D&D 5E (2014) Boots of Striding and Springing.......kinda lame

[jaelis]

No, it's less than what you said:

In that quote I was interested in exploring the consequences of your previous answer. I've already explained how I would play it myself.

 

[Caliban]

In that quote I was interested in exploring the consequences of your previous answer. I've already explained how I would play it myself.

Meh, didn't read it, didn't care.

 

[CapnZapp]

No, but I didn't want to change the setup you gave. If this is his plan, then I suggest he dashes this turn for a total speed of 60 ft. He walks 15 ft total, and jumps 30 ft, landing on the other side with 15 ft of move available.

If he can't or won't dash, then he walks 15 ft and then jumps his maximum possible distance of 15 ft, "landing" in the middle of the chasm and subsequently falling.

Sorry but now you're ruining my example... The chasm is 50 ft wide.

The point was to set up a situation where your speed is enough (to clear the chasm), and your jump distance is enough (to clear the chasm) - only, you need to "transcend the turn boundaries" to actually make the jump.

If you run it by the rules as you and I understand them: Brûtal will have to waste his entire turn moving only 5 ft backwards, and postponing the jump until next round, since the only position from which he'll make the jump in a single turn is from *exactly* ten ft away.

In other words: do you keep jumping when your turn ends, or do you start falling.

It really is all up to this question. But repeating what the Sage said does not bring any clarity.

Only by specifically adressing the issue - is there something special about running out of movement for your turn - can we determine our position on the "Kobold - Saelorn scale".

Myself: I completely understand the notion that turn restrictions should interfere with a good action scene. But I also completely understand Kobold when he points out we better have to, or everything starts getting way complicated.

So I guess I just want to point out that there's a difference between what the Sage actually says, and what he could say.

 

[Lanefan]

Only by specifically adressing the issue - is there something special about running out of movement for your turn - can we determine our position on the "Kobold - Saelorn scale".

The "Kobold - Saelorn Scale" - a sliding measure of just how far you get without any ground beneath you before you suddenly stop, and then fall. First identified and researched by a pre-eminent gravitational scientist from the mid-20th century named Wile E Coyote.

Myself: I completely understand the notion that turn restrictions should interfere with a good action scene. But I also completely understand Kobold when he points out we better have to, or everything starts getting way complicated.

To me it's just one more example of how slavery to the turn-based system just gets in the way.

Lanefan

 

[jaelis]

It really is all up to this question. But repeating what the Sage said does not bring any clarity.

It depends what you mean. I feel it's pretty clear how the sage would play it. If you want to argue that doesn't necessarily shed light on the RAW, that's OK with me.

 

[CapnZapp]

It depends what you mean. I feel it's pretty clear how the sage would play it. If you want to argue that doesn't necessarily shed light on the RAW, that's OK with me.

I agree in many ways.

But even if we assume Sage = RAW, and even if we assume everybody would instantly change their ways depending on what he says, he's still not specificially and uneqivocally stated anything that outright prevents the "across turns" interpretation.

Yes, he's come close, but I feel nothing short of outright talking about what happens when you run out of movement at the end of your turn will really be a definitive statement here (remember the two assumptions above).

Say a character is running along a street. Does he run 60 ft, stop while others take actions, run 60 ft more, stop again and so on?

The example might sound absurd, but it really goes to the heart of the issue.

Now my real point: I believe the reason why the Sage is expressing his answers in such a "political" way, narrowing down the scope of the questions, is precisely because he is aware how artificial the rules make the game feel.

In other words, he, you and I are all trying to eat the cake while still having it. We want clean-cut rules, yet we don't want to think about the cornercase implications.

If you can't jump longer than what a single round's movement allows you, that directly leads to a simple but absurd stop-go game world.

Ignoring this in the name of clean good fun is easy enough, but I still feel the Sage could talk alot more about this, how he came to make this ruling, what the alternatives are and so on.

 

[Plane Sailing]

I'm a little sad that they changed it from the traditional "30ft speed tirelessly for 12 hours" (striding) and "can jump 30ft forward, 15ft straight up or 9ft back" (springing) and adds +1 to AC. (1e DMG)

Those were the days, eh?

 

[Barolo]

I'm a little sad that they changed it from the traditional "30ft speed tirelessly for 12 hours" (striding) and "can jump 30ft forward, 15ft straight up or 9ft back" (springing) and adds +1 to AC. (1e DMG)

Those were the days, eh?

Well, I think we could add a new version with this nice list of abilities. But maybe we should call it "boots of striding, springing and evading"?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I like this example, because it shows the way it should work, assuming there are no interruptions. And for this circumstance, I'll say sure, what you describe makes sense. Implicitly, you've now told us how you understand one of the possible ways that might stop the jump being "immediately after" the run up: for you, the end of turn doesn't matter.

This isn't just a "for me" thing. This is how discrete turn modeling works, in general, for everyone. The end of a turn, in and of itself, has no impact on the events that occur within the world.

Turns are a way that we can measure what's actually happening within the game world, but how we chose to measure those actions can't possibly affect how those actions play out. We don't exist, after all (as far as the game world is concerned). It's not like the natural laws of that world actually change after someone draws a weapon; it's just that we find it to be a more convenient model if we approximate the interaction of opposing forces in six-second increments rather than continuously.

What about (a) making an Attack action?
(b) Making an attack with a bonus action?
(c) Casting a spell?
(d) Making a reaction?
(e) Making a saving throw for half damage from a spell?
(f) Failing a saving throw for that matter?
(g) being attacked?
(h) taking damage?

The answer for almost every case is that it depends on the specifics. If you're running north at a constant speed, and you (a) turn to fire your bow at an enemy to the east, is that going to mess up your momentum? Probably not. It's easy enough to visualize the scene, and there's no need to stop in order to fire (although it's significantly easier to visualize if you're using a short bow rather than a long bow). If you are instead running north at a constant speed and want to (a) swing your maul at an enemy you pass by, then that's going to be a bit trickier.

Bonus action attacks (b) would, likewise, depend on what's going on. If you're some ninja rogue with two short swords, then you could probably stab an enemy twice without slowing down, because that's something a ninja could do. If you're a raging berserker, then probably not, because you have to put a lot of momentum into your swing.

Does (c) casting a spell require you to slow down while running? I don't see why it would. You're waving your arms and chanting, but unless fatigue starts to set in, there's no reason to assume that you're even breathing heavily. It's not like the standard jump rules make an assumption of perfect form. (The rules are extremely generous in saying how far someone can jump, and how much room they need to get up to speed, but that's a separate matter.)

There are lots of types of reactions (d), so making a blanket rule for all of them would be ill-advised. As long as you're not running up to the edge and then delaying your action in order to jump across based on a certain trigger, I can't see why it would require more effort than making an attack or casting a spell as an action.

Making a saving throw for half damage (e) usually means that there's a wave of fire washing over the area, as from a Fireball spell or a dragon's breath weapon. In either case, it doesn't apply a significant amount force, so it's down to how you describe damage - which canonically varies from table to table. Did half of your skin get burned off? Then you're probably too distracted from the pain to continue running. The same goes for taking damage (h) in general. Was it a narrow miss which only burned away your luck and plot armor? Then you're fine and it doesn't interrupt your momentum.

If you fail a saving throw (f), would the effect that you were saving against alter your momentum? Are you paralyzed or sleeping now? Were you hit by a wave of force which pushed you back twenty feet (to the west, in this example)? If not, then you're probably still okay, barring the basic considerations of taking damage as described above.

If someone attacks you (g), what are you doing to defend yourself? If you're wearing heavy armor, and a giant is throwing a rock which bounces off of your armor, then that probably messed with your momentum. If you're in light armor, and someone is swinging at you, then there's no reason to assume that they either made contact or caused you to slow down, unless you used a reaction to parry or something.

Two points of further consideration:
1) The situations which I would argue against are also the ones which are less likely to actually come up during play. A rogue with a shortbow is much more likely to want to fire while moving to jump across a gap, than a barbarian or paladin is likely to want to run past a melee opponent.

2) The outcome of an action doesn't depend on whether or not you are "in combat" at the time. If your paladin in full plate armor is making a run to jump over a chasm, and a hidden giant (or pressure-based trap) throws a rock which bounces off of their armor, then that's going to interrupt the attempt equally whether or not you've called for initiative.

 

[Kobold Stew]

This isn't just a "for me" thing.

It absolutely is. You are offering subjective interpretations at every turn, making decisions about how the world should work and not accepting the possibility that a well-meaning, clear-thinking person might reach a different decision.

To give an example:

The answer for almost every case is that it depends on the specifics. If you're running north at a constant speed, and you (a) turn to fire your bow at an enemy to the east, is that going to mess up your momentum? Probably not. It's easy enough to visualize the scene, and there's no need to stop in order to fire (although it's significantly easier to visualize if you're using a short bow rather than a long bow). If you are instead running north at a constant speed and want to (a) swing your maul at an enemy you pass by, then that's going to be a bit trickier.

Based on your subjective assumptions about the efficacy of various weapons, two identical characters attempting the same action but with different weapons are judged differently. I have honestly never seen a DM insist on such arbitrariness. Your game, your rules, of course; but you know there are no rules in the PHB to support this.

You make assumptions about the mechanical possibilities of ninjas

because that's something a ninja could do.

,
spellcasting,

Does (c) casting a spell require you to slow down while running? I don't see why it would.

, and the effects of moving through a fireball and suffering physical damage from magic or combat

(e) usually means that there's a wave of fire washing over the area, as from a Fireball spell or a dragon's breath weapon. In either case, it doesn't apply a significant amount force, so it's down to how you describe damage - which canonically varies from table to table. Did half of your skin get burned off? Then you're probably too distracted from the pain to continue running. The same goes for taking damage (h) in general. Was it a narrow miss which only burned away your luck and plot armor? Then you're fine and it doesn't interrupt your momentum.

. Your answer makes subjective, personal decisions about what's possible concerning momentum with no reference to the rules in the PHB or the DMG. Is "momentum" even used in these contexts? I don't think so. Does "being distracted by pain"? No. Does the way that damage is narrated when hit points are reduced? No.

None of this is in the rules. We do, however, have the rules for the running long jump and magic items. Which are clear, even if they are (OP) "kinda lame."

Your answer here is also clear, that there are things that can interrupt a running long jump when it is spread between turns. And those times are...subject to the DM's call and context dependent.

This is no longer, as it has been, a question about rules (appealing to the PHB, to Sage Advice). If your answer is "it's always the DM's call" then there's no discussion. If your answer is "each of these opinions I have offered is objectively right, and it's not just a 'for me' thing" then I will continue respectfully to disagree with you.