Feather Fall in Rules Compendium?

[irdeggman]

I don't understand the problem.

First, a character is not flat-footed outside of combat. Flat-footed is defined in terms of being in combat, i.e., in initiative. No combat, no initiative, no flat-footed. It's irrelevant that feather fall is an immediate action, outside of combat, just as it's irrelevant that stone shape is a standard action, outside of combat. Outside of combat, feather fall is just a spell you cast to slow a fall.

I don't think so.

What is your AC outside of combat?

Do you have full AC and all of Dex bonus to it up until you roll for initiative and then suddenly lose it until your turn in the initiative order?

I do think that turns and rounds do not exist outside of combat though.

It has to be understood that the D&D combat system is very vague in its design and so it doesn't always make sense or follow a totally "logical" path.

Second, if you are in combat and flat-footed, I don't understand why it's so unthinkable that someone deliberately trying to make a wizard's teammate fall might actually succeed in doing so. Why is it so difficult to believe that a wizard could be caught gawking by the sudden eruption of combat?

This I agree with this totally.

 

[Vegepygmy]

Second, if you are in combat and flat-footed, I don't understand why it's so unthinkable that someone deliberately trying to make a wizard's teammate fall might actually succeed in doing so. Why is it so difficult to believe that a wizard could be caught gawking by the sudden eruption of combat?

I see the events (accidental fall, enemy pushes you flat-flooted) as equally unexpected, surprising, and gawk-producing. The only difference is that one is defined as "combat" and the other is not. I see no reason why that difference should dictate a different result. Thus, I see the rule as producing inconsistent results (in the special case of feather fall).

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I see the events (accidental fall, enemy pushes you flat-flooted) as equally unexpected, surprising, and gawk-producing. The only difference is that one is defined as "combat" and the other is not. I see no reason why that difference should dictate a different result. Thus, I see the rule as producing inconsistent results (in the special case of feather fall).

The difference is that things that happen to you outside of combat usually occur on your movement, when it might be argued you are in a status that is the moral equivalent of on your initiative. We are on fuzzy ground here.

My vote would be that specific text of the spell overrides the general rule. That does imply that if you cast Feather Fall to save your neck when surprised, you are denied a Swift Action during you upcoming initiative. I think this is consistent with the intent of both the spell text and the rule change.

However, those who assert an ambush is a different things are not being ridiculous. I just do not think such would be the best way to resovle this ambiguity.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

What is your AC outside of combat?

Your AC if you spring a trap (for example) outside of combat is your full AC. Because -- say it with me -- there's no flat-footed outside of combat. Flat-footedness is defined by intiaitive order.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I see the events (accidental fall, enemy pushes you flat-flooted) as equally unexpected, surprising, and gawk-producing.

That's absolutely fine, but none of those things are governed by the rules. Flat-footed is. If you choose to view things as "equally unexpected," again that's fine, but it doesn't match the rules.

So why not change how you choose to view things, so as to match the rules?

 

[Deset Gled]

Second, if you are in combat and flat-footed, I don't understand why it's so unthinkable that someone deliberately trying to make a wizard's teammate fall might actually succeed in doing so. Why is it so difficult to believe that a wizard could be caught gawking by the sudden eruption of combat?

I don't think this is hard to believe at all. However, I believe it is the complete opposite of the original intention of Feather Fall. FF was originally written to specifically be castable at any time - even if the wizard is caught completely off guard. Changing FF to an immediate action changes this, effectively changing the nature and inherent design of the spell.

I don't think that the change is necessarily a good one or a bad one. I just think it's important to notice when these type of changes happen.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

I don't think this is hard to believe at all. However, I believe it is the complete opposite of the original intention of Feather Fall. FF was originally written to specifically be castable at any time - even if the wizard is caught completely off guard. Changing FF to an immediate action changes this, effectively changing the nature and inherent design of the spell.

I disagree. Feather fall works just like it always has ... with the single exception of the wizard being unable to save someone else who is falling as a result of still another someone's combat action. And even then, that's only true when the wizard is flat-footed.

That's "changing the nature and inherent design of the spell"? That's "the complete opposite of the original intention" of the spell? Seriously? That tiny, tiny fraction of the cases to use feather fall?

If you really think so, okay. But I sure don't. As far as I can tell, feather fall works perfectly well and is all but identical to how it's always been.

 

[pawsplay]

However, the Rules Compendium specifically cites Feather Fall as an example of moving from a Free Action to an Immediate Action.

It can be any kind of action. The spell states you can cast it any time. The only consequence of it being an immediate action is that you cannot then make another immediate action.

 

[irdeggman]

Your AC if you spring a trap (for example) outside of combat is your full AC. Because -- say it with me -- there's no flat-footed outside of combat. Flat-footedness is defined by intiaitive order.

So by this logic you have full AC until you start combat and then suddenly you lose your Dex Bonus until it is your turn in the initiative order.


Now traps either make attack rolls (ranged or melee), cause a saving throw (like spells) or are never miss.

Those that make attack rolls must take advantage of the "surprise" round - because - say it with me - you can't make an attack roll unless you are in a combat situation. Surprise counting as the pre-round combat situation.


Now per the Rules Compendium pg 7

under Action types

"During a normal round, you can perform a standard action and a move action, or you can perform a full-round action. .. . ."

Action types do not exist outside of the rounds and rounds only refer to combat rounds.

So. . .using a strict reading of the RAW you can never cast a spell outside of combat since they take an action type, which doesn't exist outside of combat - and you are not entitled to until it is your turn in the initiative order.

Now some "free" actions, like talking specifically state that you can do them at any time (so it is not dependent on being in a round situation).

 

[NewJeffCT]

It can be any kind of action. The spell states you can cast it any time. The only consequence of it being an immediate action is that you cannot then make another immediate action.

If you change it back to a free action, then you're overriding the Rules Compendium that cites Feather Fall as an example of now being an Immediate Action.

As I stated above, an Immediate Action is listed in the Rules Compendium as not being able to be used when flat-footed (i.e., before your first turn in combat) - other than that, it can be used at any time.

Feather Fall had been played since 1E days as a Free Action, so it seemed odd to me that it was changed in the later days of 3.5 to an Immediate Action.