5' step, partial actions and haste

[KarinsDad]

I think you are forgetting (or choosing to ignore) two things:

1. The FAQ clearly addressed this and clarified the rule.

2. The 5-foot step is a minor positional adjustment and not really movement (no AoO, you can still do a Full Round Action, etc.) It really has NOTHING whatsoever to do with how fast you move, an is only connected to movement in that if you move otherwise, you don't get a free minor adjustment as well.

Actually, I am not forgetting anything. I just think the 5 foot rule is a minor issue in the bigger picture.

And, just because a rule is in the FAQ does not mean that it was either well thought out, or that it makes the most sense.

A rules forum is not just here to discuss what the rules are, but also to discuss whether rules are good, bad, or indifferent. You can jump up and down and shout that the rule is in the FAQ over and over again and it will not change the fact that that rule might not be the best one available.

I look for consistency and simplicity in a set of rules. Not a hard line "this is the best way to do it because this is what is written in the rules".

To me, the only one 5 foot per round rule is fine for normal situations, but it is inadequate for unique situations like Haste or Shot on the Run. Hence, it is an inferior rule, especially in conjunction with AoO rules, since it can create questions for DMs to deal with when dealing with these more unique situations.

Charge is a totally seperate issue and should not be debated in this thread.

Why?

To you, the important question is whether you can get two 5-foot moves in when hasted for the original example posted.

To me, the important question is how to resolve an entire series of Haste problems for which the original example posted is just one of several.


So, I will bring in any example I feel like which supports my contentions and what I consider important to discuss.

 

[Artoomis]

Why?

To you, the important question is whether you can get two 5-foot moves in when hasted for the original example posted.

To me, the important question is how to resolve an entire series of Haste problems for which the original example posted is just one of several.


So, I will bring in any example I feel like which supports my contentions and what I consider important to discuss.

Ah, but Magnus started this thread looking for answers on the limited issue of 5' steps. I, for one, will not be party to hijacking his thread to go off on other (even if related) issues.

Magnus: I'd say you've got pretty much all the information about 5'-steps that there is. The rest is up to you. Just out of curiousity, what is your current opinion on the topic?

 

[KarinsDad]

If you do not allow an extra 5'- step than you are ALSO not allowing ANY other movement if you take a 5' step - the two scenarios you proposed above would be illegal.

Are you sure?

In scenario 1, you could not take the 30' move because you took a 5'-step already this round.

So, you can partial charge, move 30 feet and attack, kill your opponent, and then cast a spell and move another 30 feet, and that's legal.

Result: 60 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

But, you cannot move 5 feet, cast a spell, move 30 feet, and cast another spell?

Result: 35 feet of movement, two spells.

in scenarios 2, you could not take the 5'-step because you already moved.

So, you can partial charge, move 30 feet and attack, kill your opponent, and then cast a spell and move another 30 feet, and that's legal.

Result: 60 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

But, you cannot cannot partial charge, move 30 feet and attack, kill your opponent, and then move 5' and cast a spell?

Result: 35 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

Simplicity itself. And, consistent with extisting rules for movement in a round to boot.

And, all of this makes sense to you.

Simplicity itself.

Hmmm. I don't think so. I think you are so stuck up on the one 5 foot move per round idea, that you are not looking at this clearly.

It does not make sense to me. You said that scenario 2 is invalid because you cannot take a 5' step after moving the partial charge, but there is no rule that you cannot move 5', 10', or any other number of feet after doing a partial charge when hasted. The only rules conflict in scenario 2 is that of moving both backwards and forwards in a round that you are charging. If you change scenario 2 to continuing your move forward (as opposed to backwards), your entire rationale for why it could not be done is invalid.


I think you are getting the 5' step option once per round confused with whether any 5 foot movement done during an action is permitted.

 

[Ristamar]

I could see this 5' debate going one way or the other, and I wouldn't have much of a problem with it either way. Both sides have their own merits. Personally, I've always used the only 5' per round interpretation, though I keep thinking the Sage once leaned the other way, saying you could take another 5' step if you're hasted. *shrug*

Regardless, the 5' step is inherently strange in terms of visualization and realism (whether it's a pixie or a great wyrm, you still only get a 5' adjustment), and I don't think the logic in the existing mechanics can be used to extrapolate, let alone dictate, a clear answer.

Perhaps someone should simply write Skip again, ask what the official ruling on the matter is, and also politely ask him to explain the reasoning behind said ruling.

 

[Artoomis]

I think you are getting the 5' step option once per round confused with whether any 5 foot movement done during an action is permitted.

Au contrare, mon ami. No action actually allows you to take a 5'-step. The rule is you may take a 5'-step once in any round you take NO OTHER MOVEMENT. Because this rule might be confusing in some situations, we have a list of actions that would not prohibit a 5'-step, but in no way do those actions "allow" a 5-foot step in that any time you do them you get a 5'-step regardless of whatever else you do that round.

If that was the case, you could take TWO 5'-steps in a regular round with two MEAs. I think we all know that two 5'-steps with two MEAs is not legal.

That's why I said that if one states that only one "5'-step" may be taken per round, one is also saying that no other movement is allowed in that round.

The 60' vs. 35' of movement argument seems good on the surface, until you realize that a 5'-step is SPECIAL in that it doesn't really count as movement and you cannot take any movement actions (including charging) if you take a 5'-step.

This is, indeed, very simple. Take a 5'-step (to avoid an AoO or for other reasons) and get no other movement. That's about the simplest rule there is.

Stop thinking about a 5'-step as being movment and start thinking about is as a small position adjustement you can take when you could not otherwise move (because of your other actions), and I think it all becomes clear.

In a nutshell, what I'm saying is that:

1. The rules could be interpreted two ways, but the FAQ is "official", so that means the actual, "offical" rule is only one "5'-step" per round. Follow whatever rules you like, but that's the "offical" one - read the intro to the FAQ for it's "offical" status.

2. IF you follow the FAQ, it is really, really simple to do, as I've shown.

3. IF you don't follow the FAQ and operate with the partial action not "seeing" the regular actions(s), that's fairly simple, too (though I suspect with a few hidden traps having to do with things that are defined by "rounds" rather than "actions").

 

[Hypersmurf]

So, you can partial charge, move 30 feet and attack, kill your opponent, and then cast a spell and move another 30 feet, and that's legal.

Result: 60 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

Correct.

But, you cannot move 5 feet, cast a spell, move 30 feet, and cast another spell?

Result: 35 feet of movement, two spells.

Correct. A charge is a special case that allows you to move when you normally couldn't. In a normal round, you can charge 60 feet and attack, but you can only move 30 feet if you want to cast a spell. That's how charges work. They let you move further than you normally would.

Use a partial attack action instead of a partial charge for this example.

You can attack, move 30 feet, and cast a spell.
Result: 30 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

You can cast a spell, move 30 feet, and cast another spell.
Result: 30 feet of movement, two spells.

So, you can partial charge, move 30 feet and attack, kill your opponent, and then cast a spell and move another 30 feet, and that's legal.

Result: 60 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

Correct.

But, you cannot cannot partial charge, move 30 feet and attack, kill your opponent, and then move 5' and cast a spell?

Result: 35 feet of movement, one attack, and one spell.

Incorrect. Of course you can do that. But, that 5' move requires a Move Action. It's "moving five feet", not "a five foot adjustment". It would be subject to Movement AoOs. It would allow you to draw a sword or ready a shield in conjunction. It would preclude a full attack action, if you were attacking instead of casting. You're voluntarily moving less than your Move Action allows.

The 5' adjustment is a special action that isn't always available - for instance, after your partial charge. But if you have an MEA going spare, you can move up to your speed - which you're doing in both the above examples. In one case you're just choosing to cover less distance.

-Hyp.

 

[IanB]

I really do believe allowing 2 5' steps is too powerful for a mere 3rd level spell.

It probably isn't much of a problem at lower levels. However, at higher levels, where my group at least is playing a lot of the time now, the difference between winning and losing a fight often comes down to how many full attacks the really powerful front-line fighters get. Allowing 2 5' steps makes them a LOT more powerful. At low levels, it is the difference between, say, 2 attacks and 3. At 16th level and up, it is the difference between 2 and 5, and at those levels that is a big difference in damage - and don't say that it isn't a big deal because those last attacks don't have a very high plus; it isn't terribly hard for a 16th or 17th level fighter to have total attacks of +30/+30/+25/+20/+15 when hasted.

Allowing 2 5' steps means that a fighter can attack one opponent, drop him, move 10' and full attack another opponent, maybe a spell caster. It means that she could adjust all the way through a giant's reach without provoking a single attack of opportunity, after having taken a move equivalent action. It makes the character much more flexible and powerful in combat than they were, to a point where I think it is too good.

Haste is already quite strong for a 3rd level spell. Allowing 2 5' adjustments under it makes it too good, in my opinion, regardless of the minutiae of the rules wording.

 

[Magnus]

Magnus: I'd say you've got pretty much all the information about 5'-steps that there is. The rest is up to you. Just out of curiousity, what is your current opinion on the topic?

i think that it clear that a character can only get one 5' adjustment per round. it seems to me that a lot of the argument for allowing more than one seems to treat it as movement and not an adjustment, which is what i was talking about in the intial Q. perhaps it's my fault for not being explicit enuff. but be that as it may, even tho i had no idea that this would spark of this much debate, i'm glad that i got so many viewpoints. it's really helped me get off the fence on it. i'm convinced now that u can only get one 5' adjustment per round.

thanks all

 

[Hypersmurf]

but be that as it may, even tho i had no idea that this would spark of this much debate...

Why do you think the first message I posted in this thread finished with "so I won't go there"?

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

The 60' vs. 35' of movement argument seems good on the surface, until you realize that a 5'-step is SPECIAL in that it doesn't really count as movement and you cannot take any movement actions (including charging) if you take a 5'-step.

To me, the single "5 foot once per round" rule is just one example of where there is a conflict. There is another conflict "only one movement direction with charge". There are probably others. Segregating these rules into per "overall action" resolves all of this.

To you, the 5 foot rule once per round works well with Haste. It solves the retroactive AoO problem by not allowing any additional movement that entire round.

But, there is no reason for it. Why should a standard action while Hasted not allow EVERY possibility in combat as when not Hasted?

Just the concept of:

Moving 30 feet in a partial charge and then moving 30 feet and casting is allowed.
Moving 5 feet in a partial attack and then moving 30 feet and casting is not allowed

seems alien and inconsistent. Huh?

Totally unnecessary.


The problem comes in that since the FAQ limits it to one per round, it also limits what you can do with two separate actions when hasted. A slowed person can move 5 feet every round and attack. A hasted person does not get to do that AND do his normal standard action also (he is limited to no movement). This to me is an inconsistency within the rules which does not need to exist.

If you change most of the once per round type rules to once per "overall action" (i.e. partial, standard, or full round), then the Haste and Shot on the Run problems disappear, including the retroactive AoO ones. The only rule of this nature which I would keep at once per round is the Quicken Spell rule. This should be there for balance reasons.

Even the one AoO per round rule can be one AoO per “overall action” since once you use up either your partial or normal action when hasted, it would reset. So, it would be very difficult to get two AoOs in during a round for someone without Combat Reflexes. Yes, some bizarre rare set of circumstances like you trying to grapple on your first action an unarmed person who tries to punch you in return with an AoO, could result in you getting an AoO, and then you could have a normal AoO later, but who cares? It would be extremely rare.


And to me, the 5 foot rule is a minor issue.

The major issue is how to come up with a set of rules that are consistent for both Hasted and non-Hasted situations. Hence, the "per overall action" concept which resolves those.