D&D 5E If you use thunderstep but teleport less than 10 feet do you take damage?

[Baron Opal II]

Indeed, it's a bit a question of principle at least on my part, of people trying to impose specific views on an open edition like 5e. They can do whatever they want in their campaign, but trying, without any support from the actual rules, to claim to have the only interpretation of the Holy RAW is something that I have a problem with. Free your imagination, free your game.

Should that be your goal, I don't perceive you are demonstrating that well. To my eyes you come across as peevish and divisive. Poor writing can certainly be an issue. Your insistence that the wording is vague to the point of multiple valid interpretations seems to me as purely argumentative. If the RAW is that vague, it should be fairly straight-forward to determine the RAI.

Not that you're the only one with an axe to grind.

 

[glass]

All we know is that everything is resolved in a loosely defined 6 second combat round. In this thread I have pointed out that lightning bolts are not too fast to react to (certainly not 270,000 mph) because people can make Dexterity saves to avoid half damage.

I would not necessarily go that far. Although the lightning bolt itself may be incredibly fast, lightning always follows the path of least resistance. Therefore, for a caster to aim a lightning bolt, ISTM that the spell is actually preparing the path before the lightning itself is unleashed. That path forming, while quick, could be significantly be slower than the bolt itself. And if you can perceive the path forming, you can dodge it even if the bolt itself if too fast to dodge.

On the original question, I would probably rule that the caster takes the damage if they teleport within the range of the thunder. While the spell could be worded more clearly, in that it does leave room for a delay between disappearing and reappearing, that delay could be anything between Planck time and twenty-three years a few seconds. Therefore, I prefer to assume that if no delay is specified, then not delay occurs (or at least, no mechanically-meaningful delay). Introducing a delay would mean introducing a time period where the character did not exist anywhere, which is a can of worms I would prefer not to open.

_
glass.

 

[Irlo]

I would not necessarily go that far. Although the lightning bolt itself may be incredibly fast, lightning always follows the path of least resistance. Therefore, for a caster to aim a lightning bolt, ISTM that the spell is actually preparing the path before the lightning itself is unleashed. That path forming, while quick, could be significantly be slower than the bolt itself. And if you can perceive the path forming, you can dodge it even if the bolt itself if too fast to dodge.

I really like it when players and DMs imagine and describe spell effects that both match the mechanical spell descriptions and also provide interesting visuals or incidental effects. The idea of a perceptible path forming for a lightning bolt during spell casting but before completion is awesome. If it gets countered, the path fades away and no bolt appears.

 

[James Gasik]

I guess that could explain it, but again, the spell doesn't say that's what it does, so I have to assume it, like a blue dragon's breath weapon, are significantly slower than natural electricity.

Magic Missile, on the other hand, is either super fast, or has homing properties.

So I was watching a video on youtube, and while I couldn't find any source, I heard a claim that if you jump more distance than your speed you have to complete the jump on the next turn. If that's true, does that mean someone is hanging in the air for 6 seconds?

 

[Maxperson]

So we agree that a standard action which can also actually be something so quick that it can be done while moving or attacking is actually shorter than things can be done as reactions ?

Yes and no. Some things if done as a reaction, like a sword swing will be quick, but not instantaneous quick. If done as an action(no such thing as standard action), it will not be as fast as the sword swing reaction. Movement, though, isn't going to be any faster as a reaction than an action. Other things like movement wouldn't. You don't walk or run faster just because you are reacting, than you would if you were acting.

Is someone disengaging leaving reach ?

Does disengage specifically beat the general OA rule?

Is someone going invisible leaving reach ?

See above.

Is someone using etherealness leaving reach ? All of these could be crawling away. Speed has nothing to do with it. Again, you would have to prove that it's the "speed" of teleportation (I'm using quotes) since you have been unable to prove that there is any definitive "speed" to teleportation, teleporting 5 feet in "an instant" with its casting time of one action is actually probably much slower than stepping 5 feet away) that prevents the OA.

WOW!!!! You're seriously giving a bunch of false equivalences that have specific rules that beat the general one and then using those as some sort of proof that you are right?! That's some some chutzpah.

Teleport has no specific rule that beats the general OA rule, yet OA exempts it. Why? Because instantaneous speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed!

Again wrong, the PH says: "You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction." Is someone pushing you causing you to move too fast too ?

No. That's example of a stupid rule for balance reasons. One that I have changed for my game just for that reason. There is no rational in game reason(unlike with teleport) why you would be attacked for walking 5 feet out of reach, but not being moved 5 feet out of reach at the same speed.

So it's indeed SPLIT into two (according to you, for me, there certainly can be three).

Consecutive is not a split. Teleport happens, THEN thunder happens. Two phases, no split.

So you have split an instantaneous effect into two instantaneous "phases", congratulations, you have contradicted yourself.

No. You're just so excited to try and catch me at one, that you're inventing contradictions that don't exist.

 

[Irlo]

Teleport has no specific rule that beats the general OA rule, yet OA exempts it. Why? Because instantaneous speeeeeeeeeeeeeeed!

That's one way to explain it, but it's simply not rules-based. Nothing in the text indicates that it's the speed of the teleport that prevents the OA and there are other valid ways to explain it.

I suppose one can argue that there are no other valid ways to explain it, but that would be both unsupported by rules and strangely dismissive. After all, any change of position that doesn't use one's own movement is exempted from OAs, and no one would suggest that those all of those changes of position are instantaneous.

 

[Maxperson]

That's one way to explain it, but it's simply not rules-based. Nothing in the text indicates that it's the speed of the teleport that prevents the OA and there are other valid ways to explain it. x

I suppose one can argue that there are no other valid ways to explain it, but that would be both unsupported by rules and strangely dismissive. After all, any change of position that doesn't use one's own movement is exempted from OAs, and no one would suggest that those all of those changes of position are instantaneous.

With the exception of pushing, pulling, etc. against your will, every one of those other ways have specific vs. general rule reasons, as well as in-fiction reasons for existing. The former is there for balance reasons to prevent abuse.

There is only one exception that doesn't have a specific vs. general rules reason or balance reason for existing. Teleportation. Why is that? What other valid in-fiction reason is there for that rules exception to exist other than it happens too fast to react to?

 

[Irlo]

With the exception of pushing, pulling, etc. against your will, every one of those other ways have specific vs. general rule reasons, as well as in-fiction reasons for existing. The former is there for balance reasons to prevent abuse.

There is only one exception that doesn't have a specific vs. general rules reason or balance reason for existing. Teleportation. Why is that? What other valid in-fiction reason is there for that rules exception to exist other than it happens too fast to react to?

The teleportation exception certainly has balance reasons for existing.

My in-fiction explanation is that one can cast a spell, including teleportation, without dropping one's defenses. Simple as that.

 

[Maxperson]

The teleportation exception certainly has balance reasons for existing.

What?

My in-fiction explanation is that one can cast a spell, including teleportation, without dropping one's defenses. Simple as that.

Then why can't you cast a spell and withdraw? Casting the spell isn't relevant, as that's not a trigger for an OA, just like you can walk circles around someone and not trigger an OA. Only leaving the reach is. Your in-fiction explanation doesn't explain why leaving reach via teleport doesn't trigger the OA.

 

[Rabulias]

I'm a little annoyed about that rule being in the DMG, but I guess knowing is half the battle, thanks Maxperson. I'm so used to the DMG being terrible, I never check it for rulings on anything, lol.