Pitiful Monk, your speed impresses me not.

[Antikinesis]

Having your cake and eating it too.

The ER spell desc. says it doubles your speed, with no qualifiers in that sentence. There's another sentence that mentions fleetness of foot, which looks like "flavor text" to most of us... but, apparently not all. If you must have a literal interpretation of every word . . .

The spell doubles your speed. The spell also grants fleetness of foot. There is no mention of restrictions for methods of movement. To satisfy your need to link these two sentences together, I suppose our flying ER'ed wizard is flapping his feet for that extra boost of aerodynamic ability. Hope he's wearing tight shoes.

---AK

Another think people are forgetting is that the MM states that creatures can use the "run action".

Not runnning.

The "run action" is the ability to increase your speed by x4 in order to move quicker. It is an explicit reference to the rules of increased movement rates in the PHB.

When on foot, this is called "running".

When flying, this might be called "jetting" or "soaring" or some such.


So, what happens when you apply this to the Fly spell?

According to the double speed of any type position, the Fly spell would be doubled with the ER spell.

But, what does the Fly spell have to do with being quick of foot? Nothing.

I understand that a single sentence within the description of the ER spell states that it doubles your speed. And, if that were the only sentence in the description of the spell in the PHB, I would agree with people.

But, taking the entire description of Expeditious Retreat states differently. Some people call it flavor text. I call it part of the description of the spell and how the spell works. I do not drop sentences out of spell descriptions, just because they do not fit my conception of how the spell should work. YMMV.

 

[Chun-tzu]

I don't think Expeditious Retreat is meant to apply to flying. The guideline that I use is, "what was the intent of the guy who wrote the spell?" And by my thinking, if he had intended for the spell to double any and all forms of speed, he would have said so explicitly. The description merely says "doubles your speed" because there are no races in the PHB that can fly.

I don't think it's overpowering to allow the spell to be used that way, but I wouldn't allow it if I were DM. The spell is fine as it is.

 

[IceBear]

Well, I could argue that the intent of the spell was that it only doubles your speed if you are retreating

The SRD states "Speed" not "walking speed"or "ground speed" but speed. To me, the intent of the spell is to double your speed of movement that's it.

Also, by saying "doubles your speed" it is stating all forms of speed. If he didn't intend for all forms of speed, then the SRD would say it was limited to walking speed, but because it doesn't then it is logical that it means all forms of speed.

IceBear

 

[Rogue]

 [color=white]
                                Expeditious       Retreat
                                   /               \
                                  /                 \
                                 /     The act or process of withdrawing.        
                                /
Acting or done with speed and efficiency.

[/color]

I don't see anything about "running on foot" up there... seems pretty cookie-cut to me. It means to get the hell outta there, and nothing more.

I don't think Expeditious Retreat is meant to apply to flying. The guideline that I use is, "what was the intent of the guy who wrote the spell?" And by my thinking, if he had intended for the spell to double any and all forms of speed, he would have said so explicitly. The description merely says "doubles your speed" because there are no races in the PHB that can fly.

[EDIT] Same old arguments getting old, so I decided to spice things up a bit.

 

[KarinsDad]

I understand, but in the SRD, they simply state it doubles your speed and jumping distance. I know the SRD spell descriptions aren't gospel (yet), but if they felt those "fluff" text lines were important I think they would have included them.

Also, in one of the Power Plays in Dragon Magazine, I think (think!!!) they had some example of using ER while swimming.

IceBear

Perhaps.

But, I always go with the PHB and do not rely on the fact that some editor at WotC knew what he was doing when he stripped stuff out for the SRD.

 

[IceBear]

Perhaps.

But, I always go with the PHB and do not rely on the fact that some editor at WotC knew what he was doing when he stripped stuff out for the SRD.

Oh, I agree it has to be taken with a grain of salt until that section of the SRD has been offically released. However, it is currently enough proof for me to allow ER to work on any movement form.

IceBear

 

[Number47]

What everyone seems to be forgetting here is that the spell is Expeditious Retreat. If you cast it, you are only allowed to retreat. No other direction of movement is possible. It says it right in the spell name, so it has to be right!

 

[KarinsDad]

What everyone seems to be forgetting here is that the spell is Expeditious Retreat. If you cast it, you are only allowed to retreat. No other direction of movement is possible. It says it right in the spell name, so it has to be right!

Nobody likes a smart alec.

 

[EOL]

I think this thread reflects one of the few things I dislike about 3E. It seems to have reduced DM's ability to think for themselves. 3E has done a lot to tie up loop holes, answer question, tighten rules abuses, and quantify everything. Which often times means that DM's rather than making their own judgement view the 3E PHB as if it were holy scripture, incapable of being incorrect.

Before 3E everything wasn't spelled out, things had to be tweaked all the time. Judgement calls were a fact of life, and lots of things didn't have associated rules. Look at ER it's a first level spell, it's already led to the most broken magic item in the DMG (boots of striding and springing) perhaps those people who think it should be applied to flying think that it hasn't caused enough damage.

And if you need an in game justification most of these creatures that ER could really be abused on already have the equivlant of supernatural movement, which I would have no problem declaring an enhancement bonus which therefore would not stack with ER.

The whole trend of well the rules don't say, ducks a large measure of the responsibility as a DM.

 

[Number47]

Nobody likes a smart alec.

Everybody loves smart alecs!