Friends Cantrip: The Unorthodox Power of "Friendship."

[sophontteks]

Friends

"The most poorly-named (and ill-conceived) cantrip ever created"

In a vacuum Friends might be the most powerful cantrip in the game. The only problem is that the things it does aren't really things we desire. I got to thinking just how strong the effects are, and I thought of a few ways we can make this spell do some really cool stuff. But first. Throw every per-conceived ideas or notions you have about the spells intention, or its name, or anything. We will NOT be using this to make friends.

This is very much a thought experiment. None of this is tested. Feel free to add your own ideas or explain why some won't work. I haven't tried any of this stuff in game yet.

Breakdown of the cantrips powers

Range:Self
So the spells range is self. interesting. The effect of the spell, on you, is that someone you choose will be charmed by you for a minute, and then be hostile to you. There are no other limitations to what the spell can target. No range limits, or sight limits. No limits at all outside of the target not being hostile to you already.

Advantage on Charisma checks
For 1 minute you have advantage on charisma checks. That's it. You don't necessarily have to be using charisma in a positive manner.

When the spell ends, the creature realizes that you used magic to influence its mood and becomes hostile toward you
Hostile may mean they attack you, but they may act hostile to you in other ways. This is in addition to them knowing you influenced their mind with magic. Now here's the real kicker, considering their is no targeting limitation, what happens if they don't even know you?

Another creature might seek retribution in other ways (at the DM’s discretion), depending on the nature of your interaction with it.
So, this one is interesting too. Does this mean we can manipulate a creature's reaction by how we treat it when it was charmed?

The Unorthodox powers of Friends

Finding enemies
So, because this spell will only work if a target is not hostile to us, theoretically friends can be used to distinguish whether someone is a friend or foe, and we can do this to a target at any location. Want to find out if the person who just gave you a job, or a hot tip is trying to betray you? Cast friendship! If they were trying to cause you harm, they are likely hostile and the spell won't work. This is like the nuclear option for insight.

Of course the side effect of this is that they will be hostile to you now, but there are a good number of reasons this may not be a big deal...
- We can influence how they react by what we've done while they were charmed. They will remain hostile, but may not necessarily act upon it without good reason.
- If they don't know who we are, but we know who they are, the hostility is kinda wasted. They can't really do anything bad to someone they don't know.
- The target may *appear* as a simple commoner or some other mundane thing. If they really are a commoner or whatever, who cares what they think?
- We can use a disguise to avoid the impact of the hostility.

Update
A popular interpretation is that the effect only works when you communicate with the target. In these cases alternate means of communication can be used to avoid direct communication.

Taunting a target
Again, forget the name. We are looking to make enemies here. What if we wanted to have a target become hostile to us? We often think of using charisma checks in order to make people do positive things for us, but they can also be used to manipulate a target into being more aggressive or even outright violent (murder hobo party rejoice). The target knows we used some kind of magic to influence their thoughts, and they will become hostile to us, and the magnitude of their hostility is directly related to how we act while they are charmed.

Even an otherwise peaceful thing may be goaded into violence if you've attempted to get it to do something it personally opposes. While asking a dragon to give up its treasure may be offensive, once the spell ends and it realizes you asked it to give up its treasure using magic, well, that dragon is going to be pretty freaking violent.

The key here is to combine this with the some persuasion checks to make the target behave irrationally and irately when the 1 minute duration wears off.

Some ideas I had for how this could be useful...
- Goading a target into attacking you when you have the upper hand.
- Breaking up allied factions by making the leader of one faction openly hostile to you while you play the victim.
- Setting someone up by making them act first.
- If you don't think the target is incredibly witty you can easily get them to do something stupid and get them in trouble for it.

Fun with Disguises
So one common idea with friendship is to use a disguise, so that they hate the person you are disguised as, but not you. This does not work. You are the target of the spell. No disguise or alteration can change that. The target doesn't even need to know who you are. They may have never seen you in their life, but they will just hate you all the same. If you think about it that's some crazy strong magic right there.

So how do we use disguises with this???

We disguise ourselves as someone else and help them plot their revenge on us! If they are going to try to do something to us, why pose as someone else, and cash in on that? This is the penultimate charlatan skill!

So we cast charm on some unwitting sucker, and they become hostile to us. They don't know us or anything, but they don't like us...quite a lot. Why don't we make a disguise or get the help of a friend to cash in on this?

With the help of a friend or disguise we can...
- Offer the target our services as a thug, or assassin, or what-have you. For a fee we will help them exact their revenge.
- Have your party show open hostility towards you in order to improve their opinion of the party. (you'll just have to wear a disguise for now on.)
- Disguise ourselves as an authority figure looking for *you*. Their disposition towards you increases the genuinity of the disguise, and they'd be far more willing to help you.

Intimidation and deception

Friends gives the target knowledge that you successfully used magic to influence its mood. But it does not give them knowledge of how you influenced its mood, nor knowledge of what magic was used to do this. This can be used to your advantage. The act of influencing a creature's mood with magic is pretty emasculating, scary, and it raises doubt in their own autonomy. Am I really feeling this way, or did he make me feel this way? Are they controlling me right now?

With some additional charisma checks you could have all sorts of fun with this, especially if you have access to telepathic speech. It would be very easy to convince them that the magic you are using of them is much stronger then what you actually used. Many people would want nothing to do with someone who can control their minds, and all the evidence they are provided when the spell ends is pretty convincing.

- Intimidation is perfect here, because, unlike persuasion, hostility isn't really a problem. While you may have higher DCs in persuasion checks, intimidation is about them fearing the consequences of messing with you.
- Deception also works for similar reasons. You could be convincing them that you are some form of higher being, for example, with a deception check.

Conclusion

OK that's all I got for now. I tried to make this a little more categorical, but I believe there is a lot I missed. I'd love to hear some insight from others given this new take on the cantrip. How can we make such a powerful effect, the ability to make anything hate us, work in our favor?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

"Finding enemies
So, because this spell will only work if a target is not hostile to us, theoretically friends can be used to distinguish whether someone is a friend or foe, and we can do this to a target at any location. Want to find out if the person who just gave you a job, or a hot tip is trying to betray you? Cast friendship! If they were trying to cause you harm, they are likely hostile and the spell won't work. This is like the nuclear option for insight."

Would I know it if I cast Friends on someone and they pass the save but play along? How about if they are the enemy and just play along?

[Samayu]

You would know if your spell didn't go off due to the lack of a valid target. Similarly, you know when the target of your spell passes a save.

[Ashe]

"Would I know it if I cast Friends on someone and they pass the save but play along?

Friends does not require a saving throw.

[Kane0]

Woah. This goes right up there with magic mouth programming for me!

[Mellack]

You would know if your spell didn't go off due to the lack of a valid target. Similarly, you know when the target of your spell passes a save.

Not according to Sage Advice. "A spellcaster doesn't automatically know whether a spell's target succeeded on a saving throw against the spell" https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/02/28...-successfully/

If you attempt it on an invalid target, you would only know that it failed on them. You do not know why. While you can assume that it is because they were hostile, it could for some other reason.

[Theodoxus]

"Finding enemies
So, because this spell will only work if a target is not hostile to us, theoretically friends can be used to distinguish whether someone is a friend or foe, and we can do this to a target at any location. Want to find out if the person who just gave you a job, or a hot tip is trying to betray you? Cast friendship! If they were trying to cause you harm, they are likely hostile and the spell won't work. This is like the nuclear option for insight."

Would I know it if I cast Friends on someone and they pass the save but play along? How about if they are the enemy and just play along?

Friends does not require a saving throw.

On top of it not having a save, it's only advantage on Charisma checks. So, if the creature were hostile to you, unbeknownst to you - you would have meta knowledge of that fact, because the DM wouldn't let you roll the checks with advantage. Your character wouldn't have a clue, other than your otherwise suave self under the effects of friends is bumbling the interaction.

[Valmark]

On top of it not having a save, it's only advantage on Charisma checks. So, if the creature were hostile to you, unbeknownst to you - you would have meta knowledge of that fact, because the DM wouldn't let you roll the checks with advantage. Your character wouldn't have a clue, other than your otherwise suave self under the effects of friends is bumbling the interaction.

It does require Concentration though- presumably you know if you're concentrating on something or not.

[Theodoxus]

I suppose you could use the meta knowledge of not getting advantage on your rolls to justify stopping concentrating on the spell, but in-universe, just because the spell doesn't affect your target doesn't mean you automatically stop concentrating.

And really, concentration isn't a particularly apt word for the mechanic, as it assumes you're using a conscious effort to keep the thought focused at the front of your mind. When the only thing it is doing, mechanically, is preventing you from casting another concentration spell, or casting and holding any spell for longer than your turn.

"Maintenance" would have been a much less charged word. And it alleviates the inevitable player blowback of "but I can think about and hold two thoughts simultaneously, my character should be able to concentrate on two spells!" But if it were couched in the terms of maintenance, and as a gamist construct rather than part of your characters' capabilities (regardless that Concentration is never quantified that way in the rules), "You can only Maintain one spell at a time if that spell's Duration states it requires Maintenance."

[Valmark]

I suppose you could use the meta knowledge of not getting advantage on your rolls to justify stopping concentrating on the spell, but in-universe, just because the spell doesn't affect your target doesn't mean you automatically stop concentrating.

And really, concentration isn't a particularly apt word for the mechanic, as it assumes you're using a conscious effort to keep the thought focused at the front of your mind. When the only thing it is doing, mechanically, is preventing you from casting another concentration spell, or casting and holding any spell for longer than your turn.

"Maintenance" would have been a much less charged word. And it alleviates the inevitable player blowback of "but I can think about and hold two thoughts simultaneously, my character should be able to concentrate on two spells!" But if it were couched in the terms of maintenance, and as a gamist construct rather than part of your characters' capabilities (regardless that Concentration is never quantified that way in the rules), "You can only Maintain one spell at a time if that spell's Duration states it requires Maintenance."

You don't need meta knowledge- you can't Concentrate on a spell that isn't there.

Concentration doesn't just stop you from casting another Concentration spell (it doesn't even do that)- you need to keep at it if you don't want your spell to fail. Since Friends already failed you cannot mantain Concentration.

[Amechra]

You're missing one of the funnier interactions.

Be a Sorcerer, and cast a Subtle Friends spell on someone, and immediately let the Concentration lapse. Boom, now you have an instant, no-fuss-no-muss way to make someone hate you for no good reason that no one but the target will pick up on.

[Valmark]

You're missing one of the funnier interactions.

Be a Sorcerer, and cast a Subtle Friends spell on someone, and immediately let the Concentration lapse. Boom, now you have an instant, no-fuss-no-muss way to make someone hate you for no good reason that no one but the target will pick up on.

Unfortunately it still has the material component so Subtle hardly helps.

[No brains]

Unfortunately it still has the material component so Subtle hardly helps.

There's plenty of subtle things that could qualify as 'a small amount of makeup applied to the face as the spell is cast'. Some makeup is made with the intent of not looking like it is there. Another point is that while there is the implication that the makeup should go from component pouch to hand to face, touching makeup already on the face might also work.

Of course then the person might think you're biting your thumb at them.

[XmonkTad]

I'm confused about why disguising yourself, and then casting friends allows the target to become hostile to you through your disguise. Because sure, the target becomes hostile to you, but they can only see what's in front of their face. If you're disguised, then they yes they're hostile to you, but they don't your name beyond what you've told them, and they can't "know" your true appearance beyond what you've shown them. Is this all coming from the target of "self"?

[JoeJ]

One of these functions can be performed by anyone, without learning a cantrip at all: If you want to find out whether somebody is hostile to you, just stab them non-fatally. Now you know that they're hostile.

[sophontteks]

Woah. This goes right up there with magic mouth programming for me!

Aww thanks! I thought no one was really interested when the responses came late.

"Finding enemies
Would I know it if I cast Friends on someone and they pass the save but play along? How about if they are the enemy and just play along?

There is no save vs. the effect. This makes the cantrip insanely strong, if not for the fact that making things hostile isn't generally desirable.

Not according to Sage Advice. "A spellcaster doesn't automatically know whether a spell's target succeeded on a saving throw against the spell" https://www.sageadvice.eu/2019/02/28...-successfully/

If you attempt it on an invalid target, you would only know that it failed on them. You do not know why. While you can assume that it is because they were hostile, it could for some other reason.

Yeah I did consider whether using friends to detect hostility would be meta. I don't think there would be a definitive answer that'd make everyone happy. Friends is pretty unique in this interaction. It's a target:self spell that effects any target you choose, without a saving throw. I don't know many other spells that work like this.

I assume you'd know whether the target you choose is even valid. I think we got a case where it's the rule of cool vs. a strict DM being sick of your antics.

You're missing one of the funnier interactions.

Be a Sorcerer, and cast a Subtle Friends spell on someone, and immediately let the Concentration lapse. Boom, now you have an instant, no-fuss-no-muss way to make someone hate you for no good reason that no one but the target will pick up on.

We can make it more interesting, playing off the fact that they know you used mind-altering magic.

What about an Abberant Sorcerer using subtle friends with telepathic speech in order to intimidate an enemy? Like you said, they don't know the effect was from a simple cantrip, but they do know that you *successfully* used mind-altering magic on them to influence their mood. You could make them second guess all of their feelings and emotions with just a little help.

Unfortunately it still has the material component so Subtle hardly helps.

Waving your arms around in a ritual manner is hard to cover up, as are ritual chants. Applying a bit of makeup to your face, however, is extremely difficult to pick up on.

Remember the precise ruling on components is that they are perceptible. That does not mean you automatically notice, only that you could notice. How obvious they are is taken on a case-by-case basis.

I'm confused about why disguising yourself, and then casting friends allows the target to become hostile to you through your disguise. Because sure, the target becomes hostile to you, but they can only see what's in front of their face. If you're disguised, then they yes they're hostile to you, but they don't your name beyond what you've told them, and they can't "know" your true appearance beyond what you've shown them. Is this all coming from the target of "self"?

Two reasons:
1. It is range: self. You are the target of the spell, not them. They become hostile to the target of the spell.
2. You do not have to be near them to cast this. You can choose for this spell to effect them from any distance, without any restriction outside of them not being hostile.

One of these functions can be performed by anyone, without learning a cantrip at all: If you want to find out whether somebody is hostile to you, just stab them non-fatally. Now you know that they're hostile.

Sure you can stab them, but only if you are near them. What if you wanted to check some being from another realm?
"Dear friendship cantrip, does Cthulhu hate me?"
He does now!
"Wonderful! Can't wait to see how he exacts his revenge on me!"

If the dnd universe is a bunch of realms not connected, and our reality is one of those realms, you could technically break the 4th wall and determine whether a player is hostile to your character.
"Dear friends cantrip. Is My own creator hostile to me?
He is now!

So, I think this means you, as a player, must be hostile to your own character and attempt to exact revenge.
Of course this means, you making your character do something harmful to them is in-game roleplay.
But now your character is aware that he is being controlled by some being from another realm.
Ok, you probably shouldn't try to do this...

[king_steve]

Concentration doesn't just stop you from casting another Concentration spell (it doesn't even do that)- you need to keep at it if you don't want your spell to fail. Since Friends already failed you cannot mantain Concentration.

Nothing in the spell description says it ends if you interact with a hostile creature, you only wouldn't have advantage. I don't think it has a 'failed' condition, you just don't get advantage. Specifically it says:

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

* - (a small amount of makeup applied to the face as this spell is cast)

So, the first sentence is only going to conditionally give you advantage on some of your checks (charisma checks targeting 1 creature that is non-hostile).

[Tanarii]

Fun with Disguises
So one common idea with friendship is to use a disguise, so that they hate the person you are disguised as, but not you. This does not work. You are the target of the spell. No disguise or alteration can change that. The target doesn't even need to know who you are. They may have never seen you in their life, but they will just hate you all the same. If you think about it that's some crazy strong magic right there.

So how do we use disguises with this???

We disguise ourselves as someone else and help them plot their revenge on us! If they are going to try to do something to us, why pose as someone else, and cash in on that? This is the penultimate charlatan skill!

So we cast charm on some unwitting sucker, and they become hostile to us. They don't know us or anything, but they don't like us...quite a lot. Why don't we make a disguise or get the help of a friend to cash in on this.

It doesn't matter if you disguise yourself before or after you cast the spell by a strict reading. They're always hostile to you. If you disguise yourself and approach them after the spell is finished, they're still hostile to the disguised you. Even though they may not know why.

This spell breaks down on multiple levels, but the "hostile to you" clause is certainly one of them.

[JoeJ]

Funny, but I would rule that the spell only has an effect if you actually make a Charisma check against the target to try and influence them in some way, which in turn requires communicating with them. There's still no range limit; you can try to influence them using Telepathy, Sending, a semaphor, playing a trumpet, even a written message if they read it before the spell ends, but there must be an actual Charisma check.

[Tanarii]

Funny, but I would rule that the spell only has an effect if you actually make a Charisma check against the target to try and influence them in some way, which in turn requires communicating with them. There's still no range limit; you can try to influence them using Telepathy, Sending, a semaphor, playing a trumpet, even a written message if they read it before the spell ends, but there must be an actual Charisma check.

Agreed. If there isn't a Cha check, they have not been influenced by the spell.

Kinda like using guidance to influence someone with a Cha check. Yeah, I went there.

[sophontteks]

It doesn't matter if you disguise yourself before or after you cast the spell by a strict reading. They're always hostile to you. If you disguise yourself and approach them after the spell is finished, they're still hostile to the disguised you. Even though they may not know why.

This spell breaks down on multiple levels, but the "hostile to you" clause is certainly one of them.

This works exactly as it does in all cases whenever someone or something is hostile to you. When the spell ends they become hostile to you and know you tried to influence them. Nothing in the spell gives them the supernatural ability to see through disguises afterwards.

Funny, but I would rule that the spell only has an effect if you actually make a Charisma check against the target to try and influence them in some way, which in turn requires communicating with them. There's still no range limit; you can try to influence them using Telepathy, Sending, a semaphor, playing a trumpet, even a written message if they read it before the spell ends, but there must be an actual Charisma check.

Agreed. This seems the most sensible ruling.

[Tanarii]

This works exactly as it does in all cases whenever someone or something is hostile to you. When the spell ends they become hostile to you and know you tried to influence them. Nothing in the spell gives them the supernatural ability to see through disguises afterwards.

They aren't seeing through any disguises. They're just always hostile to you. They don't know the newly appearing you is the same person as the old appearing you, they're just hostile to you anyway. Regardless of your appearance, you're always you.

And it's a spell. It's inherently supernatural.

(Edit: please note this is a devils advocate / strict reading argument. If you rule that an initial disguise before casting the spell works, then it is consistent to rule that after the spell ends disguises also work.)

[sophontteks]

Added another section for using intimidation and deception checks in combination with the knowledge that you influenced their emotions.

[sophontteks]

They aren't seeing through any disguises. They're just always hostile to you. They don't know the newly appearing you is the same person as the old appearing you, they're just hostile to you anyway. Regardless of your appearance, you're always you.

And it's a spell. It's inherently supernatural.

(Edit: please note this is a devils advocate / strict reading argument. If you rule that an initial disguise before casting the spell works, then it is consistent to rule that after the spell ends disguises also work.)

You are applying an additional unlisted effect. Everything hostile to you is hostile to you. That's why we use disguises; to conceal our identity. I'm not sure how they are gaining some sort indefinite true sight after the spell has ended.

These are contradictory rulings. In the case you are talking about, they recognize you through the disguise, thus would be hostile to the thing you are disguised as. I can see it going either way, both are wonderfully abusable. I'd say it depends on other interpretations. For example...

Funny, but I would rule that the spell only has an effect if you actually make a Charisma check against the target to try and influence them in some way, which in turn requires communicating with them. There's still no range limit; you can try to influence them using Telepathy, Sending, a semaphor, playing a trumpet, even a written message if they read it before the spell ends, but there must be an actual Charisma check.

This does suggest that, if they must communicate with you, their knowledge of you is based upon that communication. I like that. I think it's the simplest and easiest idea that doesn't contradict anything written.

[Tanarii]

You are applying an additional unlisted effect. Everything hostile to you is hostile to you. That's why we use disguises; to conceal our identity. I'm not sure how they are gaining some sort indefinite true sight after the spell has ended.

There is no true sight. Your identity is still concealed. They don't recognize who you are in any way. But they're still hostile to you.

Being hostile to you isn't contingent on recognizing you or knowing your identity. It's just contingent on you being you. They don't even know you are you, they just experience being hostile to the current creature in front of them, whenever you are in front of them in any disguise/appearance. Without limit to time or or ability to have that attitude altered, apparently.

(There's a logical fallacy name for this argument, but I'll just call it the parsing to absurdity fallacy for now. And also not continue to push the argument, because a ruling that they must recognize you to be hostile is great as long as it's consistent.)

[No brains]

Another bizarre aspect of friends is that if you're a charisma caster, Friends can help your use of Dispel Magic and Counterspell... against a target that is not hostile.

This still has uses. If someone doesn't know who you are and you need to break down their magic wards in their house, the very first thing they'll know about you is that they don't like you because you used magic to 'influence their mood'.

[Nifft]

There is no true sight. Your identity is still concealed. They don't recognize who you are in any way. But they're still hostile to you.

Being hostile to you isn't contingent on recognizing you or knowing your identity. It's just contingent on you being you. They don't even know you are you, they just experience being hostile to the current creature in front of them, whenever you are in front of them in any disguise/appearance. Without limit to time or or ability to have that attitude altered, apparently.

Yep.

This is how I would read the spell most strictly.

The spell says they are friendly to you, even if your current appearance doesn't match your usual appearance: so they are.

The spell says later they are hostile to you, regardless of your current appearance: therefore, that also happens.

[JoeJ]

Yep.

This is how I would read the spell most strictly.

The spell says they are friendly to you, even if your current appearance doesn't match your usual appearance: so they are.

The spell says later they are hostile to you, regardless of your current appearance: therefore, that also happens.

That's a defensible interpretation of the text, but if you interpret it that way is the cantrip still useful enough to be worth choosing?

[Tanarii]

That's a defensible interpretation of the text, but if you interpret it that way is the cantrip still useful enough to be worth choosing?

Depends how often your players are trying to get someone not very dangerous when they're hostile to sign something legally binding or reveal something hidden/only known to them.

Assuming the PCs won't just physically harm "not very dangerous when they're hostile" folks until they get what they want. Or that they even need to make a check.

[Angelalex242]

If you're a fan of trolling, you can slowly drive the NPC to madness with fantastic disguises, as they slowly start to hate 'everyone' that walks by, even if they're all you. With the right psychological conditioning, you can turn the object of friends into a psychopathic maniac and then unleash him on his hometown. The poor NPC, now convinced he hates all that live, proceeds to murder the townfolk of his village, one by one...until local authorities catch him.