D&D 5E If you use thunderstep but teleport less than 10 feet do you take damage?

[Paul Farquhar]

I don't think it is a huge balance issue, I am just generally a bit leery about interpretations that allow spells to expand their functionality and thus double as several spells. It's not like the spellcasters are weak and need buffing, they have plenty of tools.

Sorcerers? Compared to other full casters they are weak and need buffing. Sorcerers need multi-purpose spells. And thematically, they are supposed to be able to modify spells on the fly.

 

[Vaalingrade]

No. It depends on whether you want the spell to double as a safe AOE spell centred on the caster alongside of its intended use. Personally I don't.

The intended use of a spell that explicitly removes you from an AoE before laying down the damage isn't to be a safe AoE spell?

For real?

Just tell the player the spell is banned if you're going to hit them with a stick for using it for no good reason.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The intended use of a spell that explicitly removes you from an AoE before laying down the damage isn't to be a safe AoE spell?

For real?

The intent is that you move, for real. The intent is not that you and friend 'teleport' in place and blast the enemies that surround you. There are other spells which are intended for that. Take Burning Hands or something.

Just tell the player the spell is banned if you're going to hit them with a stick for using it for no good reason.

If they use it as intended, I.E. teleport at least 15 feet, they're fine. This is not a nerf, if is just not allowing rules lawyering to exploit unclear rules for a real (albeit marginal) advantage.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Sorcerers? Compared to other full casters they are weak and need buffing. Sorcerers need multi-purpose spells. And thematically, they are supposed to be able to modify spells on the fly.

I don't think that this is a good way to patch crap class design.

 

[Vaalingrade]

If they use it as intended,

Or as the DM has intended to twist it to punish the players for not using the full power of the spell.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Or as the DM has intended to twist it to punish the players for not using the full power of the spell.

I think the intent is pretty clear.

"You teleport yourself to an unoccupied space you can see within range. Immediately after you disappear, a thunderous boom sounds, and each creature within 10 feet of the space you left must make a Constitution saving throw..."

The intent is that you leave the are and that each creature in the area takes damage. The interpretation that the caster takes no damage within the area requires inventing a period of time when the caster is nowhere! I don't think that this is at all reasonable extrapolation, especially as the spell remains completely functional and highly useful without it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think the intent is pretty clear.

"You teleport yourself to an unoccupied space you can see within range. Immediately after you disappear, a thunderous boom sounds, and each creature within 10 feet of the space you left must make a Constitution saving throw..."

The intent is that there is straight up a period of time where the caster is nowhere. They blink out of being for a split second like most teleportation in any media ever and in that moment, which is clearly delineated by the spell saying something happens the moment you disappear and noticing your reappearance as part of the process, the boom happens, damaging the point of origin for the teleport.

The only justification for doing otherwise is to punish the player out of some weird paranoia about power gamers greedily and evily trying to teleport less than 15 feet.

 

[Lyxen]

Basically the reading depends on if you're just straight up out to get the player for daring to use this spell.

There is that as well. The discussion between @Maxperson and me focussed on another area entirely, which was the precision of the rules, their openness, and the link with the setting and the understanding as to how magic works.

But for sure, there can be a gamist discussion as well. On this one, honestly, while I know that caster are not the most frustrated of players in terms of possibilities, I have always found the lack of flexibility in spells to be a bit absurd. It might be a remain of my Ars Magica days, where spontaneous magic exists. It can be refined into formulaic, usually more powerful and les limited, and looking a bit like D&D. But D&D lacks spontaneous magic, and metamagic is really a poor substitute.

Anyway, my point is that I really like having spells which are more flexible, as a principle. And I also believe that the DM should be generous with the players' fun. And that might come from our long campaigns of Amber Diceless RPG, where the PCs are already incredibly powerful, but the game still says "and if they want more power, just give it to them".

I don't think that there is ANYTHING to be gained by imposing a restrictive version of spells, honestly. It will just frustrate the player and honestly, edge cases like that will happen once in a blue moon. As has been pointed out, it's not efficient anyway. So what's the point in letting the player out in the one instance where it would matter in a campaign ? He will feel good for it and, as a DM, you should be happy about that.

Of course, you should not let players abuse the system all the time with totally ridiculous reading anyway, there should be limits and it's up to the DM to control this, in particular so that fun is spread equitably for the players at the table. But are we really in that kind of case here ? Is it really an abuse ? Honestly...

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think the intent is pretty clear.

"You teleport yourself to an unoccupied space you can see within range. Immediately after you disappear, a thunderous boom sounds, and each creature within 10 feet of the space you left must make a Constitution saving throw..."

The intent is that there is straight up a period of time where the caster is nowhere. They blink out of being for a split second like most teleportation in any media ever and in that moment, which is clearly delineated by the spell saying something happens the moment you disappear and noticing your reappearance as part of the process, the boom happens, damaging the point of origin for the teleport.

Right. So you're straight up inventing the period of time when the caster is nowhere. How long is this time? Can readied actions take place during it?

The only justification for doing otherwise is to punish the player out of some weird paranoia about power gamers greedily and evily trying to teleport less than 15 feet.

In the same sense than having characters to take damage if they stand in fireball is to punish power gamers that would exploit that as a tactic. A game having rules that sometimes limit your options is not punishing anyone, it is what makes game possible that makes different tactical options interesting. Yes, there might be situations where Thunderstep is not a viable choice. This is good. Different spells exist to be used in different situations.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Right. So you're straight up inventing the period of time when the caster is nowhere. How long is this time? Can readied actions take place during it?

Who is inventing?

The boom happens 'the moment you disappear', not 'the moment you teleport' or 'the moment you disappear and reappear'. There's clearly a period of time within the 6 seconds it takes to cast the spell that is 'the moment you disappear'.

This isn't about the game having rules. It's about the DM going way, way, waaaay out of their way to remove obvious utility and replace it with a fist.