D&D 5E Forced movement into difficult terrain

[Nevvur]

Going by RAW, I agree with those pointing out forced movement is not affected by difficult terrain. If it's a matter of making a sensible narrative from that mechanic, I might describe the roper lifting the character bodily off the ground as part of its pull, more like a swift yank than being dragged. Generally speaking, we might assume every type of forced movement grants the target at least a tiny amount of clearance off the ground in order to apply the effect in the strictest technical fashion.

That said, I like Sorcerers Apprentice's take on it. I wouldn't begrudge any DM who pulled out a ruling like that if I were a player. As a DM, I might even take a RAF approach and increase the base amount of forced movement over slippery terrain like ice.

 

[5ekyu]

The Roper's tendrils have a reach of 50'. The Roper can pull a grappled target "up to" 25' towards it. That means it could conceivably drag the target less than 25'.

Given that movement ends at the end of each of the Roper's turns, even after a 25' move, and that the PCs would be affected by anything else they moved through (eg: Fire Wall), I would rule that difficult terrain that impedes movement (as opposed to difficult terrain like ice that messes with balance and leverage) would have its normal effect on any target being dragged.

I'd probably round up, though, and allow 15' of drag, if you're only working with the nearest map square.

This assumes the Roper is dragging the target along the ground (which seems the more reasonable assumption). If the Roper did something like yank the target into the air, so that they flew above the difficult terrain before landing in the new rest location, then I'd say that difficult terrain penalties did not apply.

FWIW the rope block says "The roper pulls each creature grappled by it up to 25 feet straight toward it." and the roper can pretend to be a stalactite or mite so it can be on the ceiling as much as floor. So it is not beyond reason to assume the roper is lifting the creature instead of dragging it especially give the 18 strength. Why let the victim get traction?

 

[DEFCON 1]

I always keep movement and forced movement separate, rules for one do not usually interact with rules for the other. Case in point... if someone has a speed of 0 due to Level 5 exhaustion, they can still get pushed away 15' via Thunderwave. You don't need one to get the other.

By the same token... my natural inclination for a Roper-pull-through-Entangle ruling would be that the Roper can pull its full distance without issue. But (there's always a but)... were one of the players to say to me "Hey, would any of those Entangle vines grab ahold of me by any chance as I got pulled in?" I'd probably stop to think about it and then possibly make a different one-time ruling. Probably requiring the Roper to make the same Strength saving throw that targets in the area do to try and pull the character through. But I wouldn't make that type of ruling generally on my own, my instinct would always be to keep the two distinct.

 

[Mistwell]

I always keep movement and forced movement separate, rules for one do not usually interact with rules for the other. Case in point... if someone has a speed of 0 due to Level 5 exhaustion, they can still get pushed away 15' via Thunderwave. You don't need one to get the other.

By the same token... my natural inclination for a Roper-pull-through-Entangle ruling would be that the Roper can pull its full distance without issue. But (there's always a but)... were one of the players to say to me "Hey, would any of those Entangle vines grab ahold of me by any chance as I got pulled in?" I'd probably stop to think about it and then possibly make a different one-time ruling. Probably requiring the Roper to make the same Strength saving throw that targets in the area do to try and pull the character through. But I wouldn't make that type of ruling generally on my own, my instinct would always be to keep the two distinct.

For what it is worth our DM made an on-the-fly ruling that the Roper was able to pull the character through the entangled vines but that round the vines (now being squished up against the Roper, as it pulled the PC directly towards itself) interfered with it's ability to attack the character, doing only half-damage on a hit (effectively resistance from a wall of vines in the way).

 

[jaelis]

As noted, difficult terrain costs extra movement, but you aren't "spending" movement when something else moves you.

I would rule flexibly on this though in the case where the difficult terrain is caused by a space filling obstruction, like a web spell or, perhaps, a bunch of vines.

 

[pming]

Hiya!
When I first read the OP...

Interesting rules question we ran into last night, while playing in Forge of Fury.

Situation is as follows. There is a Roper. It is centered in and surrounded by an field of entanglement (from a wand of Entangle).

The Roper grabs a PC exactly 25 feet away from a space adjacent to it, and tries to reel the PC to the adjacent space so it can bite the PC.

The Roper's Reel ability allows it to drag the PC exactly 25 feet.

Can it do that, through the difficult terrain of the entangled area? Or does the double movement requirement to enter that difficult terrain mean it can only drag the PC 20 feet to the edge of the difficult terrain, and then stop because it does not have the 10' remaining to move the PC that 5' in the difficult terrain?

I thought to myself: "Self. Does the OP want a RAW exploitation/explaination...or does he want a 'what does common sense tell you' ruling?". And then I read this...

That seems like an easy interpretation to exploit. If a PC has an ability to move things with forced movement, they could use it to move allies across difficult terrain at no penalty. Forced movement does have a speed by the way: in this case, the speed is set to 25 feet per round. Not sure what about "move" and "25'" wouldn't be the same as "speed" as opposed to something else?

Which made me think: "Ahhh...a RAW thing". And I was about to say something, but then...

For what it is worth our DM made an on-the-fly ruling that the Roper was able to pull the character through the entangled vines but that round the vines (now being squished up against the Roper, as it pulled the PC directly towards itself) interfered with it's ability to attack the character, doing only half-damage on a hit (effectively resistance from a wall of vines in the way).

...which indicates that the your DM is happy with a RAI interpretation. In all honesty, even though I've read all the RAW answers in this thread, this is a nigh-perfect example of the RAW "The DM is needed in 5e to make rulings when rules don't specifically fit a situation". I think your DM made a great call. It fits the situation, doesn't explicitly set up a "home rule RAW breakage" thing, and didn't rule in a binary fashion. Good on your DM! Give him/her a cookie.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Geeknamese]

That seems like an easy interpretation to exploit. If a PC has an ability to move things with forced movement, they could use it to move allies across difficult terrain at no penalty. Forced movement does have a speed by the way: in this case, the speed is set to 25 feet per round. Not sure what about "move" and "25'" wouldn't be the same as "speed" as opposed to something else?

I would totally let a PC use his action to Thorn Whip a fellow PC with no damage across difficult terrain. That’s not only creative use of your ability but imagine how badass and cool that looks. Plus, it costs an action. More tactical options to me qualifies for Rule of Cool


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[Li Shenron]

Interesting rules question we ran into last night, while playing in Forge of Fury.

Situation is as follows. There is a Roper. It is centered in and surrounded by an field of entanglement (from a wand of Entangle).

The Roper grabs a PC exactly 25 feet away from a space adjacent to it, and tries to reel the PC to the adjacent space so it can bite the PC.

The Roper's Reel ability allows it to drag the PC exactly 25 feet.

Can it do that, through the difficult terrain of the entangled area? Or does the double movement requirement to enter that difficult terrain mean it can only drag the PC 20 feet to the edge of the difficult terrain, and then stop because it does not have the 10' remaining to move the PC that 5' in the difficult terrain?

If it's dragging the victim through difficult terrain, I would rule that it does in fact take double (forced) movement.

Just think for example, if you tried to pull a cart through snow or sand, wouldn't it take you more effort than pulling it on a proper road?

However, it is also possible that the roper is lifting the victim up from the ground, in which case it may be ok to let it drag it easily.

 

[i_dont_meta]

This is what I LOVE about D&D! If/when this happens at MY table I will adjudicate as I see fit, but often times this means giving the table a hearty dose of DRAMA!!

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

 

[Blue]

...which indicates that the your DM is happy with a RAI interpretation. In all honesty, even though I've read all the RAW answers in this thread, this is a nigh-perfect example of the RAW "The DM is needed in 5e to make rulings when rules don't specifically fit a situation". I think your DM made a great call. It fits the situation, doesn't explicitly set up a "home rule RAW breakage" thing, and didn't rule in a binary fashion. Good on your DM! Give him/her a cookie.

Paul, sometimes I find myself in disagreement with you, but here I'm eating what you're putting down. This is a great place for a DM to step in with an appropriate ruling for the situation, and one that supports the current narrative.