Jump while withdrawing?

[evilbob]

Assuming you only have 5ft reach, you get an AoO on #2, but not #1. If you can explain why this makes sense to you (not why this is 'true' just per the rules, because the rules are being debated), I would be grateful.

I apologize for continuing to interrupt, but I must say I do not understand your example. The answer to your query seems to be that both of these would involve AoO after the first square of movement spent, if any of the spaces moved through were threatened, so why are you saying one does and the other doesn't? If that's not what you're asking, it seems to me that you're asking why withdraw works.

That means falling, 5ft-step, being bull-rushed, sidestepping a blade barrier, and any other situation.

Um, no. Neither falling, 5' steps, being bullrushed, nor making reflex saves (which is what I assume you're saying above) involve spending your movement, which is when you can jump. Otherwise, you could. I said that above and I still think that's the most consistent interpretation I've seen.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I apologize for continuing to interrupt, but I must say I do not understand your example. The answer to your query seems to be that both of these would involve AoO after the first square of movement spent, if any of the spaces moved through were threatened, so why are you saying one does and the other doesn't? If that's not what you're asking, it seems to me that you're asking why withdraw works.

Withdraw does'nt treat the square you start out in as threatened. And, given that I said "5ft reach" then no other squares are threatened. But, if you move and open a door you cannot be withdrawing. So, you cannot do that. However, you can move and jump over a pit or whatever (using Jump) because you rule that you allow Jump while withdrawing. Please explain how that makes sense.

Um, no. Neither falling, 5' steps, being bullrushed, nor making reflex saves (which is what I assume you're saying above) involve spending your movement, which is when you can jump. Otherwise, you could. I said that above and I still think that's the most consistent interpretation I've seen.

There are two key words/phrases in Jump. One is "Move Action" and the other is "movement." You are throwing out the whole clause concerning "Move Action" so all you have left is "movement." I asked before how you define it, which you're now stipulating as "spending your movement." I don't know what that means. Why isn't move 5ft in a 5ft-step spending your 5ft of allowed movement? Why isn't moving 10ft when someone bull rushes you 10ft spending your 10ft of movement? The point about the reflex saves was blade barrier-specific, based on this wording: "Each such creature can avoid the wall (ending up on the side of its choice)..." You move to a different (set of) square(s), so why isn't that movement? Why isn't falling movement? Are you not, in fact, moving?

 

[evilbob]

Withdraw does'nt treat the square you start out in as threatened. And, given that I said "5ft reach" then no other squares are threatened. But, if you move and open a door you cannot be withdrawing. So, you cannot do that. However, you can move and jump over a pit or whatever (using Jump) because you rule that you allow Jump while withdrawing. Please explain how that makes sense.

Ah, ok, I see now. And to me, this question is more along the lines of, "why does withdrawing work the way it works?" I mean, some guy can move all over the room without issue if he "withdraws," but if he walks over to a door to open it, he got hit? That's the part that makes no sense; the jumping during this crazy extended "free" movement is really an ancillary argument.

... I asked before how you define it, which you're now stipulating as "spending your movement." I don't know what that means. Why isn't move 5ft in a 5ft-step spending your 5ft of allowed movement? Why isn't moving 10ft when someone bull rushes you 10ft spending your 10ft of movement? ... Why isn't falling movement? Are you not, in fact, moving?

Ok, I will try to explain this again:
- Why do you have a listed speed as a medium creature of 30 feet? This serves the purpose of allowing you to know how much movement you have to spend each turn. You have a total amount of movement based on your speed. You can jump during movement (whether or not this movement can only be done during a move action is not actually what I am trying to prove here).
- Moving is not movement, although you do move when you use/spend/take your movement (which is again, based on your speed). Falling is moving, being pushed is moving, 5' steps are moving, but they are not movement granted based on your speed.

Jumping cannot be done when you are not "spending" the movement you are granted by your speed (whether this only happens during a move action or not). I freely admit I made up the phrase "spending movement," but it was only to show the difference between the bolded and underlined meanings given above.

 

[RigaMortus2]

5' steps are moving, but they are not movement granted based on your speed.

Actually, it is. If your speed (re: movement according to you) is reduced to 0, you can not take a 5 foot step. The way you are trying to rationalize it, you WOULD be able to take the 5 foot step.

CMIIAW, but basically what you are saying (in this specific instance) is that the 5 foot step is not based off of, or related to the character's speed (again, movement according to you).

 

[RigaMortus2]

After reading this thread as well as re-re-reading the Jump skill, I beleive the intent (and RAW) is based on the fact that the most common method of movement in combat is does with a Move Action. It certainly isn't the only way to move, but it is the most common and the basis for moving. So, when you move using a Move Action, you can use the Jump skill with it. This also means that you don't have to Move (Move Action) + Standard Action (Jump) and blow your whole turn when trying to Jump while moving.

For any other type of movement other than that granted by a Move Action, you should look up that specific movement type. A charge is primarily used to close in on a target and make an attack. Check charge rules to see if you can Jump during the charge. A Run is mainly used to move at a quicker rate, check Run rules to see if you can Jump during a Run. Withdraw is mainly used to get out of combat w/o provoking an AoO. Check the Withdrawing rules to see if you can Jump while Withdrawing. And so on...

 

[evilbob]

Actually, it is. If your speed (re: movement according to you) is reduced to 0, you can not take a 5 foot step. The way you are trying to rationalize it, you WOULD be able to take the 5 foot step.

Actually, I'm not trying to rationalize it that way. Just saying that a 5' step is not spending movement (which is based on your speed). The 5' step has its own set of rules separate from speed: yes. However those happen to work or not work, you are not spending your speed in "movement" to take a 5' step.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Ah, ok, I see now. And to me, this question is more along the lines of, "why does withdrawing work the way it works?" I mean, some guy can move all over the room without issue if he "withdraws," but if he walks over to a door to open it, he got hit? That's the part that makes no sense; the jumping during this crazy extended "free" movement is really an ancillary argument.

You'll note that I also commented that perhaps the problem is in opening the door that it shouldn't be a move action (and I've seen on these forums some people who have ruled thusly). However, I think you agree with my consternation over it. If moving and opening a door provokes an AoO, then moving and doing something far more dangerous like jumping over an acid-filled pit should (clearly, that must consume much of your concentration).

And I disagree about your choice of words calling it "crazy extended 'free'" movement. My description merely fits the bill exactly as you said it does. I can use Jump during my movement (withdraw). So, I do so.

I will think on the rest of your post.

 

[evilbob]

And I disagree about your choice of words calling it "crazy extended 'free'" movement.

Fair enough. I was really just trying to be silly, but I withdraw that characterization if it will assist in comprehension.

And I do agree with your consternation above; withdrawing as an action (in general) makes no sense whatsoever, but at the same time is extremely important as a game mechanic and thus needs to be preserved. (To me, it's like HP in that way.)

My compatriot TYPO5478 had the interesting idea of simply turning withdraw into a standard action. This would certainly solve this immediate problem; just to hijack this thread even further, do people feel like this makes "withdrawing" as an action too powerful/abusable or does it still seem balanced?

 

[Infiniti2000]

I would say that withdrawing as a standard action would probably be okay. I think the withdrawing as a full-round action was put into play just because the 3.5 designers couldn't or didn't want to completely rethink the poor mechanic 'withdraw' action from 3.0. There are very few Move Actions that I can think of that would lead to abuse, and none in the core rules (thus the actions themselves should be reconsidered rather than withdraw-as-a-SA). Anyone have any other ideas on whether it would be a bad rule?