spell: Command vs Panache

[McHatCommander]

This situation came up in a game recently where an enemy used Command on a player to run away. The player felt that as their move action they should be able to tumble through a minions location to get panache since tumble through has the bravado trait.

The player had 4 movement options
1.move towards the caster and move past them.
2. move into one of the minions and stop.
3. tumble through a minions position to move past them.
4. move of a 10 foot ledge to a lower position.

The player feels like the line fleeing condition
as expediently as possible (such as by using move actions
to flee, or opening doors barring your escape)

Is opening it up for them to use the tumble action. I can't seem to find much clarification. Command doesn't seem like a forced movement, it is specifically saying run away, but that movement actions can be used to accomplish this, IE if you are in a corridor and the door is closed you can open it.

What are others thoughts.

[QuidEst]

Fleeing is "as expediently as possible", and Command says "as if it had the fleeing condition". Since tumbling through somebody's space has a chance of failure to end the movement, it's only the most expedient option if there's no better way past (like walking around).

In this case, it sounds like like tumbling through was the most expedient option, so entirely fair! If an enemy magically compels you to do something you benefit from, well, that's on them.

[McHatCommander]

QuidEst wrote:

Fleeing is "as expediently as possible", and Command says "as if it had the fleeing condition". Since tumbling through somebody's space has a chance of failure to end the movement, it's only the most expedient option if there's no better way past (like walking around).

In this case, it sounds like like tumbling through was the most expedient option, so entirely fair! If an enemy magically compels you to do something you benefit from, well, that's on them.

Is that faster than descending a balcony or ledge?

Would they still be able to perform a "flashy or extravagant tumble" or would you just rule a tumble success is flashy in and of itself regardless of the intent?

I feel like with panache specifically you are trying to do something daring and flashy, but if you are fleeing and you have to tumble through someone it would just be whatever it takes... though I suppose that is what the roll is for.

[QuidEst]

McHatCommander wrote:

Is that faster than descending a balcony or ledge?

Usually, yeah. Climbing is very slow, falling prone takes an action to undo, and clearly a first-level spell doesn't allow forcing somebody to jump off a bride (even if all their friends are doing it).

McHatCommander wrote:

Would they still be able to perform a "flashy or extravagant tumble" or would you just rule a tumble success is flashy in and of itself regardless of the intent?

I feel like with panache specifically you are trying to do something daring and flashy, but if you are fleeing and you have to tumble through someone it would just be whatever it takes... though I suppose that is what the roll is for.

From a rules perspective, absolutely. Tumble Through gains the Bravado trait, so it gives panache.

From a GMing perspective... go ahead and toss your players a bone now and then, y'know? I wouldn't necessarily let this fly as an alternative to walking past somebody who isn't actually in the way, but this sounds like tumbling is a plausible "most expedient" option- certainly, there's no obvious other winner. They player is playing a Swashbuckler; they should be able to make running away look good even under compulsion.

It's good for the enemies to not just know the player characters' sheets. The caster picking a command and circumstance that worked for the character is nice for immersion and a fun little moment.

[McHatCommander]

Thanks I appreciate your thoughts.

[QuidEst]

McHatCommander wrote:

Thanks I appreciate your thoughts.

You're welcome!