close quarters vs teleport

[keterys]

Only - if teleportation allows you to teleport out of manacles (and presumably other held/worn items)

As far as I know, it doesn't. It does let you teleport away from grabbers and such, but Close Quarters neither grabs nor immobilizes so teleportation applying to those gotchas wouldn't necessarily work...

The best argument is the "How?" one that applies for mutable, gaseous, teleporting whatever... for teleporting you'd excuse it by saying that the rogue counted as baggage effectively. For others, it's trickier. Trickier than proning an ooze

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Phasing is really an interesting example...

I think the rules are not clear and there is no definite answer possible just using the rules, so it comes to a ruling... How about looking at page 42 and finding an Arcana Check DC for the Rogue to teleport with his target? If in doubt grenade roll it out.

 

[lukelightning]

I'd say you can teleport along with the target, but only because I think it sounds cooler, not because of any rules judgment. If I was feeling cruel, I'd say it works like a Star Trek transporter malfunction... "sure, you teleport along with the Eldritch Giant Warpcaster, but you've also switched minds with it..."

 

[Ryujin]

This is an excellent discussion.

I might just be changing my opinion.

Those are always the best discussions

 

[Infiniti2000]

I think a related argument is whether you allow a mount to teleport (or phase, etc.) with its rider. If you don't allow this then you have a slight inconsistency IMO for allowing the rogue to tag along in essentially a non-physical manner. It's different for flight or climbing or burrowing or swimming however.

 

[Ryujin]

I believe that we had a discussion that touched on that, not too long ago. IIRC it came down to whether it was a benefit provided by the mount, in text, which would then require the Mounted Combat feat(?).

 

[unan oranis]

I think a related argument is whether you allow a mount to teleport (or phase, etc.) with its rider. If you don't allow this then you have a slight inconsistency IMO for allowing the rogue to tag along in essentially a non-physical manner. It's different for flight or climbing or burrowing or swimming however.

Hmm, well except that close quarters requires that you be smaller than the victim (who must be at least large in size).

More a case of your mount teleporting and whether or not you go along with it.

 

[DreamChaser]

As far as I know, it doesn't. It does let you teleport away from grabbers and such...

It does...the teleport ability specifically states: Being immobilized or restrained doesn’t prevent a target from teleporting. If a target teleports away from a [BOLD]physical restraint[/BOLD], a monster’s grasp, or some other immobilizing effect that is located in a specific space, the target is no longer immobilized or restrained.

The core issue with Close Quarters as I see it is that the mechanism that describes the movement is unclear. It could be inferred that the rogue is attaching himself to the enemy except that the rogue can use the power on phasing / insubstantial / swarm foes. Thus, this inference is suspect.

The idea is general "stickiness" and the power specifies that the rogue can move with the target but it doesn't have the teleport keyword or grant phasing.

As a compromise, I think it would be fair interpret the rule to be that if the movement uses a mode of movement that you do not possess, the Close Quarters combat only works if you are still able to reach the target by shifting twice your speed. This means that flying up to a dangling platform, phasing through a wall to an unreachable chamber, teleporting across a 4 square pool of lava with no path around, or teleporting 20 squares away would trump the power but an eladrin or shadar-kai would not be able to ignore the power.

This avoids overpowering the ability by granting the rogue powers that aren't called out in the exploit but keeps it functional.

DC

 

[unan oranis]

I think in this case as the bad guy was using an interrupt action the Close Quarters should have failed. The teleport goes off before the attack, this means that the bad guy is no longer adjacent so the attack has no legal target.

Naw, the close quarters was already in effect. The interrupt was triggered by the rogue attacking while riding the victim around the room... sorry for the confusion.

At this point I had conceded to the players point of view - so this next situation was a "weird" result of the ruling... with just 3hp left the monster was guaranteed to die even though he had an interrupt-teleport qued up.

 

[keterys]

It does...the teleport ability specifically states: Being immobilized or restrained doesn’t prevent a target from teleporting. If a target teleports away from a [BOLD]physical restraint[/BOLD], a monster’s grasp, or some other immobilizing effect that is located in a specific space, the target is no longer immobilized or restrained.

Right - which doesn't help a person who is manacled, for example. They'd teleport to a different space, and still be manacled. Assuming a definition of manacles that matches the usual ones - ie, heavy duty handcuffs chained together. Any more than they'd teleport away and no longer take ongoing damage from a swarm because they left behind the little creatures biting them, or ongoing acid and fire cause they left behind those effects, or no longer diseased because they left behind harmful viruses and bacteria, etc.

Being manacled, mind you, wouldn't immobilize someone. You can still move around while manacled.

As a compromise, I think it would be fair interpret the rule to be that if the movement uses a mode of movement that you do not possess

I think any DM that rules that you can't use Close Quarters on a dragon to hang on while it flies around is doing a disservice to their players. That's the epitome of the kind of effect that it's there for.

Allowing teleport or phasing through a wall, or swarming through a tiny opening, to get out of it is pretty viable. I actually find the phasing and swarming methods work best, because the rogue is taking up space in the movement. You can justify tagging along for a teleport, but the rogue's "space" doesn't fit through the phasing or tiny opening so they might get lose there. Or the creature can't move themselves through, because their movement is constrained by the rogue as well holding onto them. That's one option too. Eh.

Thankfully, I haven't had a player with the power to worry about it, but it's high enough level that you'd expect the teleport option to just come up, and I don't see that ruling against the rogue on it really adds anything to the game.