Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lyxen" data-source="post: 8583096" data-attributes="member: 7032025">It says, specifically, that you can ready a move. It does not say which type of move so no, you cannot specifically ready crawling. Once more, just read the rules, don't invent what you think should be in there: "you choose to move up to your speed in response to it" and the example "If the goblin steps next to me, I move away". It does not say whether you intend to crawl, climb or even fly.You need to be prone to do this. Otherwise no. Of course, you can drop prone as part of your move if you want. It's stupid, but you can.No, it does not, just read the rules. After that, when you do your move, if you want to drop prone and crawl, no worry.The description of your action makes zero sense from your character's perspective, this is where a DM should tell you that you are being stupid and therefore don't get far enough, but I agree that this is local rulings and not the rules.And this is where, after all the claptrap above, you get to the wrong conclusion. You have, once more, failed to prove that it takes the entire round. So this is your challenge, prove that it takes the entire round (and by the way, which round are you even talking about ?).So, did I say otherwise ?He is not playing your PC. You made a declaration of intent, the DM describes what happens. 100% standard loop.Listen here, either you, as a player, make a declaration that makes sense, or you don't:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If you make a declaration that makes sense, like really trying to get away from the blast, the DM will describe something sensible.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">If you make a declaration that is absurd, like making as if you wanted to get away from the blast, but actually preparing to stay in it, then DM will also describe something sensible.</li> </ul>Despite what you are thinking, as a character, you have ZERO control over the caster and the amount of time its action takes, or yours, actually, in the round. The DM describes what happens, not you, based on your declaration. If you make a stupid one by trying to screw over the rules, the DM's description will screw your character over.And once more, you are totally wrong here. You describe what your character intends to do, the DM describes the result, Standard loop.And once more, you have failed to prove that you cannot interrupt instantaneous effects. I have proven to you that there is no such limit, and I've even given you other examples, like counterspell of counterspell. So once more, you are left with nothing to stand on but your personal wishes that it was otherwise.And once more, you have failed to prove it, in face of the evidence provided by the spell's description, that the disappearance is a singular event. And by the way, it's not an effect, a spell only has one effect, unless specified otherwise:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The rest of a spell entry describes the spell’s effect. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Exceptions, like Guards and Wards, say it specifically: "When you cast this spell, you can specify individuals that are unaffected by any or all of the effects that you choose. "</li> </ul>The problem is that you are trying to discuss the RAW without reading them, it causes all your arguments to be totally baseless.And since you have not understood the RAW, you continue, time and time again, to fail to prove anything. And, in this particular case, failed to prove that instantaneous effects cannot be interrupted by reactions (several examples given) and failed to prove that readied actions are based on complete actions, since it explicitly says otherwise.Once, feel free to apply your personal limitations to your game, but since they don't appear even slightly in the RAW, it would be nice for you to finally admit this.</blockquote>

Verification