DM's and Rules Lawyers - How Would You Rule this Deadly Situation?

[IndyPendant]

My error was based on a long-held belief in our group (inexplicable as it turns out) that a character could pass through an ally's space freely *unless* that character was in combat.

I'd just like to toss my hat in here and state that I have been GMing DND for years, and (my players may be horrified to read! : ) this is how I thought things worked as well, until a month or two ago, when we had an entirely different movement-rules question to look up, and I noticed that the combat limitation didn't exist.

I was lucky enough to discover it on my own, without it coming up in-game. But if it had come up before then, I might very well have ruled similarly. (Of course, while all of my players are excellent RPers, some of them are also excellent rules-lawyers too, and the cut-and-paste quotes would have flown at me literally seconds after my ruling...: )

Any they all adventured happily ever after...

And this, as well as learning from your mistakes, is the best possible ending indeed.

 

[Zephyrus]

colored text taken from the SRD

Moving through a Square
Friend: You can move through a square occupied by a friendly character, unless you are charging. When you move through a square occupied by a friendly character, that character doesn’t provide you with cover.

Opponent: You can’t move through a square occupied by an opponent, unless the opponent is helpless. You can move through a square occupied by a helpless opponent without penalty. (Some creatures, particularly very large ones, may present an obstacle even when helpless. In such cases, each square you move through counts as 2 squares.)

Ending Your Movement: You can’t end your movement in the same square as another creature unless it is helpless.

Overrun: During your movement or as part of a charge, you can attempt to move through a square occupied by an opponent.

Tumbling: A trained character can attempt to tumble through a square occupied by an opponent (see the Tumble skill).

Very Small Creature: A Fine, Diminutive, or Tiny creature can move into or through an occupied square. The creature provokes attacks of opportunity when doing so.

Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than it is.

A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is.

Designated Exceptions: Some creatures break the above rules. A creature that completely fills the squares it occupies cannot be moved past, even with the Tumble skill or similar special abilities.

Fundamentally one of two things should have been determined. Was the phantom steed a friend or not. If Yes, then he could move through it, however it would not have provided cover.

You conjure a Large, quasi-real, horselike creature. The steed can be ridden only by you or by the one person for whom you specifically created the mount. A phantom steed has a black head and body, gray mane and tail, and smoke-colored, insubstantial hooves that make no sound. It has what seems to be a saddle, bit, and bridle. It does not fight, but animals shun it and refuse to attack it.

The steed is defined that it only works for one person. Does this make it into an opponent or is it does it become simple an obstical. If it was designated as an opponent he could argue that while an opponent it is helpless (as is was unable to recieve direction from the caster) and thus move through it as if it was a helpless opponent. OR... more likly since he's taking somewhat of a middle ground. consider it an Obstical.

Obstacles: Like difficult terrain, obstacles can hamper movement. If an obstacle hampers movement but doesn’t completely block it each obstructed square or obstacle between squares counts as 2 squares of movement. You must pay this cost to cross the barrier, in addition to the cost to move into the square on the other side. If you don’t have sufficient movement to cross the barrier and move into the square on the other side, you can’t cross the barrier. Some obstacles may also require a skill check to cross.

On the other hand, some obstacles block movement entirely. A character can’t move through a blocking obstacle.

Flying and incorporeal creatures can avoid most obstacles.

If considered an Obstical its simple a matter if its a plain obstical or a blocking obstical. considering the description of the hooves (smoke colored and insubstantial) I would rull in favor that it would be a plain (not-blocking) obstical.

If treated as an Obstical I would allow some measure of cover to be gained (1/4 to 1/2 cover) as the fighter moves through the squares.


My ruling in the situation would be either that the Phantom Steed while not designated for the fighter would still be considered a 'friend' for the purposes of moving throught its square as it was created by a friendly caster. This the simplest solution. Alternatly I would rule that the Phantom Steed is neither friend or opponent to both the Golem and the fighter and thus would consider it an obstical. As such I would have granted the fighter most likly 1/4 cover (as he would provoke the attack on the 'near' side of the phantom steed vs the far side).

The minor AC bonus granted by 1/4 is not major but could potentialy aid in avoiding a hit from an AoO. This would also result in a more cinimatically attractive alternative as the fighter scrambles past the phantom steed only to not be quick enough or for the steed to interfear with the Golem enough the blow misses.

(appology for the long post)

 

[DM-Rocco]

Okay, without reading the rest of this to keep things uninfluenced, I would rule the following, if the square were the steed was the only way to get through and the steed was the property of a party memeber of neutral character to the party, then he could move through without penalty.

If the steed belonged to a fallen enemy but was not a war mount, like a riding horse for instance, I would say the same because non-war mounts quickly lose interest in combat if they don't have a rider.

If the steed belonged to a fallen enemy but was not a war mount, but had a naturally bad reaction to the PCs. like a nightmare, then I would say he would get attacked and could not move through a enemy occupied square.

If he belonged to an enemy and he was a war mount then the war mount would defend the area or his owner, even if dead, until the combat was over and a new owner claimed him or ahe could safely escape himself.

If he wanted to get through and it was an enemy, I would rule that he could tumble, if he had at least one point in the skill, through the enemy at a DC 25.

Without further information and a map of the area I can't comment further.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Oh, he could try to bull rush the steed too. The steed would most likely side step the fighter, otherwise he would have to force him out of the way or slay him.

 

[DM-Rocco]

Thanks for the replies everyone. Just a further question that was perhaps more at the heart of our DM's ruling.

Firstly, there seems to be a little confusion here in that a Phantom Steed is not a summoned creature. It is a conjured creation, not disimilar to an unseen servant. As far as I know, it has no awareness except to its riders instructions. Thus it does not avoid blows, get reflex saves etc. although it is assumed to float along avoiding obstacles when ridden (what happens if the rider falls asleep? Does it stop or keep going?).

Potentially then, is everyone else aside from the "designated driver" an opponent to the creation? Does it actively try to get out of the way of things? Can the creature attempt to hold its ground or is it unnecessary?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

Okay, I didn't know it was a summoned creature, knowiung that now, after the person who it was summoned for had died, the steed would have wandered to a place of safety until the person it was summoned for came and got it. Unless otherwise stated, such creatures that are summoned are like riding horses and shy away from combat and conflict. It was meant for riding, not combat. In fact, if it was ridden into combat, the rider should have had to make a DC 20 ride check for controling a mount in combat, DC 10 riding check if it is a war mount. If the rider had just died the last round, he would wait a round and then leave, either way, the fighter could just move through him since he would regard everyone else as friendly of neutral, thus why he doesn't attack.

Phantom Steed
Conjuration (Creation)
Level: Brd 3, Sor/Wiz 3
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: 0 ft.
Effect: One quasi-real, horselike creature
Duration: 1 hour/level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
You conjure a Large, quasi-real, horselike creature. The steed can be ridden only by you or by the one person for whom you specifically created the mount. A phantom steed has a black head and body, gray mane and tail, and smoke-colored, insubstantial hooves that make no sound. It has what seems to be a saddle, bit, and bridle. It does not fight, but animals shun it and refuse to attack it.
The mount has an AC of 18 (–1 size, +4 natural armor, +5 Dex) and 7 hit points +1 hit point per caster level. If it loses all its hit points, the phantom steed disappears. A phantom steed has a speed of 20 feet per caster level, to a maximum of 240 feet. It can bear its rider’s weight plus up to 10 pounds per caster level.
These mounts gain certain powers according to caster level. A mount’s abilities include those of mounts of lower caster levels.
8th Level: The mount can ride over sandy, muddy, or even swampy ground without difficulty or decrease in speed.
10th Level: The mount can use water walk at will (as the spell, no action required to activate this ability).
12th Level: The mount can use air walk at will (as the spell, no action required to activate this ability) for up to 1 round at a time, after which it falls to the ground.
14th Level: The mount can fly at its speed (average maneuverability).

 

[DM-Rocco]

Hi Everyone,

Sorry to take so long to ge back to you all - time difference between Sydney and the rest of the world and all that.

Firstly, the DM ruled that since the creation effect is effectively mindless and that the fighter in question was not the designated rider for the horse, he could not simply go through the squares as if it were an ally. In hindsight, the rules are quite specific in that there is no middle ground between ally and opponent. Unfortunately I suppose, our DM took one.

As such, the fighter was left having to make an opposed strength check to barge past the horse. Strangely enough, he failed. Attack of opportunity, whooshka. Still alive but barely.
At this point, the argument developed from the fighters player. He thought he could easily move through the horse's square using it as cover to avoid the attack of opportunity. In the heat of battle with a cherished character on the canvas, emotions took over. If you want to find out what happened afterwards, you'll just have to read the story hour when it finally catches up to this moment (see signature).

As I did not want to get involved in the argument, I did my best to smooth things over and keep the game moving. Unfortunately, the fighter's player went right off. I suppose it comes back to "The DM's always right except when he's wrong and even then he's still right". All in all though, it was a perilous situation, regardless of the specific ruling in this regard.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

I'm still a bit confused on where everyone was. However, it says right in the spell that he doesn't attack, thus he is indifferent from others actions. You have to be the one the spell was summoned for to ride him, but you can move past him, he won't attack.

Anytime you try to get out of combat, it should just be a given that you are withdrawing, you shouldn't have to say it, so I am confused as to why your DM would't have him do so.

Also, There might be something I am missing about cover. I don't see why you couldn't use the steed as cover.

 

[IcyCool]

You can demand that the DM play the game by the rules, is what you can do. I'd hand the DM the PHB and the DMG and say "show me where I can't move through this Phantom Steed."

I'd hand them back and say, "Show me where I'm required to be your DM."

Seriously, you want to run the game, run it. Don't bully your GM.

The DM puts the most time and effort into the game, and it's people who display this kind of attitude that make it all NOT worthwhile.

*sigh* (Sorry, this is one of my pet peeves).

I agree that the character in question should have been allowed to move through the steeds square (it certainly seems like an ally to me), and that arbitrarily killing characters is bad. But sometimes a call has to be made by the GM, and every once in a while that call is bad. It sounds like pdmiller had a happy resolution to this though, so congrats to him.

 

[DM-Rocco]

You can demand that the DM play the game by the rules, is what you can do. I'd hand the DM the PHB and the DMG and say "show me where I can't move through this Phantom Steed."

Well, I agree with Icycool on this one, there is a number one rule to being a DM or playing the D&D game, whatever the DM says goes. Hell, it is written in the DMG rules book for crying out loud.

While we all agree that the situation was not handled properly, if that is the rule or rules the DM wants to play by, then what he says goes. Of course you should tell your players of changes before hand, but players don't ever dictate the rules the DM follows, period.

My DM won't let me tumble through a enemy occupied square with a shield because he says it is too bulky. As a Dm of over 25 years and someone who knows most of the rules, I disagree with that, but it is his rule, so I have to choice but to agree.

 

[glass]

Okay, I didn't know it was a summoned creature

It isn't, as your own citation demonstrates...

Phantom Steed
Conjuration (Creation)

(Creation), not (Summoning).


glass.

 

[Nail]

My DM won't let me tumble through a enemy occupied square with a shield because he says it is too bulky. As a Dm of over 25 years and someone who knows most of the rules, I disagree with that, but it is his rule, so I have to choice but to agree.

Not really.

There are many ways to approach this sort of problem. IMO the best way is to hash it out over email after the first such incident. Often the two (or more) of you can come to an agreement that you both can live with.

In your particular case, I'll guess that the DM has a problem with the ease of the tumbling DCs. He could change them. Moreover...... Why don't you point out that shields have armor check penalties, and these apply to Tumbling.....IOW, the rules already take into account how "bulky" a shield is.