D&D 5E arcane archer grasping arrow and movement

[auburn2]

According to grasping arrow:
"The creature hit by the arrow ...... takes 2d6 slashing damage the first time on each turn it moves 1 foot or more without teleporting."

So first time each turn means I can get this 2d6 multiple times in a round. For example my 5th level AA hits bad guy with grasping arrow on his first attack, then follows that up with a martial adept pushing attack and get an extra 2d6 for "moving him the first time this turn". Druid goes next, it is a "new turn" so druid casts thorn whip and gets an extra 2d6 for moving him (on top of thorn whip damage). Wizard goes; new turn and decides and uses lightning lure to move him for another 2d6. Finally bad guys turn (new turn) and if he moves he takes 2d6 more ...

That is my interpretation of RAW, do I have it correct?

 

[commandercrud]

Only from your attack and his own movement. Not from the forced movements.

 

[jayoungr]

I read "on each turn" to mean "on each of the target's turns," not "on anyone's turn in a round."

 

[Charlaquin]

I suspect the intent is that forced movement doesn’t count, but I don’t have any evidence.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Yep. It says nothing about only its turns or only willing movement, so RAW you are correct. I'm somewhat inclined to think RAI may have been for willing movement on its own turns, which feels more typical of 5e balancing, but both of these are requirements they have fairly boilerplate language for that they could have employed here and didn't so who knows.

In any case, even the most blatant, over-the-top exploiting of this wouldn't make Arcane Archer one of the best Fighter subclasses. If you can find a way to get an enemy moving on other turns then you should reap the benefits of the RAW wording.

 

[auburn2]

Yep. It says nothing about only its turns or only willing movement, so RAW you are correct. I'm somewhat inclined to think RAI may have been for willing movement on its own turns, which feels more typical of 5e balancing, but both of these are requirements they have fairly boilerplate language for that they could have employed here and didn't so who knows.

In any case, even the most blatant, over-the-top exploiting of this wouldn't make Arcane Archer one of the best Fighter subclasses. If you can find a way to get an enemy moving on other turns then you should reap the benefits of the RAW wording.

Thanks. Agree completely on the 2nd paragraph, even if exploited it still does not make AA overpowered or even equivalent in combat to a lot of other buildseven if it is exploited. It does make this the best arcane shot though, especially since there is no save against it unless bad guy uses an action to try and end the effect.