Using "Command" to cause harm.

[Andrew "The Great Kilt" Rauch]

Recently there have been some discussions in our group about my clerics creative use of the command spell to truly inconvenience the bad guys. The two uses that got the most discussion Both happened in the PFS module #39: The Citadel of Flame (PFRPG). At one point the party was attacked by a flying creature hovering over a chasm. One Command to fall later the creature was prone on the ground after taking a fair amount of falling damage. Later the party faced the BBEG in a room full of lava steams on the floor(not pits). After failing against Command she approached my cleric but was forced to step into the lava to do so(no room for her to jump over). I have used this before to make the baddies step on to my exploding runes granted by the Rune domain.
Some people argue that while you can command a person to flee or approach they wouldn't do so in a way that would cause them harm. My argument against this is "The creature may do nothing but move during its turn, and it provokes attacks of opportunity for this movement as normal". If the creature is intelligent enough for Command to be used against it surely such creature is aware it is provoking AOO something that would cause it harm. Ultimately the DM has allowed these instances partly because he finds it hilarious and partly because he hopes to use such tactics against PC's when given the opportunity. So my question is can Command be used to cause indirect harm?

[Are]

Since the command spell doesn't say the subject resists or gets another save if the command will be harmful, I'd say these applications of it works fine.

[Hartbaine]

This happens from time to time in our games as well. While it's left largely up to the GM we say 'yes', but caveats is that the target can not be aware that the action is going to cause them harm. The exception is the movement that provokes the AoO, since this stated in the book.

Here's a few ways I handle it.

When the target moves, if any of the AoOs connect and score damage, the command effect is broken and the stop on the square where they were injured.

Asking them to 'read' a warded book is acceptable, since they don't know it's warded. Triggering a pressure plate they didn't know was there. Walking into a Gelatinous Cube was acceptable, but the target still got their perception roll to notice it (remember, they're transparent).

The 'fall' command would not have worked in my game, since 'falling' would have caused direct harm as a result of obeying the command.

The rune trap may have worked, but the target would still have been permitted a perception check to notice they were being asked to walk into a trap.

Hope that provides some insight.

[GeneticDrift]

Spells only do what they say. It's short range and language dependency, and protection from x spells limits it.

Command is a good spell. And has no claus about not being harmful.

[Malag]

I don't mean to rain on parade but people should read the text before they use the spell.

Command has language dependency and has 5 commands only. I have seen people who didn't even read the spell and consider that they can order the subject anything they want.

While flying creature would most likely fall upon Command that same flying creature most likely didn't have the language required to understand the caster. I played that scenario and "creature" has only one rare language it speaks.

Beside that, Command can cause harm easily. Nothing says in spell that it can't.

[Serisan]

Are wrote:

Since the command spell doesn't say the subject resists or gets another save if the command will be harmful, I'd say these applications of it works fine.

+1. The spell is already limited enough. I was amazed that it worked in our PFS game on Saturday in the first place, let alone that the chosen command actually had the desired effect (the cleric used "Approach" on an enemy on a high ledge to make him accessible to the large amount of melee).

[Andrew "The Great Kilt" Rauch]

Malag wrote:

I don't mean to rain on parade but people should read the text before they use the spell.

Command has language dependency and has 5 commands only. I have seen people who didn't even read the spell and consider that they can order the subject anything they want.

While flying creature would most likely fall upon Command that same flying creature most likely didn't have the language required to understand the caster. I played that scenario and "creature" has only one rare language it speaks.

Beside that, Command can cause harm easily. Nothing says in spell that it can't.

You mean it was a gaav(DC 19 knowledge religion roll for the cleric) that only speaks Infernal(one of the three bonus languages a cleric can get)?

[Gauss]

There are other command type spells which have other effects. I suggest using them instead.

Murderous Command causes the target to attack his ally.
Forbid Action prevents the target from taking a specific action.

Both are in Ultimate Magic.

- Gauss

[Malag]

Andrew "The great Kilt" Rauch wrote:

Malag wrote:

I don't mean to rain on parade but people should read the text before they use the spell.

Command has language dependency and has 5 commands only. I have seen people who didn't even read the spell and consider that they can order the subject anything they want.

While flying creature would most likely fall upon Command that same flying creature most likely didn't have the language required to understand the caster. I played that scenario and "creature" has only one rare language it speaks.

Beside that, Command can cause harm easily. Nothing says in spell that it can't.

You mean it was a gaav(DC 19 knowledge religion roll for the cleric) that only speaks Infernal(one of the three bonus languages a cleric can get)?

Yes, but if he had that language it's fine. Just wanted to give a note, as I see lot of people mixing things.