Best Languages to learn for the Command spell?

[Merudo]

The cleric & paladin spell Command requires that the target understand the language the command was spoken in.

Which languages I should pick for my Cleric to maximize the number of creatures I can cast Command & Suggestion on? Said creatures should ideally have a low WIS save so the spell has a decent chance to work.

The Giant language is a good one, as giants are plentiful, typically don't know common, and tend to have low WIS save.

Undercommon is also good, as most creatures of the underdark know the language.

Not sure about other languages though.

[Corran]

Depends a lot on the campaign, but yeah, as you said, giant would be my first choice. The value of command, aside for targeting a weak save and for allies with strong OA's, derives from denying an enemy his action (basically it's a trade off, you use your action, in the hope that the enemy loses theirs, plus some OA damage from whomever of your allies are close, including you). So it makes sense to target enemies with a strong attack sequence, so yeah, giants qualify for this.

[JellyPooga]

I'd have said Common would be your highest priority :smalltongue:

Giant is definitely a good shout, as is Draconic (which is weirdly common; many non-dragons speak draconic; it's really a reptilian/ophidian language).

[Merudo]

I'd have said Common would be your highest priority :smalltongue:

Giant is definitely a good shout, as is Draconic (which is weirdly common; many non-dragons speak draconic; it's really a reptilian/ophidian language).

Problem with Draconic - most creatures that speak it, also speak common (Dragons,
Dragonborn, Kobolds).

Creatures that speak draconic and not common (wis save in parenthesis, asterisk means magic resistance):

Draconic, MM: Behir (2), Chimera (2), Dragon Wyrmlings (2), Dragon Turtle (1), Faerie Dragon (1*), Lizardfolks (1-2)

Draconic, Volo's: Firenewts (0), Guard Drake (0)

Draconic, MToF: Abishais (1-12)

I'm not super impressed by this list.

[JellyPooga]

Problem with Draconic - most creatures that speak it, also speak common (Dragons,
Dragonborn, Kobolds).

Creatures that speak draconic and not common: Behir, Chimera, Dragon Wyrmlings, Dragon Turtle, Faerie Dragon, Lizardfolks

From Volo's: Firenewts, Guard Drake

From MToF: Abishais

I'm not super impressed by this list.

While not impressive, it's a touch more than any of the others. Shrug.

[Merudo]

While not impressive, it's a touch more than any of the others. Shrug.

Abyssal/Infernal may be more valuable, actually.

The following creatures speak Abyssal but no common:

Abyssal, MM: Balor (9*), Balgura (2), Chasme (5*), Dretch (-1), Glabrezu (7*), Goristro (7*), Hezrou (4*), Manes (-1), Marilith (8*), Nalfreshnee (6*), Shadow Demon (1), Vrock (4*), Yochlol (6*), Gnoll Fang (2), Kraken (12), Lizard King/Queen (2), Merrow (0), Minotaur (3), Loths (0-2*)

Abyssal, Volo's: Bodak (1), Babau (1), Maw Demon (-1), Shoosuva (5), Devourer (0), Draegloth (0), Flind (5), Leucrotta (1), Vargrouille (-2), Xvarts (-2,0)

Abyssal, MToF: Alkilith, Armanite, Bulezau, Maurezhi, Molydeus, Nabassu, Rutterkin, Abyssal Wretch, Wastrilith, Howler, Retriever, Loths (Cano, Dhergo, Hydro, Mereeno, Oino, Yagno)

The following creatures speak Infernal but no common:

Infernal, MM: Devils (Barbed, Bearded, Chain, Horned, Ice, Spined), Lemure, Pit Fiend, Hell Hound, Kraken, Loths (Mezz, Nyca, Ultra)

Infernal, Volo's: Vargrouille

Infernal, MToF: Abishais, Hellfire Engine, Merregon, Nupperibo, Loths (Cano, Dhergo, Hydro, Mereeno, Oino, Yagno)

[JellyPooga]

Abyssal/Infernal may be more valuable, actually.

Abyssal, MM: Balor, Balgura, Chasme, Dretch, Glabrezu, Goristro, Hezrou, Manes, Marilith, Nalfreshnee, Shadow Demon, Vrock, Yochlol, Gnoll Fang, Kraken, Lizard King/Queen, Merrow, Minotaur, Minotaur Skeleton, Loths (Mezz, Nyca, Ultra)

Abyssal, Volo's: Bodrak, Babau, Maw Demon, Shoosuva, Devourer, Draegloth, Flind, Leucrotta, Vargrouille, Xvart

Abyssal, MToF: Alkilith, Armanite, Bulezau, Maurezhi, Molydeus, Nabassu, Rutterkin, Abyssal Wretch, Wastrilith, Howler, Retriever, Loths (Cano, Dhergo, Hydro, Mereeno, Oino, Yagno)

Almost all of which also speak Common. I realise that there's very little in it, whichever language you choose; Undercommon and Giant are the only two that really stand out and those are mostly because of the frequency of their use more than the number of native speakers, per se.

[Merudo]

Almost all of which also speak Common.

What are you talking about? None of them speak common.

[Teaguethebean]

I would consider if you are starting at a low level picking up goblin is nice. I know the book says goblins speak common but a lot of DMs like to remove the common from creatures languages to make them more interesting.

[JellyPooga]

What are you talking about? None of them speak common.

Woah. Ok, granted. I was taking a big assumption when I wrote that; possibly a holdover from previous editions. It feels like a bit of an oversight that demons and devils, the master manipulators of the Planes, the pact-makers and deal-breakers of legend, many of who have intelligence and charisma superior to that of mortal man...can't understand Dave the Farmer when he says "hello" without using magic. It's an intriguingly specific defence against language-based magic like Command or Suggestion, I suppose, but it does feel weird that these quasi-godlike entities don't know the Common tongue.

To nitpick, though, how much of your list can be pared down to simply "Demons" and "Devils", instead of listing every one? It's not necesarily comprehensive given that some small few do actually speak Common, but it would probably be a more accurate indication of what we're looking for here to say "Demons don't speak Common" than listing every Demon that doesn't. I mean, if you were making a list of creatures that are affected by the spell Earthbind, it would make the list misleadingly long to list every colour and age of dragon instead of just saying "Dragons".

[sophontteks]

Undercommon, infernal, and primordial.
Which is better is campaign-dependent. Each pretty much hits a category of creatures.

[Asmotherion]

Woah. Ok, granted. I was taking a big assumption when I wrote that; possibly a holdover from previous editions. It feels like a bit of an oversight that demons and devils, the master manipulators of the Planes, the pact-makers and deal-breakers of legend, many of who have intelligence and charisma superior to that of mortal man...can't understand Dave the Farmer when he says "hello" without using magic. It's an intriguingly specific defence against language-based magic like Command or Suggestion, I suppose, but it does feel weird that these quasi-godlike entities don't know the Common tongue.

To nitpick, though, how much of your list can be pared down to simply "Demons" and "Devils", instead of listing every one? It's not necesarily comprehensive given that some small few do actually speak Common, but it would probably be a more accurate indication of what we're looking for here to say "Demons don't speak Common" than listing every Demon that doesn't. I mean, if you were making a list of creatures that are affected by the spell Earthbind, it would make the list misleadingly long to list every colour and age of dragon instead of just saying "Dragons".

Well, they all have telepathy, witch kinda beats common as an universal language. If they were to bother to learn a language, perhaps they'd learn to speak with things that can block telepathy? Seems logical.

[JellyPooga]

Well, they all have telepathy, witch kinda beats common as an universal language. If they were to bother to learn a language, perhaps they'd learn to speak with things that can block telepathy? Seems logical.

That's what weird. Thryxzor the Unspeakable can initiate conversation with anyone he likes and have a conversation, no problem. If Dave the Farmer is trying to get Thryxzors attention, though, there's a conversation barrier. It's particularly strange for Fiends that are playing the infiltration game in (demi) human alternate form (whether through a spell, ability, magical item or plot device). They have to have at least Comprehend Languages, if not Tongues up and running, like 24/7 and that sounds all sorts of inconvenient compared to, you know, just putting some of that mighty intellect to use and learning a language literally named for how ubiquitous it is.

I'm not complaining or refuting anything here; just pointing out how...well, how weird it is. Especially given that remarkably few Fiends have innate access to any communication magic or, indeed, shapechanging magic. How are they supposed to do the whole "corrupt mortal-kind through manipulation" thing if they have to rely on outside assistance so they don't stand out like...well, like a Glabrezu at the village fair?

[R.Shackleford]

Depends a lot on the campaign, but yeah, as you said, giant would be my first choice. The value of command, aside for targeting a weak save and for allies with strong OA's, derives from denying an enemy his action (basically it's a trade off, you use your action, in the hope that the enemy loses theirs, plus some OA damage from whomever of your allies are close, including you). So it makes sense to target enemies with a strong attack sequence, so yeah, giants qualify for this.

Command will never cause an OA to go off.

First, you can't command a creature to do something directly harmful. A creature won't run off a cliff or cause an OA to happen.

A, B, and C was stolen from the interwebs... But is the best description i've found for this.

A) The target Dashes if they don't believe they'll be exposed to direct harm in doing so, such as opportunity attacks.

B) The target Disengages if they do believe they'll be exposed to opportunity attacks.

C) The target provokes opportunity attacks as usual if they did not choose to Disengage. (Which suggests they were mistaken about who was armed and dangerous.)

"The spell has no effect if the target is undead, if it doesn’t understand your language, or if your command is directly harmful to it." - Command

"The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means."

Thus a fleeing creature would disengage if your ally is ready to smack it.

Dropping prone doesn't directly harm a creature. Sure some attackers have advantage, but they don't get to freely attack them. Some attackers have disadvantage after all.

[Corran]

@R.Shackleford: Eh, I am not sure the provocation of an OA attack could be classified as something directly harmful. I think this clause is there to prevent the silliness (ie commanding someone to commit suicide or die, or jump off a cliff, etc). But yeah, as you said, I dont see any reason against it, if a DM say, made the affected by command enemies to take the disengage action first, it actually seems very reasonable (but to be honest I prefer it being ruled with the OA's triggering; maybe that's why I am thinking that only a very technical reading would classify ''provoking OA's'' as something directly harmful and maybe that's why I am trying perhaps a bit too hard to read into the intent).

Out of curiosity (and I know this wont come up very often in atual play, so I am not trying to make any point with that, I am just curious how you would rule it), how would you rule the following?
I cast command on an enemy to flee. The enemy fails his save, and on their turn they will disengage and flee. After my turn and before that enemy's turn, an ally of mine plays, and hits the enemy that was affected by command with a BB. Would you rule that this negates the command the enemy failed to save against (and which at the time it was issued it was valid), or does he take the damage? (I guess this is more of an issue cause by the timing of the command spell, rather than what you were saying in your post; still, since we are talking about command I thought I would ask).

[sophontteks]

My take..
If you command a target to run and in the process they are hit with OA, the command was indirectly harmful.
If you told them to stab themselves, its directly harmful.

I agree that its there to stop silly shenannagans more then anything.

[Lunali]

That's what weird. Thryxzor the Unspeakable can initiate conversation with anyone he likes and have a conversation, no problem. If Dave the Farmer is trying to get Thryxzors attention, though, there's a conversation barrier. It's particularly strange for Fiends that are playing the infiltration game in (demi) human alternate form (whether through a spell, ability, magical item or plot device). They have to have at least Comprehend Languages, if not Tongues up and running, like 24/7 and that sounds all sorts of inconvenient compared to, you know, just putting some of that mighty intellect to use and learning a language literally named for how ubiquitous it is.

I'm not complaining or refuting anything here; just pointing out how...well, how weird it is. Especially given that remarkably few Fiends have innate access to any communication magic or, indeed, shapechanging magic. How are they supposed to do the whole "corrupt mortal-kind through manipulation" thing if they have to rely on outside assistance so they don't stand out like...well, like a Glabrezu at the village fair?

Or the specific fiends involved in the rare infiltration take the time to learn common while the rest only deal with the sorts of people that summon fiends or visit the hells.

[Corran]

@Merudo: On the lists you made, perhaps it would be good if you took out (or at least if you just highlighted) whetever has legendary resistances (as command would be less useful, if at all, against such enemies). That might help you make up your mind more easily, regarding language selection.

[JellyPooga]

Or the specific fiends involved in the rare infiltration take the time to learn common while the rest only deal with the sorts of people that summon fiends or visit the hells.

I'll point you to the description of the Glabrezu;


A Glabrezu takes great pleasure in destroying mortals through temptation...[snip]...they prefer to tempt victims into ruin, using power or wealth as a lure. Engaging in guile, trickery and evil bargains...

Glabrezu are the literal demonic incarnation of damnation through temptation. High ranked and masters of the "shady deal", yet they can't speak Common and have no magic to disguise themselves as "legitimate businessmen", no magic to fast-talk their way through an unwinnable legal battle or corporate take-over, no charms or enchantments to beguile their victims, no Polymorph, Shapechange or even Disguise Self to look like anything except a 10ft, four-armed, claw-handed goat-dog-lizard...thing. No amount of telepathic pleading is going to make me do anything but run like the (apparently very real) whips of hell are at my heels. Call me crazy, but the stats just don't fit the job description.

[R.Shackleford]

@R.Shackleford: Eh, I am not sure the provocation of an OA attack could be classified as something directly harmful. I think this clause is there to prevent the silliness (ie commanding someone to commit suicide or die, or jump off a cliff, etc). But yeah, as you said, I dont see any reason against it, if a DM say, made the affected by command enemies to take the disengage action first, it actually seems very reasonable (but to be honest I prefer it being ruled with the OA's triggering; maybe that's why I am thinking that only a very technical reading would classify ''provoking OA's'' as something directly harmful and maybe that's why I am trying perhaps a bit too hard to read into the intent).

Out of curiosity (and I know this wont come up very often in atual play, so I am not trying to make any point with that, I am just curious how you would rule it), how would you rule the following?
I cast command on an enemy to flee. The enemy fails his save, and on their turn they will disengage and flee. After my turn and before that enemy's turn, an ally of mine plays, and hits the enemy that was affected by command with a BB. Would you rule that this negates the command the enemy failed to save against (and which at the time it was issued it was valid), or does he take the damage? (I guess this is more of an issue cause by the timing of the command spell, rather than what you were saying in your post; still, since we are talking about command I thought I would ask).

Directly or indirectly, doesn't matter.

They have their turn to flee, disengaging or dashing is part of their turn and will get them further depending on the situation.

If the target sees one or more potential attacks, disengage will get them further away from your character. If no potential attacks are there, dashing will get them further away from you.

The target still gets their turn, dash and disengage is part of that.

[Merudo]

Undercommon, infernal, and primordial.


Why infernal above abyssal?

My list shows more races speak abyssal. Are infernal creatures more prevalent than abyssal ones?

[Merudo]

@Merudo: On the lists you made, perhaps it would be good if you took out (or at least if you just highlighted) whetever has legendary resistances (as command would be less useful, if at all, against such enemies). That might help you make up your mind more easily, regarding language selection.

Thanks for the comment. Few of the creatures listed have legendary resistances, but a lot have magic resistance.

[JellyPooga]

Why infernal above abyssal?

My list shows more races speak abyssal. Are infernal creatures more prevalent than abyssal ones?

It's not necessarily about how many different creatures speak a language, so much as it's how often you're likely to use a language. That's why Goblin would be a good pick in a low-level game, as TeagueTheBean mentioned above. In the case of Infernal vs. Abyssal, there's a slightly higher chance that your encounter with a Lawful Devil is going to be social than your one with your average Chaotic Demon. The chances are not much higher, but it's a consideration worth noting.