good Suggestions for Suggestion

[Chugger]

I'm getting that casting spells like Friend and Charm doesn't mean automatic success, that you still must make a Cha roll if you want the victim to do something. They at least won't attack you (or presumably your friends) even if you're attacking their friends, but to get them to do something for you might require some cleverness.

This has always been the case with Suggestion. The right wording can be miraculous, even funny. A poor or weak Suggestion can backfire or be a waste of a casting.

If I'm told "Join us and help us kill your comrades - they're evil and have been plotting to kill you" I'm going to have a hard time getting out of it. But they only said "help us kill" - they didn't say "cast harmful spells on" or "use your sword to kill". Do I have leeway here or wiggle room? I sure think I do, but I won't say more. Maybe one of you will figure out something better if I keep quiet.

What if I'm told, "Do 200 pushups right now and your god will be so impressed that your god will cause you to win every battle you fight today." Do I have to do those 200 pushups while my team fights and possibly dies around me? Can I drop prone (no movement), do a pushup, use half my movement to pop back up and attack an enemy, and shout "ONE!" Next round the same except shout "TWO!" Would that work - would I be satisfying the spell? What if they'd said do 200 consecutive or 200 uninterrupted pushups?

What if I'm attacked by 3 ogres and want to get rid of one of them? I could suggest, "Run as fast as you can right now to the place you spent the night and search - you left something very important back there!" If that were used on me I'd have a hard time getting out of it. I'm not thinking of anything good. I could argue that I know I didn't leave anything important there, but it's a spell and is probably making me think I really did. I have to run there right now as fast as I can. Any ideas? Any way to wiggle out of this one?

What are the most brilliant or funny or lame suggestions you've come across? I'd love to hear them. Ones you think a monster can't get out of - that would be awesome.

Also, can a warlock use his telepathy (old one iirc) to make a suggestion to a monster it otherwise can't communicate with. No common language except through his special warlock telepathy - would that work? Is there a specific rule in the phb or sage advice against that please?

[Aett_Thorn]

"Join us and help us kill your comrades" isn't a reasonable Suggestion. At least not in my view. They give you no reason to do that, and you wouldn't normally take that action (unless your group is evil, I guess). However, if they phrased it, "One of your companions is evil, join us and help us kill them," then that would be a reasonable Suggestion. They are making it reasonable to take the action.

Your push-up example is exactly why Suggestion isn't a great spell to use against the characters. They'll try to reason their way out of it in a way that the DM usually wouldn't. Yes, you should drop to the ground an immediately do 200 push-ups uninterrupted. But you could argue that doing one a round for 200 rounds is a reasonable interpretation.


As for other good Suggestions: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?532129-Best-uses-for-Suggestion

[Pex]

"You're not paid enough to risk your life. Stay out of this fight."

DMs tend to be more lenient if you don't use Suggestion as a means to get an ally to fight for you or otherwise increase the raw power of your side.

[Specter]

Against a melee foe? "Use this as your weapon". Then hand him a mug or a table leg or some other stupidity.

Against casters? "Stop casting spells".

[Findulidas]

I think most people are using this spell the wrong way. Its clearly much more effective and more reasonable to use out of combat. Im thinking along the lines of "these are not droids you are looking for". Perhaps convincing a random guard that you are an inspector doing a suprise inspection. Suggesting to a suprise witness that what you are doing is not important and can be ignored/forgotten. Suggesting that you can just borrow the key or nobles ring for few seconds since you cant really do anything im that short time, so you can do a mold of it. Suggesting to the guard in a prison that he needs to be somewhere else so you can escape. Suggesting that the drow should focus on something else then torturing you, perhaps be a jerkass to some other drow and start some infight. Suggest that the merchant should not scam you, give some fair prices and show the good stuff so he went feel bad afterwards. Suggest to the troll that you dont look tasty and that he will find better game in the forest. Suggest to the draconic paladin that your questionable criminal character seems to have started to reform himself and should be left alone.

I mean out of combat there are many more options that allow you to skip a lot of trouble or just open up new opportunities.

[Finieous]

If you're the DM, the first thing you should do is decide whether or not the spell allows the caster to implant false beliefs in the target's mind (e.g. "Your comrades are plotting to kill you"). If you're a player, the first thing you should do is find out if your DM interprets the spell this way.

Otherwise, you can simply suggest a reasonable course of action, with pretty wide latitude on what is "reasonable." The most successful applications in my games use the target's own inclinations against him (e.g. "Help us kill Boss Hark so you can be the new goblin boss.")

[Findulidas]

If you're the DM...

Yeah this spell certainly can be interpreted in many diffrent ways. As a dm I would say if it could work or not in diffrent situations and why not just to clarify things.

[Chugger]

A long time ago spells were pretty devastating. A simple charm spell gave you total mind-control in most interpretations.

I can see there is an issue with whether or not suggestion causes you to believe something or not. Clearly on some level it does. It's making you do something against your will.

[Ventruenox]

GOOlock telepathy combos quite well with Suggestion. I use it all the time.

Before choosing the wording that seems most advantageous to you, try to imagine the motivations of the opponent and what they might likely do on their own if so inclined. Appeals to laziness and greed usually come across as reasonable. Having them attack their own allies just because you said so is not.

Compare these two examples, if you are up against someone using a chaotic evil dragon as a mount:

"Your rider is your enemy. You should kill him." - unreasonable and boring. DM will likely say no.

"You have vermin on your back. You should roll over to scratch them off." - reasonable and amusing. DM would probably go for it.

The end results both have the dragon turn on the rider, but how you phrase the suggestion is very important.

And if you want to throw a curveball to the DM, use the paradox: "Ignore This Suggestion"

[Chugger]

And if you want to throw a curveball to the DM, use the paradox: "Ignore This Suggestion"

"Does not compute!" Smoke coming out the computer's ears! Oh wait...not Star Trek. :D

Good thoughts. Yes, something more reasonable should work more often.

What if I'm told vermin are after me, I should take off my armor and scratch them away - without adding "right now" or "immediately"? Is "immediately" implicit in the command nature of the suggestion? If it's not added could I do something else first (if that's cast on me) such as finish the fight - and then take off my armor and scratch. If I were a player and had a sug cast on me, I'd fight it - so DMs should have most monsters fight suggestions. Stupid monsters - special case monsters and a "perfect fit" suggestions - maybe not - i.e. a corrupt guard getting "there's no reason for you to risk your life here - you should run far away from this fight now and make up a story about being magically feared to keep out of trouble" - I'm not even sure the guard would need to try to save against that - might just obey it because it's what he wants to do, anyway.

[SharkForce]

"Does not compute!" Smoke coming out the computer's ears! Oh wait...not Star Trek. :D

Good thoughts. Yes, something more reasonable should work more often.

What if I'm told vermin are after me, I should take off my armor and scratch them away - without adding "right now" or "immediately"? Is "immediately" implicit in the command nature of the suggestion? If it's not added could I do something else first (if that's cast on me) such as finish the fight - and then take off my armor and scratch. If I were a player and had a sug cast on me, I'd fight it - so DMs should have most monsters fight suggestions. Stupid monsters - special case monsters and a "perfect fit" suggestions - maybe not - i.e. a corrupt guard getting "there's no reason for you to risk your life here - you should run far away from this fight now and make up a story about being magically feared to keep out of trouble" - I'm not even sure the guard would need to try to save against that - might just obey it because it's what he wants to do, anyway.

if you want to get rid of an armoured foe, try suggesting that there are rust monsters nearby :)

[GoodmanDL]

"This whole fight is stupid. You should juse go home."

[Chugger]

if you want to get rid of an armoured foe, try suggesting that there are rust monsters nearby :)

Hah!

I truly hate rust monsters. They don't exist in the campaigns I DM ... or haven't yet....

[Chugger]

"This whole fight is stupid. You should juse go home."

Unless Suggestion has a built-in "now" (implicit), if that were cast on me, I'd go home after the fight was over. But it's a good though. I'd add "right now" at the end if I cast it.

[Unoriginal]

And if you want to throw a curveball to the DM, use the paradox: "Ignore This Suggestion"

And they ignore it

[Sirithhyando]

And if you want to throw a curveball to the DM, use the paradox: "Ignore This Suggestion"

How is it a curveball?

Player : (cast suggestion) "Ignore this suggestion"
Target : "Ok, I ignore it"

Done... what was suppose to happen? I dont get it.

I'm looking at the spell right now and all I can see is that he will ignore this suggestions as asked since it's pretty reasonable to do so.

Player : "I suggest to you to ignore what i'm suggesting"
Target : Stab the player while ignoring what he was saying...

No, really, I dont see what it could do beside wasting a level 2 spell and your action (if within combat).

[Aett_Thorn]

How is it a curveball?

Player : (cast suggestion) "Ignore this suggestion"
Target : "Ok, I ignore it"

Done... what was suppose to happen? I dont get it.

I'm looking at the spell right now and all I can see is that he will ignore this suggestions as asked since it's pretty reasonable to do so.

Player : "I suggest to you to ignore what i'm suggesting"
Target : Stab the player while ignoring what he was saying...

No, really, I dont see what it could do beside wasting a level 2 spell and your action (if within combat).

It creates a paradox.

If they ignore the Suggestion to "Ignore this Suggestion" then they are actually following the Suggestion. As such, they are not ignoring it. But if they don't ignore the Suggestion, then they aren't following the spell effects.

If I were the DM, I'd give the NPC a round or two of confusion while they try to work it out, but I still think that there are better uses for Suggestion.

[Unoriginal]

It creates a paradox.

If they ignore the Suggestion to "Ignore this Suggestion" then they are actually following the Suggestion. As such, they are not ignoring it. But if they don't ignore the Suggestion, then they aren't following the spell effects.

If I were the DM, I'd give the NPC a round or two of confusion while they try to work it out, but I still think that there are better uses for Suggestion.

It's not how Suggestion or paradoxes work.

There is nothing to be confused about this. Suggestion doesn't make bodies move without the brain's input, it's just a very convincing "advice". Saying "Ignore this Suggestion" won't lead to confusion, aside from maybe from people wondering which suggestion you're talking about while they continue to do their thing.

[jas61292]

The fact that one happens to be doing what the suggestion says does not mean the suggestion is what is making them do so. If you tell them to ignore the suggestion, they will. It might be a logical paradox, but the creature is not a logic engine, so it does not care. The magic makes them ignore it, and then it is done. The fact that, in ignoring it, they have followed it, is immaterial.

On a more serious note, I take issue with a lot of people's examples of suggestions. A suggestion is a "course of activity," not a belief. If your suggestion requires that they first accept something as fact that they have no reason to believe, it should not work, because that is not a course of activity.

Saying "you should attack your friend" is a course of activity, but it is not reasonable. Adding "your friend is actually a spy" won't help, because that is simply a lie. It is not a course of activity, and the spell does nothing to make them believe any lies you preface your suggestion with. Any time the "suggestion" is a statement and then a suggestion, only the later part should be considered, and the former ignored, unless the player has other magical or mundane means of making them believe. The suggestion spell alone will not do it, however.

[Ventruenox]

Let's try to be respectful to the OP and not derail the thread arguing what constitutes a paradox and how individual DMs ought to rule. This is 5E, and this spell is quite subjective to DM interpretation. The reason I call it a curveball is that the phrasing will force a ruling from the DM who might not have expected this particular use of the spell. This will vary from table to table, ranging from "You waste a level 2 spell slot for no effect" to "His head explodes and he dies." If you don't like this use, don't allow it at your table. There is no uniform policy as to how to handle it.

As to the two sentence formula usage, You make a valid point that Suggestion does not make the listener believe a lie. Playing spin doctor on the first statement to make the suggested course of action seem more reasonable is not the same as an outright lie. If the statement would fall in line with the listener's prejudices (an evil dragon would consider its rider to be an inferior creature, possibly no better than vermin), then it pushing the scope of the spell a bit, but not breaking it. I consider that to be part of the saving throw, whether or not the listener accepts the premise. You could argue that accepting a biased premise would constitute two suggestions being made, but this may also vary from table to table. I see it as an understanding of your enemy and incorporating psychological manipulation rather than part of the magical effects of the spell.

[Chugger]

Let's try to be respectful to the OP and not derail the thread arguing what constitutes a paradox and how individual DMs ought to rule. This is 5E, and this spell is quite subjective to DM interpretation. The reason I call it a curveball is that the phrasing will force a ruling from the DM who might not have expected this particular use of the spell. This will vary from table to table, ranging from "You waste a level 2 spell slot for no effect" to "His head explodes and he dies." If you don't like this use, don't allow it at your table. There is no uniform policy as to how to handle it.

As to the two sentence formula usage, You make a valid point that Suggestion does not make the listener believe a lie. Playing spin doctor on the first statement to make the suggested course of action seem more reasonable is not the same as an outright lie. If the statement would fall in line with the listener's prejudices (an evil dragon would consider its rider to be an inferior creature, possibly no better than vermin), then it pushing the scope of the spell a bit, but not breaking it. I consider that to be part of the saving throw, whether or not the listener accepts the premise. You could argue that accepting a biased premise would constitute two suggestions being made, but this may also vary from table to table. I see it as an understanding of your enemy and incorporating psychological manipulation rather than part of the magical effects of the spell.

It's okay - and I think you handled the paradox thing quite well there (though my (joking) Star Trek reference also covered it - you hit it in more detail). Thanks.

I find it funny that a lot of us seem to be taking the paradox observation a bit too literally. But this is a game where stranger stuff has happened, so I can see people letting the humorous aspect of the paradox reference "whoosh" them while they struggle to make literal sense of it.

I think the phb gives an example of a "successful" suggestion spell - that a knight give her horse to the next beggar she sees. And there is an 8 hour or so window for that to happen. If she sees no beggar in that time, nothing happens - if she does, she gives him her mount. There is no "reason" to do it, so a "reason" may not be required to make suggestion work. It is a command that seems to supplant the will and force you to do something. And yes, there is still a heavily subjective element to it, meaning it could be hell to implement.

A lot of "it makes sense that the monster would obey this suggestion" is not necessarily RAW but psychological - i.e. DM manipulation - i.e. this DM won't let me get away with x unless I "entertain him" or w/e. Or add a justification (so he feels better about having an event outside his control happen) even though "needing a justification" is not necessarily RAW.

I think I see why there is some confusion: the phb says the suggestion has to be "reasonable." So a lot of people assume that means reasonable in a general way, but it does _not_. The phb goes on to define what "reasonable" means in context of this spell, and that is the suggestion can't force a victim to kill itself or jump in lava or do something so crazy or dangerous that death is almost certain.

And then the phb gives a working version of suggestion - the knight giving her warhorse to the first beggar she sees. This is "reasonable"? Hardly! So the only way to make sense of the PHB is to conclude that "reasonable" is limited to the example-structure they gave - reasonable means non-suicidal. So if I suggest that a Bugbear run as fast as it can toward the snowy mountains, it will do that if it fails its ST. It doesn't need a "reason" to do that. If the bugbear, however, is standing on a small island of rock in a lake of lava and I tell it to run toward the snowy mountains, unless it turns and "runs in place" I would assume that spell wouldn't work on it - because to run toward the snowy mountains would mean to step into lava and burn up - suicidal - not reasonable.

If we put a requirement of true or general or objective "reasonableness" on this spell, then it's no different from making a persuasion check using Charisma - and that is a separate and different thing. Suggestion is an enchantment spell which will "magically influence a creature" (phb).

[Tanarii]

Suggestion doesn't redefine reality, nor make the target believe anything that they know is not true. It magically compels an action based on something that is reasonable. Things the target knows not to be true won't be reasonable, and the spell will automatically fail.

That may or may not rule out telling the target that they've been betrayed, or the like. Or it might require a Deception vs Insight check (on top of the saving throw) for it to be believed. Or (if you're dealing with a bunch of backstabbing backstabbers) it might be very reasonable. It behooves the caster to know their target and what their target believes to be true, or can be persuaded to believe is true.

[Chugger]

Suggestion doesn't redefine reality, nor make the target believe anything that they know is not true. It magically compels an action based on something that is reasonable. Things the target knows not to be true won't be reasonable, and the spell will automatically fail.

That may or may not rule out telling the target that they've been betrayed, or the like. Or it might require a Deception vs Insight check (on top of the saving throw) for it to be believed. Or (if you're dealing with a bunch of backstabbing backstabbers) it might be very reasonable. It behooves the caster to know their target and what their target believes to be true, or can be persuaded to believe is true.

But it does seem to compel a creature that fails its ST to _do something unreasonable_.

Semantics. We're dealing with two separate cases of the same word - but not the same meaning.

This is a common problem and often hard to see - even for really smart people. It's important to approach this spell with rigor and grasp that "reasonable" - RAW in the phb - is strictly limited to the cases they provide for what "reasonable" in this spell's context means: and here "reasonable" means it doesn't make you commit suicide. (edit, unreasonable in the narrow stricture of the suggestion spell only means "will cause imminent suicide" or something much like that)

If I suggest to a creature and it fails its ST, "The sky is pink, run to that village over there and oink like a pig" - that is "reasonable" by the suggestion spell's phb/RAW. Even though the sky is _not_ pink. That version of reasonable is not a test for the spell working or not RAW. (edit running over there and oinking like a pig is not suicidal and is therefore "reasonable" as per the spell's test - but of course in a more general sense it is totally unreasonable - but again that is a _different use of the same word_ / please don't be confused / though doubtlessly some of us will) Suggesting that a creature "swim in lava" (it will surely burn up) or "jump into the sea" (when they can't swim and will surely drown) - these are not reasonable. "You are a magic butterly. Flit your arms like they're wings and try to sniff every flower in this field." <-- this is RAW/phb "reasonable" and would work. (it would fail if the creature this is cast on knows it is highly allergic to flowers and suffers death if they sniff them, however)

Now, RAI ... who knows? Arguably, unless JC has told us RAI, who cares? Again this is a "magic spell" - each DM has to try or should try to put a consistent interpretation on it. And it is very very hard to have true rigor and be truly consistent. Seriously. I struggle at it, and I feel I have a pretty good grasp of what rigor and consistency mean.

[Tanarii]

But it does seem to compel a creature that fails its ST to _do something unreasonable_.This statement directly contradicts the sentence in Suggestion that says:
"The suggestion must be worded in such a manner as to make the course of action sound reasonable."


Semantics. We're dealing with two separate cases of the same word - but not the same meaning.

This is a common problem and often hard to see - even for really smart people. It's important to approach this spell with rigor and grasp that "reasonable" - RAW in the phb - is strictly limited to the cases they provide for what "reasonable" in this spell's context means: and here "reasonable" means it doesn't make you commit suicide. (edit, unreasonable in the narrow stricture of the suggestion spell only means "will cause imminent suicide" or something much like that)That's not semantics. It's redefining the word to mean something it doesn't mean. The spell includes a restriction ("reasonable"), followed by clear examples of things that are definitely not reasonable. Anything else must be adjudicated by the DM.



Let me give an example. I certainly find it both believable and reasonable that eating healthy food and exercise are good for me. But that doesn't mean I eat healthy (although I generally try to get regular exercise). If someone cast a Suggestion on me telling me it'd be a good idea to skip the formal dinner tonight with lord so and so, because I need to lose a few lbs, it'd be completely reasonable. Despite the fact that I probably wouldn't have done it without magical compulsion. If someone tried to persuade me of such a thing using just a 'skill check', I'd almost certainly look at them funny. But with magical compulsion, based around something I could find reasonable, if I failed my save I'd do it.

OTOH if someone tried to convince Suggestion me that McDonalds is super healthy, so I should run out right now and buy 100 big macs for them and their closest friends ... there's no way I'd find that reasonable. It's obviously a lie. (A tasty one, but still obviously a lie.)

[Chugger]

This statement directly contradicts the sentence in Suggestion that says:
"The suggestion must be worded in such a manner as to make the course of action sound reasonable."

That's not semantics. It's redefining the word to mean something it doesn't mean. The spell includes a restriction ("reasonable"), followed by clear examples of things that are definitely not reasonable. Anything else must be adjudicated by the DM.



Let me give an example. I certainly find it both believable and reasonable that eating healthy food and exercise are good for me. But that doesn't mean I eat healthy (although I generally try to get regular exercise). If someone cast a Suggestion on me telling me it'd be a good idea to skip the formal dinner tonight with lord so and so, because I need to lose a few lbs, it'd be completely reasonable. Despite the fact that I probably wouldn't have done it without magical compulsion. If someone tried to persuade me of such a thing using just a 'skill check', I'd almost certainly look at them funny. But with magical compulsion, based around something I could find reasonable, if I failed my save I'd do it.

OTOH if someone tried to convince Suggestion me that McDonalds is super healthy, so I should run out right now and buy 100 big macs for them and their closest friends ... there's no way I'd find that reasonable. It's obviously a lie. (A tasty one, but still obviously a lie.)

Nope, you're reading the rules wrong. Sorry. I know you think you're justified in your interpretation and you do have an argument for it, but it's an argument that fails.

The very section you quote justifies my interpretation for the reasons I stated. In the PHB it gave an example of what "reasonable" means for this rule. What "reasonable" is such a well-defined concept that you think it can be used in the way you say??? Really? Hardly. Sorry, but "reasonable" is one of the most subjective words there is in the English language. You can't play with it the way you do.

The rules gave an example for what they mean by "reasonable" - and it seems strictly limited to doesn't cause victim to obviously just die or "commit suicide". They gave an example that _contradicts_ your interpretation later in the spell definition in the PHB. The knight in the example of the "successful" use of Suggestion - what - it's "reasonable" for her to give her warhorse to the first beggar she sees???? No, of course it isn't.

Therefore we have - clear as day - an obvious issue with semantics. And just as I say (this is hard for some of us to grasp) you are having trouble grasping it. We have _two_ distinct and _separate_ uses of "unreasonable" in the definition of the spell. I'm not trying to be rude with you, just firm. You're absolutely wrong (from a RAW standpoint) and I'm not arguing this point with you any more. From a standpoint of RAI you might be right, but without a mearl or JC quote, who can know? Get us one of those and we have something to discuss. Otherwise, for me, this issue is settled. Thanks.

[Tanarii]

Nope, you're reading the rules wrong. Sorry. I know you think you're justified in your interpretation and you do have an argument for it, but it's an argument that fails.Your argument isn't reasonable. Therefore your attempt to tell me I'm reading them wrong automatically fails. :smallamused:

[jas61292]

I think the big problem is that people see the example given and think that it is not reasonable, and use that as an excuse to do anything, regardless of how unreasonable. But, I think that is a huge misinterpretation of the example given. Yes, a horse is important to a knight, but ultimately it is just a horse. Even a good warhorse only costs 400gp, and while that seems a sizable sum, a knight was typically a member of lower nobility. Giving up a valuable possession for no good reason certainly is not something someone would normally do, but when that possession is hardly irreplaceable, this is ultimately on the low end of unreasonable. It is not going against key character traits, and making them do something that violates the very core of who they are. It is simply having them take an action they would not normally do.

Now compare that to some of what people suggest: betraying friends, believing and acting on something that their own knowledge tells them is an outright lie. These are not even in the same category as a knight giving up a horse. The former is something that likely is violates core principles of the individual, while the latter is an affront to their intelligence, not to mention trying to use the spell to go beyond its scope (a statement of fiction as if it were fact is not a part of the course of action the spell allows). Trying to equate these to the horse situation is ridiculous.

Obviously, the horse example does show that "reasonable" does not necessarily mean something the person themselves would do normally. But it does mean far more than "not suicidal." Anything that goes against their beliefs, their ethos, or their other fundamental character traits will never be reasonable, by any definition of the word.

[SharkForce]

giving up a horse is pretty unreasonable. "only" 400 gp is pretty ridiculous for a knight, even if you presume the feudal system is in place; a knight may have been minor nobility, but that doesn't mean they were swimming in money. things like armour and warhorses were crazy expensive for quite a long time, and a knight didn't exactly own a huge amount of land.

[Unoriginal]

If you want to go historical about it, a good amount of knights were from the gentry, not the nobility. Landed knights had the lowest possible rank of nobility, and even for them being a knight, who needed armor, weapon, and more importantly a war horse or more, was incredibly expensive.

[jas61292]

The point though is not that it is reasonable, but that giving away something very valuable, but not irreplaceable, is absolutely not on the same level as betrayal or many other such suggestions. Giving up stuff is not violating core character principles, unless we are talking about someone whose core characteristic is greed, in which case is argue the horse suggestion would fail anyways.

[Tanarii]

The point though is not that it is reasonable, but that giving away something very valuable, but not irreplaceable, is absolutely not on the same level as betrayal or many other such suggestions.
Nor is it the same as trying to make someone believe something that they know is not true, then base the compelled action on that. Which many of the other suggested Suggestions are doing.

[Demonslayer666]

My interpretation of suggestion has always been that you make the action sound reasonable. Give them a reason to do something unreasonable. The Knight giving away his horse is unreasonable because you didn't suggest a reason for the course of action. There's an implied one, that the beggar is poor and needs a horse, but this IMO, is a poor example. It would better if it were worded, "give your horse to the next beggar you see because he needs it to plow his fields, his family is starving."

Along that line, "Take off your armor, it's cursed." "Help us restrain your friend, he is a doppelganger." "This is going to be a long battle, you best run back to town and get more healing potions." "It's going to get cold, you should build a huge bonfire."

In the 200 push-up example, as a DM, I would not allow you to do one and attack. You'd do push-ups instead of anything else until you completed 200.

[MintyNinja]

I've used a Twinned Suggestion to help in a prison break scenario, telling the guards: "Turn around, sit down, and shut up until I say otherwise."

Being surprised by individual guards here and there my character's go to Suggestion is: "Would you kindly spend the rest of the night at the nearest casino gambling." It gives a level of deniability should they pass their saves and I can just say that I'm a promoter or something.

[Primus Beno]

The real kicker for Suggestion is it's 8 hour duration, even if it does have to be concentration. You can take someone out of the fight for a long time by doing this if you are crafty and don't need many concentration spells to cast. One of our favorite suggestions to hit orcs with was "It is vital that you pick up as many sticks as possible". We tried to target obvious leaders or archers. The orc then would start to furiously pick up sticks. Any menial task works really well as it probably won't be completed in under 8 hours if you phrase it right. It makes a good way for capturing someone too to make sure they can't run away if you need to get information out of them.

[Zorku]

Some people take the suggestion phrase itself to be the verbal component for the spell, but I've got the impression that that's not RAI. I think that the verbal components are always supposed to be more like some Harry Potter type stuff, so a casting of Suggestion would have the wizard flicking their magic wand a bit, and then saying "Mas'os Ghul'ib. You don't need to check in the cellar."

-

Going for the "reasonable is a keyword" end of things, it only shows up 3 times in the PHB, all of which are in spell text.

(Mass/) Suggestion gives us inflicting harm on oneself as utterly invalid actions, and giving away a warhorse/all of your money to a beggar as "trigger conditions." We seem to generally be using the exception proves the rule reasoning to frame these are invalid and valid examples of suggestions, but neither case seems to actually be those things. You cannot just up and tell a creature to kill itself with this spell, AND if you give a creature conditions then they will perform the activity when you said to, so long as this is within the duration of the spell. This does not strictly give us any examples of invalid or valid suggestions.

What we do have is that wording that the suggestion must be phrased to sound reasonable. This probably gives us the fun interpretation, where you don't just cast suggestion and say "give all of your money to the first beggar you see" but instead, you say something like, "The trickster god of reversals* is in town, dressed as a beggar. Give him all of your money and insist that he keep it so that he'll grant you a far greater sum the next day!"

*I'm trying to go setting agnostic with that old Kitsune story.

For reasonable tables "I need to borrow your horse. Lend it to me, for my cause is a righteous one!" is probably suitable for getting a horse from some paladin. For tables that rate higher on the munchkin scale, "there is an invisible net in that dark pit where a great treasure is hidden. Hop into it before your friends can claim the treasure!" is probably good for dispatching some cave troll (and will dispatch a whole group if your dm thinks it would be funny enough if they fought each other to try and get at the treasure.)