Command(Flee) + Conjure Animals, pure theory or OP?

[borg286]

Cleric 1/Druid 5 lets you Conjure Animals and nearly double the DPR through "Command"ing foes to flee and thus provoke opportunity attacks. Most 1/4 CR animals a DM can pick only have a single attack, so an OA would double the DPR.
CR 1/4 animals do on average 9.5 damage on a hit and have on average +4.5 to hit. Thus vs. a 10 AC and 8 animals attack up to 2 targets they should total 60 DPR. And vs. an 18 AC 36 DPR.

If you have a 60% chance of landing Command that is an extra 60% DPR, or 94 DPR. This seems to blow everything out of the water at this level. It tapers off when you get higher levels as it becomes infeasable to get 16x CR 1/4 creatures positioned well. Thus you end up opting for tougher animals.

My question is if this proposed tactic is pipe dreams or feasible? Would you need to switch to a stronger conjure spell when facing damage reduction vs. non-magical?

Would you opt for Life cleric for good berries spamming or for arcana cleric for booming Blade, warcaster and shillelagh so you can join in on the fun? For the latter would you go for star druid so you can guarantee concentration checks, or for shepherd so you can deal with non-magic resistance?

I was considering Kobold for the grovel granting advantage on all those attacks. The idea of a wise kobold is also quite funny.

[ftafp]

eh, it's a standard tactic, but it's more a matter of pre-tashas summon spells being really poorly designed than a good combo. conjure animals in particular can either destroy game balance or be completely worthless depending entirely on DM fiat, not to mention its potential to grind combat to a halt by giving a player 9 turns a round

[Frogreaver]

Cleric 1/Druid 5 lets you Conjure Animals and nearly double the DPR through "Command"ing foes to flee and thus provoke opportunity attacks. Most 1/4 CR animals a DM can pick only have a single attack, so an OA would double the DPR.
CR 1/4 animals do on average 9.5 damage on a hit and have on average +4.5 to hit. Thus vs. a 10 AC and 8 animals attack up to 2 targets they should total 60 DPR. And vs. an 18 AC 36 DPR.

If you have a 60% chance of landing Command that is an extra 60% DPR, or 94 DPR. This seems to blow everything out of the water at this level. It tapers off when you get higher levels as it becomes infeasable to get 16x CR 1/4 creatures positioned well. Thus you end up opting for tougher animals.

My question is if this proposed tactic is pipe dreams or feasible? Would you need to switch to a stronger conjure spell when facing damage reduction vs. non-magical?

Would you opt for Life cleric for good berries spamming or for arcana cleric for booming Blade, warcaster and shillelagh so you can join in on the fun? For the latter would you go for star druid so you can guarantee concentration checks, or for shepherd so you can deal with non-magic resistance?

I was considering Kobold for the grovel granting advantage on all those attacks. The idea of a wise kobold is also quite funny.

Love the concept. Alternatively one could do a Lore Bard and Pick up conjure animals and use dissonant whispers. This would actually be easier to use than command as sharing a language isn't required.

*I think your DPR calc is off. The Animals should only be getting 35-40ish DPR (assuming 60% chance to hit for rough back of napkin math). The additional 60% would be about +21-24 DPR which is fantastic DPR for a 1st level slot.

[Unoriginal]

Cleric 1/Druid 5 lets you Conjure Animals and nearly double the DPR through "Command"ing foes to flee and thus provoke opportunity attacks.

What makes you expect the foes won't use the Disengage action to flee without provoking opportunity attacks?

[Frogreaver]

What makes you expect the foes won't use the Disengage action to flee without provoking opportunity attacks?

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

If the creature has it's action then Dashing would be the fastest available means?

[Aett_Thorn]

"Flee: The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means."
If the creature has it's action then Dashing would be the fastest available means?

This is how I would rule it as a DM, too. Unless there's no place for the creature to flee to that is more than it's base move speed, it would take the Dash action and try to get as far away as possible. If the enemy creature is only 10' from the back wall and there's nowhere else for it to go? Sure, Disengage and move the 10'. But for many cases, it would at least try to take the Dash action if it could first.

[Frogreaver]

This is how I would rule it as a DM, too. Unless there's no place for the creature to flee to that is more than it's base move speed, it would take the Dash action and try to get as far away as possible. If the enemy creature is only 10' from the back wall and there's nowhere else for it to go? Sure, Disengage and move the 10'. But for many cases, it would at least try to take the Dash action if it could first.

I suppose that depends on if one interprets flee as not allowing intermediate movement to be closer as long as the final result is further. If so then there's almost always the direction the PC's came from even if that means running through them initially.

[borg286]

Love the concept. Alternatively one could do a Lore Bard and Pick up conjure animals and use dissonant whispers. This would actually be easier to use than command as sharing a language isn't required.

*I think your DPR calc is off. The Animals should only be getting 35-40ish DPR (assuming 60% chance to hit for rough back of napkin math). The additional 60% would be about +21-24 DPR which is fantastic DPR for a 1st level slot.
Chance to hit = 1-(AC - To Hit - 1)/20
Average to hit is +4.5

They have a 78% chance to hit an AC of 10 and a 38% chance to hit an AC of 18.
8 creatures doing 9.5 damage on a hit is 76 damage on a hit.
76*.78=59 DPR
76*.38=28 DPR

60% chance to land command(either 1 for for 1st level spell, or upcast so animals each get another attack) means, on average, 60% will flee and provoke another attack. Thus multiply DPR by 1.6
94 DPR vs AC 10 foes
45 DPR vs AC 18 foes

It gets even better when we add in Booming Blade with a shillelagh wisdom-based quarterstaff. But that requires a feat and implies we are in melee, which is a lot to ask of a concentrating druid.

A frontline fighter only has 1 opportunity attack and only takes up so much of the front line. Conjure Animals lets you literally have a front line.

The only weaknesses I can see are (1) that an AOE crushes your minions, (2) resistance to bludgeoning/piercing/slashing non-magical attacks, and (3) if you end up getting small animals facing a large/huge creature. They technically can just walk right over anyone 2 size categories smaller than they are. Velociraptors are tiny, but thankfully deadly. Their pact tactics would allow them to be a real threat even at tier 2.

[Frogreaver]

Chance to hit = 1-(AC - To Hit - 1)/20
Average to hit is +4.5

Average(a1x1+a2x2) does not equal Average(a1+a2) * Average(x1+x2)

That is it's not actually correct to take the chance to hit and Damage independently and the compute a DPR value from that. However, it's probably not significantly off, but potentially enough to swing your calculations by (gut feeling) 20%.


They have a 78% chance to hit an AC of 10 and a 38% chance to hit an AC of 18.
8 creatures doing 9.5 damage on a hit is 76 damage on a hit.
76*.78=59 DPR
76*.38=28 DPR

Beasts gain Damage from a variety of sources.

Multi Attacks
Charge Affects
Save DC for additional Damage after the hit


This means your damage from provoking an OA will be much lower than the on turn damage as the higher damage beasts typically feature one of those effects.

Also, I believe thorough analysis will show an average beast does less than 9.5 Damage.


60% chance to land command(either 1 for for 1st level spell, or upcast so animals each get another attack) means, on average, 60% will flee and provoke another attack. Thus multiply DPR by 1.6
94 DPR vs AC 10 foes
45 DPR vs AC 18 foes

The DPR multiplier will probably be much lower when everything is accounted for like 20-30%

I think that 20% would be in the realm of a magic missile spells damage. 30% would be a bit better than magic missile but not enough to go for the dip for that sole reason.

Combo looks more promising for a Lore Bard IMO.

[Unoriginal]

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

If the creature has it's action then Dashing would be the fastest available means?

Risking death isn't the fastest available mean, IMO.

[Frogreaver]

Risking death isn't the fastest available mean, IMO.

Doesn't make sense to me. What does risking death have to do with "fastest"?

[Unoriginal]

Doesn't make sense to me. What does risking death have to do with "fastest"?

Can't get away from danger the fastest if you're dead. A creature under your Command (Flee) spell isn't going to throw themselves into lava just because it's the most direct road away from you.

[borg286]

Average(a1x1+a2x2) does not equal Average(a1+a2) * Average(x1+x2)

That is it's not actually correct to take the chance to hit and Damage independently and the compute a DPR value from that. However, it's probably not significantly off, but potentially enough to swing your calculations by (gut feeling) 20%.



Beasts gain Damage from a variety of sources.

Multi Attacks
Charge Affects
Save DC for additional Damage after the hit


This means your damage from provoking an OA will be much lower than the on turn damage as the higher damage beasts typically feature one of those effects.

Also, I believe thorough analysis will show an average beast does less than 9.5 Damage.



The DPR multiplier will probably be much lower when everything is accounted for like 20-30%

I think that 20% would be in the realm of a magic missile spells damage. 30% would be a bit better than magic missile but not enough to go for the dip for that sole reason.

Combo looks more promising for a Lore Bard IMO.
You're right, in that I failed to account for my source sheet including charge damage.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CZPoOWBCOVQUbbjI1b6bJH_ijmMiRALotLzBeYK894U/edit?usp=drivesdk

I'll have to find another source that doesn't aggregate the extra damage.

Regarding the DPR calculation, I see what you're saying. I've created an average creature that may bias the calculated DPR compared to the individual DPR calculations of each beast. I should average the individual DPRs instead.

[whateew]

Can't get away from danger the fastest if you're dead. A creature under your Command (Flee) spell isn't going to throw themselves into lava just because it's the most direct road away from you.

The command spell is relatively unclear IMO - it says "obviously dangerous," but commanding someone to fall prone in front of a gang of fighters is obviously dangerous - so is the "approach" command, which could also trigger AoO. I reckon the intention is to force creatures to dash (hence "fastest possible means"), not disengage. Regardless however, the suggestion from Frogreaver

Love the concept. Alternatively one could do a Lore Bard and Pick up conjure animals and use dissonant whispers. This would actually be easier to use than command as sharing a language isn't required.

I think is the best option, and it solves all these issues. On a successful save, you still deal damage. The only issue is that command upcasts to multiple creatures, which could be useful, but a bard has access to that too.

This would make for a very fun combination with the wolf totem barbarian, as a poster somewhere else recently suggested. Like this, you get double the attacks from advantage.

While it might be hard to make so many opportunity attacks (you need to be in reach with all those animals!) a bunch of snakes, with their fantastic range, would be very able to do so. I think this is a fantastic combo OP, and sounds very fun. It would even work with the new Tasha's summon spells, although less impressive. However, I believe some have useful rider effects - the summon undead's fear chance comes to mind.

Hell, a group with a bunch of summoned poisonous snakes AND a putrid undead sounds unbearable, it would be very easy to paralyse enemies.

[Frogreaver]

Can't get away from danger the fastest if you're dead. A creature under your Command (Flee) spell isn't going to throw themselves into lava just because it's the most direct road away from you.

Sure. The difference being Lava is guaranteed death. OA's aren't.

[Unoriginal]

Sure. The difference being Lava is guaranteed death. OA's aren't.

So you rule that Command Flee will force enemies to run into easily preventable potential death as long as it's not guaranteed?

[RogueJK]

Alternatively one could do a Lore Bard and Pick up conjure animals and use dissonant whispers.

Or a character with access to Conjure Animals on their spell list could take the Fey Touched feat to also learn Dissonant Whispers.

Dissonant Whispers not only solves the "Enemy might use Disengage" conundrum, but would also stack some additional damage on. And it would still at least do a little damage, even if the enemy makes its save, unlike the all-or-nothing Command. It's strictly better than Command in this specific strategy, unless you're trying to upcast Command to affect multiple enemies.

[Frogreaver]

You're right, in that I failed to account for my source sheet including charge damage.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CZPoOWBCOVQUbbjI1b6bJH_ijmMiRALotLzBeYK894U/edit?usp=drivesdk

Yea. I think that sheet is some amazing work but I wish it was a bit more detailed on #attacks, highest damage attack, special effects, etc.


Regarding the for calculation, I see what you're saying. I've created an average creature that may bias the calculated DPR compared to the individual DPR calculations of each beast. I should average the individual DPRs instead.

No problem. If your numbers weren't much higher than I expected I probably wouldn't have noticed either.


Or a character with access to Conjure Animals on their spell list could take the Fey Touched feat to also learn Dissonant Whispers.

Thanks! I was wondering if there was a way to obtain that spell with many of the newer options. I'm not quite as well versed on the newest material.


So you rule that Command Flee will force enemies to run into easily preventable potential death as long as it's not guaranteed?

I would say there is a fine line. If it's an environmental hazard that is likely but not certain to kill them then no.

That said dissonant whispers bypasses this whole issue and is actually the better spell for this combo so maybe we should argue about command in a different thread?

[stoutstien]

Because command is a common spell I use for NPCs I allow each table to vote on the exact ruling governing the impact of the flee command. Most tables have agreed that as long as dodge or disengage were options the target would use normally it's fair to assume they can also use them under the command spell

[RogueJK]

Dipping a level of Bard or Great Old One Warlock on your Druid is another option for acquiring Dissonant Whispers, if you don't want to spend a feat on Fey Touched. (You'd have to dip a level in Cleric anyway to get Command.)

[Frogreaver]

Because command is a common spe u use for NPCs I allow each table to vote on the exact ruling governing the impact of the flee command. Most tables have agreed that as long as dodge or disengage were options the target would use normally it's fair to assume they can also use them under the command spell

Just curious, by that logic, why couldn't the commanded creature attack before fleeing?

[stoutstien]

Just curious, by that logic, why couldn't the commanded creature attack before fleeing?
They can and then they will proc AOOs unless they have secondary ways to prevent them. Command is about limiting action options not complete denial though halt comes close.
Not like command is in danger of becoming a weak spell option seeing how it's verbal only with no concentration and it upcasts very well.

[Unoriginal]

Just curious, by that logic, why couldn't the commanded creature attack before fleeing?

Because attacking isn't fleeing. Disengage is literally a "get away from enemy" action.

Although if you cast Command (Flee) on an enemy who cannot flee from you unless they attack one of you teammates, then they would naturally have to attack.

[whateew]

They can and then they will proc AOOs unless they have secondary ways to prevent them. Command is about limiting action options not complete denial though halt comes close.
Not like command is in danger of becoming a weak spell option seeing how it's verbal only with no concentration and it upcasts very well.

I completely disagree. Drop and Grovel both specift "do X, and then end your turn." It is very much action denial in these cases."

[JonBeowulf]

I'm coming in late, but needed to point out the DPR calculations are off...


PHB 191:
... you can move through a hostile creature's space only if the creature is at least two sizes larger or smaller than you.

So an enemy surrounded by 8 conjured animals can only flee if there's a difference of at least 2 size categories with at least one of the conjured animals. So assuming a medium-sized enemy, a tiny creature isn't going to do anything significant with its OA and you're not going to be conjuring huge creatures.

[whateew]

I'm coming in late, but needed to point out the DPR calculations are off...



So an enemy surrounded by 8 conjured animals can only flee if there's a difference of at least 2 size categories with at least one of the conjured animals. So assuming a medium-sized enemy, a tiny creature isn't going to do anything significant with its OA and you're not going to be conjuring huge creatures.

There is a glut of good summons with reach though - giant poisonous snake comes to mind.

[stoutstien]

I completely disagree. Drop and Grovel both specift "do X, and then end your turn." It is very much action denial in these cases."

Item interactions get funky with drop and grovel. They have to complete the command if they fail the save but nothing says that is all they can do only what must be done. Can a creature under command:drop speak or give orders? Most would say yes because it's not directly interfering with the command and the item interaction that comes as part of a turn isn't much different. so the target would drop whatever they do have in their hand but nothing actually prevents them from drawing another weapon out at the same time.

On a similar vein with the flee conversation with using teleportation. It's fair game as long as it follows the parameters of the command.

Like I said, I leave it up to a table vote. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Once players realize getting nailed with command works both ways they tend to like the more liberal interpretation because it promotes split second decision making like a barbarian smashing a alchemist fire on their head to maintain rage when they blow a command:grovel or the ranger pulling out a dagger so they still have access to the DD feat.

[borg286]

I'm coming in late, but needed to point out the DPR calculations are off...



So an enemy surrounded by 8 conjured animals can only flee if there's a difference of at least 2 size categories with at least one of the conjured animals. So assuming a medium-sized enemy, a tiny creature isn't going to do anything significant with its OA and you're not going to be conjuring huge creatures.

This is a double edged sword. Velociraptors against an ogre means you have more surface area to engage the ogre, but also means the ogre can simply walk over them to attack you. Tiny creatures can share the same square.
If the DM opts for small animals then you will likely need to split them up to engage 2 targets. Thus I favor Command's ability to upcast to 2 targets. This makes your strategy adapt to more setups.

Conjure Animals can also be upcast giving you bigger and tougher creatures. This is probably best done if you can get 8x CR 1/2 creatures.

[Frogreaver]

I believe command is a spell more about intent than RAW as there are loopholes that can be accomplished on almost every spell out command in the spell.

Approach. The target moves toward you by the shortest and most direct route, ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet of you.
RAW Loopholes - Target can move 5 feet and then attack with a ranged attack. The turn only ends if it moves within 5 feet of you.
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to approach you till it's either unable to move closer or till it's within 5 feet of you.

Drop. The target drops whatever it is holding and then ends its turn.
RAW Loopholes - Target can stow the item, then the target has nothing to drop which ends the spell due to not being able to fulfill the action. Then the creature can use their action to do something else.
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to only drop the item and end their turn.

Grovel - The target falls prone and then ends its turn.
RAW Loopholes - Target can use it's action before falling prone and ending it's turn
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to immediately fall prone and end it's turn.

Halt - The target doesn’t move and takes no actions.
RAW Loopholes - Target can use a bonus action if available
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to do nothing on their turn.

Flee - The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means.
RAW Loopholes - Target can attack before or after moving away
RAI - Intent is less clear here but judging by the other commands RAI that all intend for the creature to lose it's turn then the RAI is that moving away by the fastest available means would require the dash action.

[stoutstien]

I believe command is a spell more about intent than RAW as there are loopholes that can be accomplished on almost every spell out command in the spell.

Approach. The target moves toward you by the shortest and most direct route, ending its turn if it moves within 5 feet of you.
RAW Loopholes - Target can move 5 feet and then attack with a ranged attack. The turn only ends if it moves within 5 feet of you.
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to approach you till it's either unable to move closer or till it's within 5 feet of you.

Drop. The target drops whatever it is holding and then ends its turn.
RAW Loopholes - Target can stow the item, then the target has nothing to drop which ends the spell due to not being able to fulfill the action. Then the creature can use their action to do something else.
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to only drop the item and end their turn.

Grovel - The target falls prone and then ends its turn.
RAW Loopholes - Target can use it's action before falling prone and ending it's turn
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to immediately fall prone and end it's turn.

Halt - The target doesn’t move and takes no actions.
RAW Loopholes - Target can use a bonus action if available
RAI - Obviously intent is for the target to do nothing on their turn.

Flee - The target spends its turn moving away from you by the fastest available means.
RAW Loopholes - Target can attack before or after moving away
RAI - Intent is less clear here but judging by the other commands RAI that all intend for the creature to lose it's turn then the RAI is that moving away by the fastest available means would require the dash action.

Bout right though bonus actions are still categorized as a type of action so any command that prevents actions prevents normal actions, bonus actions, and the rare in turn reactions.

It's one of the many reasons I dislike spell casting in 5e. On one hand people want them to be limited to what the say exactly to prevent spells from overwhelming the looser framework of the game but on the other hand need to constantly check RaW for equally abusive interpretations. 5e just doesn't mesh with the explicitly that spells run off of.

[borg286]

Average(a1x1+a2x2) does not equal Average(a1+a2) * Average(x1+x2)

That is it's not actually correct to take the chance to hit and Damage independently and the compute a DPR value from that. However, it's probably not significantly off, but potentially enough to swing your calculations by (gut feeling) 20%.



Beasts gain Damage from a variety of sources.

Multi Attacks
Charge Affects
Save DC for additional Damage after the hit


This means your damage from provoking an OA will be much lower than the on turn damage as the higher damage beasts typically feature one of those effects.

Also, I believe thorough analysis will show an average beast does less than 9.5 Damage.



The DPR multiplier will probably be much lower when everything is accounted for like 20-30%

I think that 20% would be in the realm of a magic missile spells damage. 30% would be a bit better than magic missile but not enough to go for the dip for that sole reason.

Combo looks more promising for a Lore Bard IMO.

I enriched the table with a new column of the average damage on a successful opportunity attack
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CZPoOWBCOVQUbbjI1b6bJH_ijmMiRALotLzBeYK894U/edit#gid=0

I then calculated per-creature DPRs vs AC 10, 14, and 18. Thus the average DPR of a CR 1/4 creature is 5.6 DPR vs AC 10. 4.2 DPR vs AC 14 and 2.8 DPR vs AC 18.
Multiplying these by 8 gives us
45 total DPR vs AC 10
33 total DPR vs AC 14
22 total DPR vs AC 18

Thus your gut was quite right. Thank you for your deep analysis.

At CR 1/4 only 2 creatures get pact tactics, none get multi-attacks, and the charge effects can't be relied on as they require wide open spaces and likely only a few will be able to do it given that charge is almost entirely on large creatures that take up lots of surface area.

Still this DPR is round after round. Compared to fireballing we've got quite a potent strategy. I'd like to get some more feedback on the feasability of this strategy. I feel that with computers I'd be able to automate away the time-consuming part.

I was thinking of having a set of optimal strategies if the DM gave you velociraptors and another strategy if given large horses. Raptors would likely double up and focus fire the BBEG. Horses would form a line and then tell the team to pace themselves and choose more cost-effective attacks even if it is slower. If the DM chose Giant Owls you'd want to dive bomb and fly away and pick another main action as Command(Flee)/Dissonant Whispers wouldn't provoke opportunity attacks. Constrictor Snakes and Giant Wolf Spiders would center around using restrained creatures taking ranged attacks. A restrained creature's speed would be 0, so it simply can't provoke opportunity attacks.

[borg286]

I'm coming in late, but needed to point out the DPR calculations are off...



So an enemy surrounded by 8 conjured animals can only flee if there's a difference of at least 2 size categories with at least one of the conjured animals. So assuming a medium-sized enemy, a tiny creature isn't going to do anything significant with its OA and you're not going to be conjuring huge creatures.

I updated the DPR calculations, see up the page a little.
While a single cat isn't going to do much against a giant constrictor snake, were talking about velociraptors and 8 of them, each doubled up. In aggregate their damage competes with and likely exceeds a fighters single attack. Thus we only need 4 of the available 12 adjacent squares on a large opponent. Even 8 small creatures vs a huge opponent's 16 adjacent squares can fit comfortably.

[borg286]

What would you want, as a DM, from someone commanding 8 animals, to make the burden easy? For example making attack and damage rolls as quick as a fighters attack. Or making them die when hit twice.

[Frogreaver]

What would you want, as a DM, from someone commanding 8 animals, to make the burden easy? For example making attack and damage rolls as quick as a fighters attack. Or making them die when hit twice.

If you are playing online it's really quick and easy to roll 8 attack and damage rolls really fast. Tracking hitpoints vs hits for 20 and less hp isn't much of a problem as long as you identify each animal with a number so everyone can refer to which creature received the damage easily.

The biggest thing IMO is having them all act on the same initiative and having the player ready to declare their actions. Use theatre of the mind instead of a grid helps quite a bit too.

[Hael]

We had the command flee debate at our table, and what was decided was that the enemy would flee in the direction that caused it the least pain. So it wouldn’t path through the 8 wolves if it could avoid it. Moreover it would take something like the disengage action so just surrounding it ad initio didn’t work, however it would still provoke new oas when leaving reach of something that it initially wasn’t next too.

So the idea was that it would force tactical positioning of the summons, so eg a set up of two paths with maybe four one way and four the other way, and the enemy would pick one and trigger the three or four OA but not the full shebang.

It’s still a crazy amount of damage for a spell that also has a CC element, and one of the many reasons cleric/Druid combos are so strong and synergizing.

[Frogreaver]

I enriched the table with a new column of the average damage on a successful opportunity attack
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CZPoOWBCOVQUbbjI1b6bJH_ijmMiRALotLzBeYK894U/edit#gid=0

I then calculated per-creature DPRs vs AC 10, 14, and 18. Thus the average DPR of a CR 1/4 creature is 5.6 DPR vs AC 10. 4.2 DPR vs AC 14 and 2.8 DPR vs AC 18.
Multiplying these by 8 gives us
45 total DPR vs AC 10
33 total DPR vs AC 14
22 total DPR vs AC 18

Thus your gut was quite right. Thank you for your deep analysis.

Thanks.


At CR 1/4 only 2 creatures get pact tactics, none get multi-attacks, and the charge effects can't be relied on as they require wide open spaces and likely only a few will be able to do it given that charge is almost entirely on large creatures that take up lots of surface area.

Still this DPR is round after round. Compared to fireballing we've got quite a potent strategy. I'd like to get some more feedback on the feasability of this strategy. I feel that with computers I'd be able to automate away the time-consuming part.

I was thinking of having a set of optimal strategies if the DM gave you velociraptors and another strategy if given large horses. Raptors would likely double up and focus fire the BBEG. Horses would form a line and then tell the team to pace themselves and choose more cost-effective attacks even if it is slower. If the DM chose Giant Owls you'd want to dive bomb and fly away and pick another main action as Command(Flee)/Dissonant Whispers wouldn't provoke opportunity attacks. Constrictor Snakes and Giant Wolf Spiders would center around using restrained creatures taking ranged attacks. A restrained creature's speed would be 0, so it simply can't provoke opportunity attacks.

I think if I was your DM I would suggest you pick 4 CR 1/4 beast types and I'll pick 4 CR 1/4 beast types and we will roll a d8 to see which you summon. Options can be changed between sessions and a character sheet for each beast type would be required.

[AdAstra]

Wouldn't you need creatures with 60 ft. movement to take full advantage of this tactic against most humanoid opponents after the first turn? If they Dashed, they'd take the opportunity attack, then be 60 feet away. Even if they're almost completely surrounded with only a small opening to escape, they can still get out of the reach of most creatures normal movement, forcing the summons to dash and thus not be able to make normal attacks. And the creatures with 60+ movement speed tend to be less powerful.

You're still effectively getting two attacks on the turn you use Command, but it's hardly the most powerful thing ever you can do with the spell, as evidenced by the Dissonant Whispers combo.

[Frogreaver]

Wouldn't you need creatures with 60 ft. movement to take full advantage of this tactic against most humanoid opponents after the first turn? If they Dashed, they'd take the opportunity attack, then be 60 feet away. Even if they're almost completely surrounded with only a small opening to escape, they can still get out of the reach of most creatures normal movement, forcing the summons to dash and thus not be able to make normal attacks. And the creatures with 60+ movement speed tend to be less powerful.

You're still effectively getting two attacks on the turn you use Command, but it's hardly the most powerful thing ever you can do with the spell, as evidenced by the Dissonant Whispers combo.

IMO - If the damage had been as high as originally thought then at the levels he is looking at he wouldn't have needed more than the initial attack and the command attack to kill nearly anything he might encounter.

[borg286]

Wouldn't you need creatures with 60 ft. movement to take full advantage of this tactic against most humanoid opponents after the first turn? If they Dashed, they'd take the opportunity attack, then be 60 feet away. Even if they're almost completely surrounded with only a small opening to escape, they can still get out of the reach of most creatures normal movement, forcing the summons to dash and thus not be able to make normal attacks. And the creatures with 60+ movement speed tend to be less powerful.

You're still effectively getting two attacks on the turn you use Command, but it's hardly the most powerful thing ever you can do with the spell, as evidenced by the Dissonant Whispers combo.
Consider a foe without a good ranged attack. They need to be in melee to be effective and somehow survive the initial dogpile and opportunity attacks. They are now a whole turn away from anybody. They'd have to dash to get back but now they're out of actions. Their choice is to be far enough away from my critters that we'd have to dash to get to him, or come close enough to be in walking distance from my creatures. Either way he's losing yet another turn. That's a win for us. We don't need to chase him down, let him come to us.

On the other hand if he has a superior ranged attack then he only needs to get close enough to shoot one of us. That could be a spell like web (Ouch), or a bow attack vs. the druid. Both of these options would have been bad before, but I've forced his hand and he somehow survived. He's going to make it worth the pain.

One thing about 5e that we lost when moving from 4e is effective marking. We've got Sentinel and Ancestral Guardian, but they are crap when faced with a DM that plays team bad guys wisely. A bunch of goblins around the fighter would flee when the fighter uses up his reaction to go dogpile the squishy. Many DMs simply leave the goblins stuck to the fighter as a gesture to the player trying to make do as the frontline fighter. By forcing a foe to eat the opportunity attack you thus invite the DM to have them reengage your party where they like rather than where the fighter wants them. This new position may not be to your liking. But that's what you get when you try to get more damage out of opportunity attacks.

[Segev]

To me, it seems pretty obvious that command is an immediate thing. That is to say: the target is compelled in a manner similar to an involuntary startle response, such as if a recruit fresh out of boot camp hears "ATEN-HUT!" he is very likely to snap to attention, no matter who actually said it nor in what circumstance. (Well, that's a stereotype, anyway, and one I am inclined to believe has basis in fact. Regardless of how true it is, it gives an idea for the kind of involuntary behavior I expect from command.)

So when you tell somebody to "drop," they instantly let go of whatever they're holding. When you tell somebody to "grovel," they are already on their knees by the time they think of doing anything else. When you tell somebody to "flee," they turn tail and run. When you tell them to "approach," they have already walked as close to you as they can get.

Note the interpretation in "approach" vs. "flee" is not a studied one, just something I picked up naturally from the word choice: in "flee," I envisioned them turning tail and running; in "approach," I envisioned them walking at a brisk but not running pace. So the first might involve a dash, while the second is a move with no actions taken (unless they end more than 5 feet from you).

The reason most of them end their turn is because the whole point is that their minds don't catch up to what their bodies are doing until after their turn is over. They snapped to, reflexively, and obeyed the command, and THEN realized how foolish that was, but too late to do anything else with their time.