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

[Maxperson]

So produce to me the definition of "teleport" in game term, because so far, we only have individual spell descriptions. Moreover, once more, prove to me that:

• It's more instantaneous than other effects in the spell.
• That the specific definition of Thunder Step, which is specific to that spell and therefore taking precedence over any other rule in the book, is not applicable in its dissociation of disappearance and appearance.

The game uses the common usage of the term and that definition was provided pages ago.

 

[ECMO3]

Was he blinded when he entered the area? If not, he may have a pretty clear idea of other places to teleport outside of that range that he saw. My personal DM style is to do what makes sense. And since he "saw"(assuming he wasn't blind when he entered the area) the other places, I'd allow it, though I might require an intelligence check to remember clearly enough.

If not, I'd rule that he took the damage. As I said earlier, I can see ruling it in either direction. In my mind teleportation is instantaneous with disappearance and reappearance happening simultaneously, so the sound would strike the caster. If I were with a DM who felt that there were three discrete events and the sound would not affect me, I wouldn't argue it. Not because it helped me, but because that is also a reasonable interpretation.

When you cast the spell you teleport to a place you can see, so I would take that to mean a place I can see right now when I cast the spell. That is how it is generally ruled on other spells ...

 

[Lyxen]

Fail to work IN THE SPHERE. The departure point is not in the sphere. The departure point would work outside of the sphere and then the teleportation destination point would fail to work in the sphere.

You are, once more, reading part of the sentence only: "Teleportation and planar travel fail to work in the sphere, whether the sphere is the destination or the departure point for such magical travel. "

You are reading more into that statement than is written. It does not say that the spell fails to work, only that the teleportation within the sphere fails to work.

Not at all, you forgot half of the sentence.

 

[Lyxen]

I submit that by using the term "teleport," it is intended to accept the commonly held definition, one that the teleport spell itself makes clear. When most people think of magical teleportation, it is instantaneous.

But not more instantaneous than other instantaneous effects, and not more interruptible than other instantaneous effects. Can you prove otherwise ?

 

[Maxperson]

You are, once more, reading part of the sentence only: "Teleportation and planar travel fail to work in the sphere, whether the sphere is the destination or the departure point for such magical travel. "

No, I'm not. You are the one focused on the wrong part of the sentence. The first half is the important half. It specifies "will not work in the sphere." The second half you underlines is subject to the first half. If the destination is in the sphere, teleport fails to work IN THE SPHERE. If the departure point is in the sphere, teleport fails to work IN THE SPHERE.

At no point does it ever say that the spells fails completely or that if fails OUTSIDE THE SPHERE if the destination is in the sphere. You are assuming that which is not said.

 

[Lyxen]

Teleportation is not going to work differently from one spell to another. Having it work differently in different spells does in fact create different definitions for teleportation.

5e, like lots of games is exception based, and specific beats general.

It doesn't have to be more instantaneous. The question is whether the disappearance and reappearance are one effect or not. If they are, then once you disappear, you reappear at the same time so no other effect, instantaneous or not, can interrupt that. The game doesn't say that they are or are not the same effect, so it's a pure DM ruling on that issue.

Exactly my point from the start, with the added point that (and I agree that it is specific, but once more "exception-based" and "specific beats general") clearly, Thunder step makes a distinction for disappearance (compared to appearance or teleportation). You can read it this way or ignore it, but it makes the spell indeed subject to local ruling.

 

[Maxperson]

5e, like lots of games is exception based, and specific beats general.

There are no exceptions being made here, though. The common usage of teleport is "instant travel." It's on you to prove that teleport in 5e isn't using what 5e says it is using. We've provided the appropriate definition, supported by the teleport spell and other teleport type spells.

 

[Lyxen]

No, I'm not. You are the one focused on the wrong part of the sentence. The first half is the important half. It specifies "will not work in the sphere." The second half you underlines is subject to the first half. If the destination is in the sphere, teleport fails to work IN THE SPHERE. If the departure point is in the sphere, teleport fails to work IN THE SPHERE.

I'm sorry, but your reading does not make any sense. If you travel only within the sphere, there is no need for the second half (and the wording would have been "within the sphere"). The only reading that makes sense is that the sphere causes teleportation to fail whether the departure or arrival is in the sphere.

Note in particular that it does not say that the spell fails, it's not about the spell casting, it's simply about the travel itself because it's magical travel.

At no point does it ever say that the spells fails completely or that if fails OUTSIDE THE SPHERE if the destination is in the sphere. You are assuming that which is not said.

It says this exactly, by saying that teleportaion and planar travel do not work in the sphere where the sphere is the destination. Because when you teleport, you do not cross the intervening space, I would very much like to understand how teleport could work from outside into the sphere. Teleport has two ends, you know, like any string.

 

[Lyxen]

There are no exceptions being made here, though. The common usage of teleport is "instant travel." It's on you to prove that teleport in 5e isn't using what 5e says it is using. We've provided the appropriate definition, supported by the teleport spell and other teleport type spells.

And I'm not even contesting that, I'm just saying that you have failed to prove that this teleportation is more instantaneous than the damaging effect, which can then occur in any sequence between the disappearance and appearance, since the spell specifically mentions disappearance (and not appearance or the travel).

Put another way, you are saying that the appearance is simultaneous with the disappearance, but the spell is instantaneous, so the damaging effect is simultaneous with both and the spell specifically (and specific beats general) say that the damage is immediately after the disappearance, so there is good reason to sequence things as per Xanathar, that's all.

 

[Baron Opal II]

Thunderstep spell:

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, taking 3d10 thunder damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. The thunder can be heard from up to 300 feet away.

What if you only move yourself 10 feet, do you take damage from it?

It says immediately after you disappear, not sure if that is before you reappear if you also reappear immediately after you disappear.

I would say yes.

Teleportation is instantaneous, so it would resolve prior to the immediate effect which explicitly happens after you teleport.

If you're going to jump, jump farther than the blast radius of the grenade you leave behind.