Did I Rule Correctly with Suggestion

[JRosco]

I was running a social encounter between my party and the Marshall of a backwater town, and the party was trying to convince the Marshall to let them speak to a prisoner. The sorcerer of the party cast Suggestion and the Marshall saved from the effect. I ruled that the Marshall knew that something had tried to influence his mind, and he became hostile.

My player argued that, since Suggestion specifies that the target learns they were influenced by the spell only after the spell has ended (upon completion of the suggested task or 8 hours), the target is unaware of the spell if he is not influenced by it. I would argue that that specification is there to clarify that the target doesn't know it is under the influence of the spell while performing the task, or during the 8 hours.

I allowed the player to take back the action, since he didn't know that I ran it that way, but he grumbled about it for the rest of the night. Should I have let the player's interpretation slide?

[NewDM]

I was running a social encounter between my party and the Marshall of a backwater town, and the party was trying to convince the Marshall to let them speak to a prisoner. The sorcerer of the party cast Suggestion and the Marshall saved from the effect. I ruled that the Marshall knew that something had tried to influence his mind, and he became hostile.

My player argued that, since Suggestion specifies that the target learns they were influenced by the spell only after the spell has ended (upon completion of the suggested task or 8 hours), the target is unaware of the spell if he is not influenced by it. I would argue that that specification is there to clarify that the target doesn't know it is under the influence of the spell while performing the task, or during the 8 hours.

I allowed the player to take back the action, since he didn't know that I ran it that way, but he grumbled about it for the rest of the night. Should I have let the player's interpretation slide?

So he didn't notice the caster putting a bit of honeycomb or sweet oil onto a snake's tongue and then making strange noises of an unknown magical language to cast the spell?

Also no where does it say the target is or is not aware of the effects of the spell.

[rhouck]

I know the spell Friends has the language re they are aware you used magic once the spell ends, but where is that language in Suggestion?

[RulesJD]

So he didn't notice the caster putting a bit of honeycomb or sweet oil onto a snake's tongue and then making strange noises of an unknown magical language to cast the spell?

*edit*

As pointed out above, there is no such line like that for Suggestion. The target wouldn't know they were trying to be influenced without some sort of Detect Magic, etc.

[Gorthano]

I agree with NewDM's assertion about the obviousness of a spell being cast right in front of someone.

Otherwise, just like RulesJD, I'd rule that the target is unaware that they were targeted by a charm-effect spell unless the spell description expressly provides for the target having that knowledge and the conditions for that knowledge have been met. (PHB 204- Targets)

[Demonslayer666]

I'm glad to see that you let him take back his action. I probably would not have let him once I explained that casting a spell on a city official is illegal. :) It's always a risky situation when you cast a spell on someone of authority, they should know better.

If they are influenced by Suggestion, then they perform the task for the duration. If they fail, they don't perform the action (no duration), and they can act immediately of their own free will.

While there is a Verbal and Material component to the spell, the verbal component could be the command, and the material component would be your staff. That could make it hard to detect, but I think most DMs would rule they know you cast a spell. As a player, it might be assumed that it is not obvious. "You wouldn't deprive an old man of his walking stick, would you?"

Having the Marshal react with hostility might be a bit harsh. He may want to simply refuse to help, and hold a grudge against the party for future interactions.

[hymer]

I allowed the player to take back the action, since he didn't know that I ran it that way, but he grumbled about it for the rest of the night. Should I have let the player's interpretation slide?

Unless the spell was cast in a manner in which the target would be unable to know who cast the spell, I agree with your interpretation, and your handling. A saving throw 'represents an attempt to resist a spell [or other effects]' (PHB p. 179). So making a save means, in most circumstances at least, that you know something happened. And if the guy casts a spell just when it happens, it's pretty easy to put the two together and know exactly who did it. Even if they don't know exactly who did it, it would still make sense for experienced individuals to react if they sensed they had been subjected to a magical attack, such as Suggestion. It's a reasonable bet that the adventurers trying to get you to do something specific were responsible, even if you don't know which one of them did it.
It could be run otherwise, but your ruling is certainly well within reasonableness.

You could go further, and let the sorcerer pick a different spell than Suggestion, if he thought it would be a safe-and-easy way to avoid actually roleplaying. Okay, he may not be that bad. Still, I'd offer to let him swap the spell.

[SharkForce]

iirc there's a rule somewhere about saving throws that says you aren't immediately aware you've made one (though it may be quite obvious if, for example, you were trying to avoid damage from a fireball).

i'll have to see if i can track it down. maybe i'm just crazy.

that said, casting a spell while someone is watching would be noticeable. the official may or may not be aware it was a suggestion spell, or that it was being cast on him, but i would generally assume that:

1) important people are generally speaking not going to meet with people they don't trust implicitly alone, so that others can also notice and react to any such effects, which would be relatively common in a world where D&D creatures and classes exist.

2) casting *any* spell in the presence of someone in a position of importance without very clearly explaining what you're going to do is not going to be met favourably. if someone has guards, expect the guards to react poorly unless, as noted above, you've explained what you're doing.

(that said, one season of AL has rules for hiding spellcasting that are relatively easy to succeed at).

[kaoskonfety]

If the spell was not cast with Subtle and the target knows what a spell caster is they are in for a bad time.

Generally I stick with resisted effects causing a moment where you notice *something* - in the case of suggestion - a spell caster telling you to do something you suddenly REALLY want to do. This spell has the added complication: "You suggest a course of activity (limited to a sentence or two) and magically influence a creature you can see within range that can hear and understand you."

So you need to literally tell them where to go and how to get there.

You MAY rule Subtle overrides this need to give direction out loud and you MAY rule as to whether or not 'making your save' is a thing the target 'experiences' in some way. Make it clear how this works and stick to it going forward - it works both ways.

[SharkForce]

so did some searching, and found the text i was thinking of. in the spellcasting chapter, under "targets" it mentions that unless a spell has a "perceptable effect" there's generally no clue that a spell was cast on you.

though again, if you're casting a spell while the guy is watching, well, he may not feel that a spell was cast on him, but he sure as heck knows that you just cast something.

[rhouck]

so did some searching, and found the text i was thinking of. in the spellcasting chapter, under "targets" it mentions that unless a spell has a "perceptable effect" there's generally no clue that a spell was cast on you.

though again, if you're casting a spell while the guy is watching, well, he may not feel that a spell was cast on him, but he sure as heck knows that you just cast something.

I don't think that's necessarily the case with Suggestion, as it has no Somatic component and the Verbal is arguably just the suggestion itself (edit: Jeremy Crawford tweeted that the suggestion is separate from the V component). With an arcane focus, then there is nothing to really need to be subtle about or to indicate that there is a casting.

At the end of the day, I don't think there is a "correct" ruling here. The DM is free to interpret the spell as he wishes and, since that interpretation was not clear to the player beforehand, allowing the player to revise their action was fair.

[p_johnston]

I don't think the suggestion itself counts as the verbal component.

"Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."

I always took this to mean that not only are you saying something out loud, You are saying a specific set of words in a very specific way. This means that A) Unless you have subtle spell you cannot hide the fact that you are casting a spell. Anyone close enough to hear you talking in a normal tone of voice can hear you. B) Less related but I always ruled it to mean you can't mumble/whisper the spell to try and hide it. Doing so messes up the verbal component.

I suppose it could be ruled differently but that's how I have interpreted it.

[RulesJD]

I don't think the suggestion itself counts as the verbal component.

"Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."

I always took this to mean that not only are you saying something out loud, You are saying a specific set of words in a very specific way. This means that A) Unless you have subtle spell you cannot hide the fact that you are casting a spell. Anyone close enough to hear you talking in a normal tone of voice can hear you. B) Less related but I always ruled it to mean you can't mumble/whisper the spell to try and hide it. Doing so messes up the verbal component.

I suppose it could be ruled differently but that's how I have interpreted it.

Again, check out Rise of Tiamat, specially the encounter in the Tomb with the Lizardfolk. The the suggestion itself "Come have dinner with us" is the verbal component of the Suggestion spell that they're casting.

[JeffreyGator]

suggestion to me has always been jedi mind trick.

It is illegal to use on Stormtroopers as well, but if these aren't the droids you are looking for, it works.

Unless you had an arcane focus, I would require Sleight of Hand vs perception or Subtle to hide the material components.

As the charm type spells rise in level, I think that the drawbacks are increasingly mitigated.

That being said the Mayor could also have other people in the room and or magical precautions in place to notice this sort of activity especially if this is a sizable enough village that it would be logical for him to be higher in level than PCs.

[Tanarii]

I don't think the suggestion itself counts as the verbal component.

"Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."Agreed. The PHB is clear about what V components are. And the Suggestion spell doesn't say anything to specifically override that, although players commonly want to make the assumption that the suggestion itself is the V component. Unsurprisingly, given it's hugely to their advantage. But IMO without Subtle Spell metamagic, it should be obvious that a spell is being cast in a generic D&D campaign. (Obviously a DM might have special ways of handling spell components in their campaigns.)

[rhouck]

Agreed. The PHB is clear about what V components are. And the Suggestion spell doesn't say anything to specifically override that, although players commonly want to make the assumption that the suggestion itself is the V component. Unsurprisingly, given it's hugely to their advantage. But IMO without Subtle Spell metamagic, it should be obvious that a spell is being cast in a generic D&D campaign. (Obviously a DM might have special ways of handling spell components in their campaigns.)

Jeremy Crawford agrees with you: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/652550899814916096

"The spell's suggestion is a separate, intelligible utterance."

[Ruslan]

Depends on how the player described it. Theoretically, it's possible to cast Suggestion with an Arcane Focus (eg. a wand), and use the actual words of the Suggestion as the verbal component. So, the PC could have been just speaking to the mayor while punctuating his points with a slight wave of a wooden stick, and none is the wiser. Or, it's also possible to cast Suggestion while manipulating material components, making it quite clear you're casting a spell.

So, the question is this: if the player didn't specify anything, and just said "I cast Suggestion", is it the DMs responsibility to interpret the action in a way most beneficial to the player?

I'd say no, the DM has no such duty. Unless the player has a history of successfully casting spells covertly, using his Arcane Focus in an inconspicuous way, etc., and if the player didn't give the DM any specifics as to how exactly he's casting the spell, there's no reason for the DM to take the charitable interpretation of the PCs actions. "He realizes you tried to enchant him and becomes hostile" is a perfectly viable interpretation in this scenario.

[hymer]

so did some searching, and found the text i was thinking of. in the spellcasting chapter, under "targets" it mentions that unless a spell has a "perceptable effect" there's generally no clue that a spell was cast on you.

Nice!
A fuller quote: "Unless a spell has a perceptible effect, a creature might not know it was targeted by a spell at all." Might not? Weasels. :smallsigh: It goes on to suggest that attempting to read someone's mind would typically go unnoticed (and then more weaselling, of course). Whether the suggestion sentence counts as a perceptible effect is also kinda who-knows.
Or in other words, ask your DM. And since OP is the DM...

[Tanarii]

Jeremy Crawford agrees with you: https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/652550899814916096

"The spell's suggestion is a separate, intelligible utterance."Always nice to actually interpret RAI the same way as the designers.

[Telok]

Turn it around.

What do the PCs do the next time a merchant casts Suggestion:"This item is totally worth a 200% mark-up. You should buy it now."

[Slipperychicken]

What do the PCs do the next time a merchant casts Suggestion:"This item is totally worth a 200% mark-up. You should buy it now."

The other 3 or 4 party members who weren't targeted can apply for a refund, the sum consisting of whatever valuables the merchant has on or about his person. The refund application process generally is not pleasant for a merchant accused of magical fraud.

[bardo]

I, for one, would have liked to see Suggestion work like a Jedi mind trick or the Voice from Dune. But Suggestion, like most charm spells in this edition, has been nerfed to the edge of uselessness. A clumsy and random set of spells, and there's always a Wisdom saving throw. Even Command, which used to be automatic against the feeble-minded since times immemorial, now grants a Wisdom saving throw for all.

For a Jedi mind trick using a 2nd level known spell the sorcerer is probably better off taking Enhance Ability. It can be cast before-hand so the victims can't tell magic is involved. You rolling Charisma checks (deception/intimidation/persuasion) with advantage would usually give you better odds than their Wisdom saving throw. And no nasty consequences if your victim rolled higher. You asked, they said no, life goes on.

In this particular case the Sorcerer could have gotten a 2-for-1 with Enhance Ability. Advantage to convince the Marshall, then if it all goes down in less than 1 hour, advantage to extract information out of the prisoner. Just reading the list of 2nd level Sorcerer spells I spotted 5 that would be more useful than Suggestion in this situation, which is a real shame. This is not the spell you are looking for.

OP acted fairly. Would also be a good idea to let the sorcerer retrain Suggestion for a useful spell.

Bardo.

[rhouck]

But Suggestion, like most charm spells in this edition, has been nerfed to the edge of uselessness.

I definitely would not go that far. For a 2nd level spell, it's very powerful in the context of 5e as an in-combat spell. It lasts for 8 hours (with concentration) and only offers a single save, and you can easily say "you feel tired and would like to take a nap for a few hours", or "you remembered you have to be home for dinner and need to leave immediately".

Or potentially the best of "your teammate is actually a spy in disguise, you should attack him!", as the spell only breaks if the caster or his teammates causes damage -- not damage from the target's companions.

Combined with the Sorcerer's ability to twin the spell, that's quite a powerful save-or-suck effect given how hard 5e nerfed other such effects.

Obviously, like all charm or illusion spells, it is always subject to the DM nerfbat, but I would not call it anywhere near useless.

[Pex]

I don't think the suggestion itself counts as the verbal component.

"Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."

I always took this to mean that not only are you saying something out loud, You are saying a specific set of words in a very specific way. This means that A) Unless you have subtle spell you cannot hide the fact that you are casting a spell. Anyone close enough to hear you talking in a normal tone of voice can hear you. B) Less related but I always ruled it to mean you can't mumble/whisper the spell to try and hide it. Doing so messes up the verbal component.

I suppose it could be ruled differently but that's how I have interpreted it.

How could one know someone is casting a spell when identifying a spell being cast is not an official ability of the game? Is it fair the npc automatically knows a spell was being cast? Should there at least be a Knowledge Arcana check or something? Do PCs get to know automatically someone is casting a spell even granting not knowing what the exact spell is just that spellcasting is being done?

[rhouck]

How could one know someone is casting a spell when identifying a spell being cast is not an official ability of the game? Is it fair the npc automatically knows a spell was being cast? Should there at least be a Knowledge Arcana check or something? Do PCs get to know automatically someone is casting a spell even granting not knowing what the exact spell is just that spellcasting is being done?

FWIW there were rules released along with Adventurer's League with Mulmaster re trying to hide your casting (without using Metamagic):


Hiding Your Casting
It is possible that your character might decide to cast an
arcane spell anyway. In order to distract witnesses from the
casting or to make them think a magic item was used, as a
Bonus Action a character may attempt a Charisma
(Deception) or Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) skill check
(player’s choice) with DC equal to 8 + the level of the spell
being cast. If the character fails his or her check and the DM
rules that there is a witness, the character will be receiving a
visit from the Cloaks.

http://dndadventurersleague.org/mulmaster_cloaks_logsheet.pdf


It might make more sense to make that an opposed roll against either Perception or Arcana of the NPC.

[Tanarii]

Do PCs get to know automatically someone is casting a spell even granting not knowing what the exact spell is just that spellcasting is being done?Yep. NPCs too.

[Slipperychicken]

How could one know someone is casting a spell when identifying a spell being cast is not an official ability of the game? Is it fair the npc automatically knows a spell was being cast? Should there at least be a Knowledge Arcana check or something? Do PCs get to know automatically someone is casting a spell even granting not knowing what the exact spell is just that spellcasting is being done?

Spellcasting involves distinct vocalizations, precise and delicate hand-movement, and often the use of props. I think of it like a stage magician saying nonsense-words while flicking his wand about.

If it means anything, the art often shows visual effects for spellcasting, like vague colored energy flowing about a caster's hands or eyes.

[Saeviomage]

"Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren’t the source of the spell’s power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion."

I always took this to mean that not only are you saying something out loud, You are saying a specific set of words in a very specific way. This means that A) Unless you have subtle spell you cannot hide the fact that you are casting a spell. Anyone close enough to hear you talking in a normal tone of voice can hear you. B) Less related but I always ruled it to mean you can't mumble/whisper the spell to try and hide it. Doing so messes up the verbal component.

The specificity does NOT cover volume. Only pitch and resonance.
The requirement for resonance could preclude whispering (although the spell might call for whispering, which itself could be considered a specific resonance). However you can speak incredibly quietly without whispering, certainly quietly enough for it to go unnoticed if there's a conversation going on nearby.

In general, allowing surreptitious use of spells is going to promote the non combat aspects of the game. If you demand that all spells are flashy and obvious, then your wizard is going to take fireball and tune out during social encounters, which I would argue isn't a good thing.

[jas61292]

The specificity does NOT cover volume. Only pitch and resonance.
The requirement for resonance could preclude whispering (although the spell might call for whispering, which itself could be considered a specific resonance). However you can speak incredibly quietly without whispering, certainly quietly enough for it to go unnoticed if there's a conversation going on nearby.

In general, allowing surreptitious use of spells is going to promote the non combat aspects of the game. If you demand that all spells are flashy and obvious, then your wizard is going to take fireball and tune out during social encounters, which I would argue isn't a good thing.

I kinda feel the exact opposite. If you are going to allow anyone to basically have a Sorcerer class ability, but without needing the resources a sorcerer would, you take away from the one class that is supposed to be good in these situations. Anyone can use spells socially, but you have to take things into account, one of which is that people are not stupid, and know what magic is and what it looks like. Getting around that fact is part of the challenge, not something to just gloss over.

[Roughishguy86]

You are the DM therefore the ruling is at your discretion. So technically you cannot be wrong.


However as far as RAW goes i think you might have been wrong.

[Knaight]

How could one know someone is casting a spell when identifying a spell being cast is not an official ability of the game? Is it fair the npc automatically knows a spell was being cast? Should there at least be a Knowledge Arcana check or something? Do PCs get to know automatically someone is casting a spell even granting not knowing what the exact spell is just that spellcasting is being done?

Seriously?

How could one know that somebody is loosing arrows at them where noticing incoming arrows is not an official ability of the game? How could one know that stone is a hard material when material hardness detection is not an official ability of the game? How could one know someone is trying to skewer them with a spear when identifying aggressive movements as distinct from gestures is not an official ability of the game?

Characters are assumed to have a baseline of capabilities that most real world people do, like seeing stuff. Spells explicitly have a whole bunch of components that make it really obvious when someone is casting them. Either that or they're just gesturing, making spell specific noises, and pulling materials out of a pouch; the spell is the reasonable assumption. Detecting specific spells is a murkier matter, but detecting spells is pretty clear cut.