Help needed for Improved Skirmish in melee

[blargney the second]

In the game I DM there's a swift hunter that just got Improved Skirmish, and I'm having a little trouble figuring out exactly how it's supposed to work.

Scout's starting position:
Scout's ending position:
Enemy:
Unoccupied squares:





Assuming she wants to move at least 20' to get her extra skirmish damage, can she take the long way (clockwise) around from to ? She'd cover a total distance of 25', but only end up 10' from her starting position, so I know she'd get at least her vanilla skirmish. But does she get Imp Skirmish?
-blarg

ps - I couldn't figure out how to rule it during the game, so as a temporary measure I had her roll Tumble vs Sense Motive+BAB. It worked okay as a house rule, FWIW.

 

[roguerouge]

Yes, she should get her improved skirmish. You want it to be an on/off thing for faster game play, not a "well, I moved x feet but only really Y feet, which means that I use this table of attack bonuses and damage, so I really hit..." Plus, that's the book's RAW.

 

[blargney the second]

Thanks, rougerogue. "Plus, that's the book's RAW" made me realize I hadn't actually verified the text of Improved Skirmish: "If you move at least 20 feet away from where you were at the start of your turn [...]" makes it pretty clear what's supposed to happen here. No Improved Skirmish for her in this case.

It's the absolute distance that counts, not the mileage.
-blarg

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

What's wacky is that you could move right back to where you started (if you have enough movement) and then don't even have to move your mini. That's when it starts to look silly.

 

[thorian]

Just to be clear here, it states "If you move at least 20 feet away from where you were at the start of your turn [...]" NOT "If you move at least 20 feet."

In other words, in the OP's example, the PC does not qualify for improved skirmish. They are not "20 feet from where they started."

 

[blargney the second]

Yeah, that was my conclusion as well, thorian.

 

[roguerouge]

Actually, it doesn't say that you have to end your move 20 feet from where you started. It says that you have to move at least 20 feet from where you started. If you have to end your move 20 feet away, then you get the ridiculous result that many Spring Attacks do not qualify for skirmish damage.

I stand by my interpretation. It's a crappy RAW, but I think it's accurate to it.

 

[Jhaelen]

Actually, it doesn't say that you have to end your move 20 feet from where you started. It says that you have to move at least 20 feet from where you started. If you have to end your move 20 feet away, then you get the ridiculous result that many Spring Attacks do not qualify for skirmish damage.

I stand by my interpretation. It's a crappy RAW, but I think it's accurate to it.

I don't think so. I think it really should say 'must end move at least 20 feet away.' I don't see how that's ridiculous in any way.

What does a DM do if the RAW are crappy? She ignores RAW!

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

All the RAW says is that you must move at least 20 feet away. It doesn't limit where you move (including back to your starting point) after you've moved that 20 feet.

I agree that the RAW should be clarified to say you must end up at least 20 feet from where you started but, hey, it hasn't happened yet and isn't going to now with 4E out.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

What's wacky is that you could move right back to where you started (if you have enough movement) and then don't even have to move your mini. That's when it starts to look silly.

I suppose it does get silly, if you pretend that D&D isn't supposed to be (poorly) representing cyclical combat, and that the other creatures are time stopped when not acting/reacting. You would measure the cycles of a clock in a computer based on different sampling times, and the result is binary -- either it's a 1 or 0 (high or low). Any fluctuation between sampling points doesn't matter. Why do I bring this up? Does this sound like the proper way to imagine how a character's turn plays out? I thought not.

*Has NEVER had a problem with letting skirmishers end their movement where they started*

EDIT: (poor) Graphical Representation!

*                                                *
    --------              ----     -----
___|        |____________|    |__|      |_________

* = start and end points of the player's turn. Does all the stuff that happened between there matter, or just that the scout happens to be at "0" at both beginning and end?