to negate disguises. It doesn't say it negates disguises. It says the target knows you manipulated its mood. It doesn't say the target knows who you are. It certainly doesn't allow the target to be able to tell identical twins apart when he meets them one week later if one of them cast the spell on him. Nor does it allow the target to automatically pierce disguises. He knows you - the person he saw when he interacted with you - did it. He doesn't magically know, 10 minutes later after you've put on a disguise, that the Halfling who he's mad at is that "scullion brat" cleaning the cauldron in the corner (now that you've put on your "human scullion" disguise).

If Superhero Sam is the arch nemesis of Villainous Vinnie, but Vinnie's main squeeze Samantha Sweetheart is, unbeknownst to Vinnie, Sam's alter ego, Vinnie is mad at Sam an awful lot...but doesn't know Samantha is Sam, and thus doesn't act on that anger towards her. If Vinnie enacts a diabolical plan to discover Sam's secret identity, and something goes wrong which causes him to believe that Mayor Mike is Superhero Sam, Vinnie, who before may not have been particularly mad at Mike, is now mad at Mike because he thinks Mike is Sam, with whom he is legitimately angry.

TL;DR: He's mad at YOU, but nothing prevents him from being wrong and thinking somebody else IS you.

[sandvirm]

I can't post links yet, but there is an entry for this on SageAdvice.eu. Mearls says the target of Friends is angry with whomever the PC is disguised as.