Clever uses for Command

[borg286]

I've scoured for clever commands to use with the Command spell

A couple notes about Command, the target doesn't have to hear you for it to be effective, and "immune to charmed" doesn't apply.

Here (https://en.m.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Category:English_intransitive_verb s&from=B) is a list of other intransitive verbs.

In combat commands


Betray/Revolt/Defect/Desert/Coup
Burp/Belch (on a dragon)
Fall/Trip
Flee/Sprint/Dash
Cower
Dismiss/Abort/Cancel/Juggle (lose concentration, spells specify 'Dismiss' as an option)
Undress/Strip (includes dropping weapon, shield, belt w/ component pouch, refrain from running)
Approach
Stop/Drop(See Undress instead)
Grovel
Halt
Blaspheme/Apostatize (on a paladin/cleric)
Tantrum
Charge



Out of combat uses


Commands above
Monologue/Sing
Defecate
Dance/Salsa/Tango/Spin/Frolic/Prance
Confess(bypass zone of truth, DM may confess squat)
Cooperate/Capitulate
Scream
Pardon
Believe
Relent
Cheat
Eat/Drink (after poisoning their food)
Overpay/Undercharge


Are there any that you would add?

[da newt]

This spell has always bugged me logically.

If you can command "grovel" and they go prone why not command "sleep" or "freeze" and do these commands create the unconscious, incapacitated, blinded, paralyzed, or restrained conditions? What if I command someone to "immolate" ?

It's hard to know what this simple 1st lvl spell can and cannot do. As written, there is way too much left up to the DM to SWAG.

[HappyDaze]

It doesn't have to hear you, but it does have to understand what you're saying... weird.

Also, many of those are going to give the DM a chance to be "clever" in how the NPC interprets & responds to the command. Some tables might find that fun, others will not.

For example, a magistrate accuses you of a crime. You give the command of "Pardon" expecting to have the charges dismissed. Instead, the magistrate figures your hearing is poor, so he repeats himself and reads the charges again in a louder voice.

[ProsecutorGodot]

This spell has always bugged me logically.

If you can command "grovel" and they go prone why not command "sleep" or "freeze" and do these commands create the unconscious, incapacitated, blinded, paralyzed, or restrained conditions? What if I command someone to "immolate" ?

It's hard to know what this simple 1st lvl spell can and cannot do. As written, there is way too much left up to the DM to SWAG.

Well first off you can't command them to do anything directly harmful to them, so "immolate" is straight out.

"Sleep" most likely makes them go prone and attempt to go to sleep as they would at the end of the day, "Freeze" would function identically to "Halt" which is a given example in the spells description.

I'm surprised it wasn't mentioned in OP but one of the more popular uses for it is for the caster to carry a sack of many small items, dump them out and command the target to "count" them. It doesn't function very differently than "Grovel" but a lenient DM may rule that a less intelligent creature would also drop their weapons and begin counting the object by hand.

[Segev]

I've scoured for clever commands to use with the Command spell

A couple notes about Command, the target doesn't have to hear you for it to be effective, and "immune to charmed" doesn't apply.

Here (https://en.m.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Category:English_intransitive_verb s&from=B) is a list of other intransitive verbs.

In combat commands


Betray/Revolt/Defect/Desert/Coup
Burp/Belch (on a dragon)
Fall/Trip
Flee/Sprint/Dash
Cower
Dismiss/Abort/Cancel/Juggle (lose concentration, spells specify 'Dismiss' as an option)
Undress/Strip (includes dropping weapon, shield, belt w/ component pouch, refrain from running)
Approach
Stop/Drop(See Undress instead)
Grovel
Halt
Blaspheme/Apostatize (on a paladin/cleric)
Tantrum
Charge



Out of combat uses


Commands above
Monologue/Sing
Defecate
Dance/Salsa/Tango/Spin/Frolic/Prance
Confess(bypass zone of truth, DM may confess squat)
Cooperate/Capitulate
Scream
Pardon
Believe
Relent
Cheat
Eat/Drink (after poisoning their food)
Overpay/Undercharge


Are there any that you would add?
Indulge


This spell has always bugged me logically.

If you can command "grovel" and they go prone why not command "sleep" or "freeze" and do these commands create the unconscious, incapacitated, blinded, paralyzed, or restrained conditions? What if I command someone to "immolate" ?

It's hard to know what this simple 1st lvl spell can and cannot do. As written, there is way too much left up to the DM to SWAG.
The line that seems to be drawn here is one of voluntary action. If you told them to do it without magic, and they were feeling cooperative, COULD they?

Here's an idea for a party game with your friends. I understand Japan has "the King Game" which is...similar, and I think Truth or Dare's dares can be seen the same way. But in this version, you just take turns giving one-word commands to each other. The person you give the command to has to obey or be out of the game. If the group agrees he followed through, he's still in and is the next one to give a command to any one other player. If the group agrees that he didn't follow through, he's out. If the group agrees that he literally couldn't follow through no matter how much good faith effort he gave it, you're out.

Now, if you use that same logic, you can determine what the spell does. "Sleep" doesn't work; very few people can drop into slumber in less than six seconds on command...especially in a combat situation. "Freeze" can make him hold still, but can't really overcome involuntary flinching and the like. "Immolate" probably falls into self-harm, unless context suggests another valid target for the immolation. In which case I suppose they do it if they're able.

Of course, if you do this party game and tell your friends to cause harm to themselves, others, or to property, expect to be kicked out of the game based on bad sportsmanship, if nothing else. :smalltongue:

[Eldariel]

This spell has always bugged me logically.

If you can command "grovel" and they go prone why not command "sleep" or "freeze" and do these commands create the unconscious, incapacitated, blinded, paralyzed, or restrained conditions? What if I command someone to "immolate" ?

It's hard to know what this simple 1st lvl spell can and cannot do. As written, there is way too much left up to the DM to SWAG.

I'm thinking it has to be something the person is capable of doing. You can't just spontaneously fall asleep on the spot unless you're incredibly well-trained with self-suggestion and meditation, so you can't spontaneously fall asleep as the target is simply incapable of completing the command in the span of the spell. Flee, drop an item, grovel, etc. is something the target is perfectly capable of so they'll fulfill the command to the best of their ability. Freeze will probably lead to them being still for their next turn; immolate will probably be an impossible command unless they have something to immolate themselves with and it has the "directly harmful"-clause similar to Suggestion, which is rulespeak for approximately "cannot do damage to oneself nor cause solely and explicitly damaging conditions", so they'd be unable to follow the command anyways. All of this we can deduct from the examples and the wording.

This interpretation feels quite airtight: if you command somebody to, say, orgasm, they will simply be incapable of doing so as it's not something most beings are capable of doing on command (unless of course they happen to be specifically trained to that end). If you command somebody to poison themselves, they won't do so as it's directly harmful. But everything that doesn't damage them nor inflict a damaging effect on themselves (so they can take tactically and positionally unwise decisions such as proning themselves, dropping their weapons, turning their backs on their opponents, etc. but anything where the effect itself causes harm or is caused by harm is out of the picture).

[Nifft]

Are there any that you would add?

Autodefenestrate.

Explain.

Repent.

[borg286]

I've tried to keep to the "no self harm" and "can the creature choose to do it". Orgasm and defenestrate shouldn't work.

Regarding count, it is left to the DM to chose the implied direct object. They don't have to count the things you want. They could be really good at counting, how would you know. In combat occupying yourself counting is less effective than Strip.

I like having more verbs for fleeing, dropping everything and dropping concentration. D&D is a game of narration, and the rule of cool looses effectiveness when you reuse the same trick. Do you have variations of these commands?

[borg286]

Autodefenestrate.

Explain.

Repent.

Autodefenstrate is self harm. Defenestrate would work, but leaves the direct object ambiguous.

Explain seems like you could just ask the person and the DM would explain anyways. How do you see this helping?

Repent seems ambiguous. A worshiper of Vecna repenting might redouble their efforts to adhere to Vecna's teachings. Repent is only one directional to us because our society is replete with monotheistic religions and repenting drives actions towards the Good God. In D&D pantheons and a verisimilitude of alignments makes "Repentance" only imply greater devotion.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Regarding count, it is left to the DM to chose the implied direct object. They don't have to count the things you want. They could be really good at counting, how would you know. In combat occupying yourself counting is less effective than Strip.

If your DM is actively trying to sabotage your command, Strip is arguably less effective than Count. Strip could occupy many interpretations, they could strip one object off only using their object interaction for the turn, strip you of your belongings, strip you of your life.

A reasonable DM probably isn't looking actively for loopholes like this, and if you spend the same fraction of time presenting a creature with many objects and magically compelling them to count them, It's a pretty reasonable assumption to say that they will count the objects you've present them with.

No one word is better than another if you're already assuming the DM isn't going to play fair, so assume that the DM is going to be ruling in good faith.

[Boci]

Interesting (to me) note: in hungarian Command is stronger, since the language structure allows more to be communicated in a single word. "To set free" for example is one word, "Kiengedni".

[Yora]

A cool think about command is that it has only a verbal component. So you can cast it while being tied up.

Since of course nobody in my fantasy world speaks English so I am not going to be pedantic about "one word", and I ruled that "release me" worked as a command. All the PCs failed their saves and so one of them untied him while the others looked on. Unfortunately for the evil priest, he was still in very bad shape and only made it to the door before the one round duration ended and one of the players killed him with a thrown dagger.

[Eldariel]

Interesting (to me) note: in hungarian Command is stronger, since the language structure allows more to be communicated in a single word. "To set free" for example is one word, "Kiengedni".

Though I'd argue "release" could accomplish much the same in English. But yes, there are certainly cases where agglutinative languages such as Hungarian, Finnish, Turkish, or company could accomplish more. Which is sorta cool.

[Tanarii]

Since of course nobody in my fantasy world speaks English so I am not going to be pedantic about "one word", and I ruled that "release me" worked as a command.Good point. I'm not bilingual, but are there languages where the target of the verb doesn't require additional word and instead just modifies the verb instead?

[Damon_Tor]

Many spells have one-word names, so this is a great way to get enemy spellcasters to blow their spell slots: use the command "Fireball" in a situation where there's a no good way to safely launch a fireball except at the open sky to pretty reliably waste a 3rd level slot. Of course the spell name can't otherwise be a viable command: telling him "Jump" probably won't get him to waste a first level slot on the spell jump, but rather to jump up into the air.

Like in the surprisingly watchable "I, Robot" film with Will Smith: "Respond" after a question is asked. Use in conjunction with a Zone of Truth for best results.

In theory you can use it to force obedience to a longer command by using the word "Comply". IE: "Deactivate your spell and lie face down on the ground. Comply." This is pretty clearly in violation of the intent of the spell, however, so your DM is likely to disallow it.

In a low-magic setting where the legal system isn't set up to accommodate magic and/or people don't really understand that it exists, this would be a powerful tool for a salesman. You slide the contract and a pen towards them: "Sign". I've been in sales, and people have actually accused me of using hypnosis to close a sale in real life, and judges hear nonsense like this all the time: the fact you are actually using sorcery to increase your closing rate wouldn't actually change much compared to "hard" sales tactics where you emotionally manipulate the buyer.
NOTE: I left that profession. I'd appreciate not being called scum for doing that IRL: I know it was wrong and I don't do that anymore.

[HappyDaze]

If your DM is actively trying to sabotage your command, Strip is arguably less effective than Count. Strip could occupy many interpretations, they could strip one object off only using their object interaction for the turn, strip you of your belongings, strip you of your life.

A reasonable DM probably isn't looking actively for loopholes like this, and if you spend the same fraction of time presenting a creature with many objects and magically compelling them to count them, It's a pretty reasonable assumption to say that they will count the objects you've present them with.

No one word is better than another if you're already assuming the DM isn't going to play fair, so assume that the DM is going to be ruling in good faith.

Any command that requires an object is ambiguous. Count doesn't have a defined object. You tell a guy to count, and he might just say "one" as he counts off and expects the next guy to say "two." He is under no obligation to count grains of sand or anything else.

[Yora]

It always requires context. Otherwise a single word makes no sense.

[Segev]

If they don't have to hear you, then you could use this for cheating in competitions.

As an example, in a political debate between two candidates for, say, Mayor of a town, you could, from the crowd, cast command: "Lose." In this context, he's only got two primary candidates for the direct object: "the debate" or "the election." At most "literal genie" interpretation, maybe "lose his place." The last one is still bad: for about six seconds, he suddenly stumbles over his words and seems flustered by his opponent's point. The other two would cause him to take the most immediate action he could to lose the debate or the election. Formally announcing his withdrawal MIGHT do it, but he would know if that was insufficient and thus would be compelled to perform some act of self-sabotage.

In a more contrived scenario, you could use this on a competitor in a race; he'd do whatever he had to to give his opponent an advantage. Whether this would mean actively turning and running the other way, or just slowing down or tripping or what-have-you, would of course be up to the player of the target. (Though "trip" would work, here, too, for any seriously competitive foot-race.)

Or in a game of chess, "lose" might make a player take the worst possible move he sees on the board. Maybe even just knocking over his king to forfeit.

[Mr Adventurer]

It always requires context. Otherwise a single word makes no sense.

I think this is right and really makes most of the suggestions in this thread pointless. You can't just come up with words nobody has thought of (in my opinion, the list now in the OP is baffling and most would give no result), if you want a clever use of Command you have to describe the scenario as well as how you'd use the spell.

An apocryphal story I remember from the internet years ago: the party were in a high-stakes poker game. The Command used, at the critical moment in the card game? Fold.

[da newt]

Good responses all around.

If you command someone to grovel - "on it's next turn it must fall prone then end it's turn" - what happened to it's ability to take an action, a movement and a possible bonus action? Can the person/creature under the effect of the spell use it's action to drop prone, and then it's movement to stand (1/2 movement) and then move? If the creature/person is flying, does it drop prone and land dart taking damage (in conflict w/ RAI "Halt" which specifies it just hovers)?

This spell exemplifies all that I love about D&D (few constraints, opportunities to be clever and inventive) and all that I hate about it (WTF are the rules, can the DM just decide to do whatever they want ignoring RAW and making their own judgements on the fly even if it totally contradicts previous rulings) ...

If you tell a creature to "grovel" so it goes prone, it is now vulnerable to all melee attacks w/ ADV - is this not "directly harmful" to the creature and therefore not allowed? Does the spell force the target to burn it's action, or it's reaction, or it's movement, or it's bonus action, or some of these but not others ...

As written the creature/person affected doesn't react when the spell is cast, but does on it's next turn. When does the spell's duration end if the spell duration is "1 round" - does that 'round' start at the caster's turn, or the target's turn?

I think it could be an extremely powerful first level spell - if upon a failed save the target cannot do anything but fall prone on their turn, but it's so poorly written that RAW I have no idea what the outcome will be and every DM will interpret it differently.

[Mr Adventurer]

Good responses all around.

If you command someone to grovel - "on it's next turn it must fall prone then end it's turn" - what happened to it's ability to take an action, a movement and a possible bonus action? Can the person/creature under the effect of the spell use it's action to drop prone, and then it's movement to stand (1/2 movement) and then move?

No, on its turn it has to drop prone, then end it's turn. ?


If the creature/person is flying, does it drop prone and land dart taking damage (in conflict w/ RAI "Halt" which specifies it just hovers)?

No, that would be directly harmful.


If you tell a creature to "grovel" so it goes prone, it is now vulnerable to all melee attacks w/ ADV - is this not "directly harmful" to the creature and therefore not allowed?

No, that would be indirect harm if the creature were to subsequently take attacks.


Does the spell force the target to burn it's action, or it's reaction, or it's movement, or it's bonus action, or some of these but not others ...

This might be a gap in the rules, though as you've already pointed out Grovel at least does close that gap.


As written the creature/person affected doesn't react when the spell is cast, but does on it's next turn. When does the spell's duration end if the spell duration is "1 round" - does that 'round' start at the caster's turn, or the target's turn?

I'm not sure if this is a general rule but other examples of 1 round duration are sometimes "until the start of your (the caster's) next turn)". Many of the examples given specify that the creature takes an appropriate action and then ends it's turn. This seems like a pretty clear indication of intent to me.


I think it could be an extremely powerful first level spell - if upon a failed save the target cannot do anything but fall prone on their turn, but it's so poorly written that RAW I have no idea what the outcome will be and every DM will interpret it differently.
Yes, it's a good spell.

If you have no idea how the spell works, maybe read it a little more closely and think about it in the round, then discuss it with your DM.

[Tanarii]

I think it could be an extremely powerful first level spell - if upon a failed save the target cannot do anything but fall prone on their turn, but it's so poorly written that RAW I have no idea what the outcome will be and every DM will interpret it differently.
Right. I've seen people suggest that the spell eats up all of the actions and the target can do nothing except the given action. Despite only one command saying that (Halt). All the others leave the target free to use actions as normal, albeit often before taking whatever action is specified.

[borg286]

Regarding needing context and that a list like this is useless w/o context, I feel that it helps to expand on the existing list of actions in the spell. I mostly just want to get some extra benefits like opportunity attack, dropping concentration, extracting 1 for out of a group, attack his allies. Some of these are covered, some not. Having a clever word helps smooth it over with the DM.
Out of combat is purely contextual, but having a good base to get you thinking outside the spell text box helps.

[Damon_Tor]

Right. I've seen people suggest that the spell eats up all of the actions and the target can do nothing except the given action. Despite only one command saying that (Halt). All the others leave the target free to use actions as normal, albeit often before taking whatever action is specified.

For "Flee" the spell says the creature "spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means". The word "spends" implies the whole of something is exhausted, ie "He spends three dollars on coffee every day." And "By the fastest available means" would usually include using his action to dash, and if he's capable of doing so a bonus action to dash again.

[MrStabby]

In addition to the ones mentioned:

So crawl has worked well for me - prone and triggering an attack of opportunity and takining half movement to stand again.

Submit/surrender can be good on a leader to get their troops to stand down, even if only for a round.

One DM allowed context, so I could throw something (as an object interaction) and instruct "fetch" - when they are next to you and you have spirit guardians up this gets painful.

Release, donate, open, disclose...

[Yora]

Really not clever, but funny. When I had a hostile priest planning to use command on his next turn, the fighter in the group stopped his attack to demand the priest stop fighting and get to the ground.

Command: "No U!"

[Chronos]

"Crawl" doesn't specify where to crawl to, so they could just drop prone and spend all of their move on crawling around inside your fighter's threatened area, and thus not provoke any opportunity attacks.

[MrStabby]

"Crawl" doesn't specify where to crawl to, so they could just drop prone and spend all of their move on crawling around inside your fighter's threatened area, and thus not provoke any opportunity attacks.

They could do, but then they are making the decison to turn - without intruction. I would have no problems with the DM picking a random direction to crawl in, and sometimes that not working out - but tracing a circular path or similar would seem to be oddly specific for a person who can't really control what they are doing.

There is nothing in the word "approach" to say it has to be in a straight line, but the spell interprets that as the result.

Neither does "flee" specify that it is in a straight line, but the spell says it is.

I would argue that "crawl" should be the same - move, but unless something else specifies it, do so in a straight line.



On the other hand "approach" doesnt describe that it is by the fastest possible means like flee does, potentially allowing some movement then as long as they are not within 5ft they still get to make an attack or whatever, so there is precident for inconsistent interpretations of just what is entailed in the single word outputs... so I guess you wouldn't be absolutely wrong to interpret this differently in the case of "crawl" anymore than you would have been to guess that "approach" lets you attack on that turn.

[Segev]

...a use with Twin Spell, on two people who're fighting like an old married couple. "Kiss already!" (The 'already' isn't part of the command, but I figure you can add words afterwards if they're not expected to influence the nature of the command.)

[JNAProductions]

They could do, but then they are making the decison to turn - without intruction. I would have no problems with the DM picking a random direction to crawl in, and sometimes that not working out - but tracing a circular path or similar would seem to be oddly specific for a person who can't really control what they are doing.

There is nothing in the word "approach" to say it has to be in a straight line, but the spell interprets that as the result.

Neither does "flee" specify that it is in a straight line, but the spell says it is.

I would argue that "crawl" should be the same - move, but unless something else specifies it, do so in a straight line.

On the other hand "approach" doesnt describe that it is by the fastest possible means like flee does, potentially allowing some movement then as long as they are not within 5ft they still get to make an attack or whatever, so there is precident for inconsistent interpretations of just what is entailed in the single word outputs... so I guess you wouldn't be absolutely wrong to interpret this differently in the case of "crawl" anymore than you would have been to guess that "approach" lets you attack on that turn.

Flee means they have to go AWAY from you-and the fastest way is (generally) a straight line.

Crawl does not prescribe a line of movement-the enemy has to follow the order, but they're doing that if they crawl in a circle.

That's not the DM being a jerk, that's the enemy being smart.

[Throne12]

Here's a question what if a divine sorcerer cast command with Extension on it making it longer then a min and they command a elf to sleep. Does the elf lay down and go to sleep or not because elfs cant be magical put to sleep. But it not the magic putting them to sleep they are doing it then selfs. So how to yall Interpreted it.

[JNAProductions]

Here's a question what if a divine sorcerer cast command with Extension on it making it longer then a min and they command a elf to sleep. Does the elf lay down and go to sleep or not because elfs cant be magical put to sleep. But it not the magic putting them to sleep they are doing it then selfs. So how to yall Interpreted it.

Extend doubles the duration, right?

I would rule the elf tries their darnedest to fall asleep within those 12 seconds, but fails, because most HUMANS couldn't fall asleep in 12 seconds on demand, and we have practice! An elf who is used to trancing would not be able to accomplish that.

[JackPhoenix]

Here's a question what if a divine sorcerer cast command with Extension on it making it longer then a min and they command a elf to sleep. Does the elf lay down and go to sleep or not because elfs cant be magical put to sleep. But it not the magic putting them to sleep they are doing it then selfs. So how to yall Interpreted it.

"When you cast a spell that has a duration of 1 minute or longer, you can spend 1 sorcery point to double its duration, to a maximum duration of 24 hours."

You can't use Extended metamagic with Command.

[MadBear]

My favorite to this day was a really simple command: Forget.

Another player was up to shenanigans when they got caught by the guard. I immediately asked the DM if I could cast the spell immediately following him discovering our rogue. He assumed combat was going to ensue and had us roll initiative. The guard failed his save, and I used the word forget to cause him to forget what he had seen over the last 6 seconds.

It was niche, but it was absolutely a blast to see work.

[JackPhoenix]

My favorite to this day was a really simple command: Forget.

Another player was up to shenanigans when they got caught by the guard. I immediately asked the DM if I could cast the spell immediately following him discovering our rogue. He assumed combat was going to ensue and had us roll initiative. The guard failed his save, and I used the word forget to cause him to forget what he had seen over the last 6 seconds.

It was niche, but it was absolutely a blast to see work.

FOR the next 6 seconds. Humans aren't able to erase their own memory on a whim without sufficient time and generous amount of intoxicating substances. Command doesn't allow you to do physically impossible things.