Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kerbarian" data-source="post: 3079175" data-attributes="member: 40393">Actually, I think that defining "your environment" as a frame of reference is exactly what we have to do.  Consider the case where teleport doesn't maintain momentum.  You're falling and you teleport safely onto the ground.  In order to *not* maintain momentum, the teleport spell had to decide that you would end up stationary relative to the ground.  IOW, it had to figure out the reference frame of your environment and set you at rest relative to it.If that's considered reasonable behavior for the spell, I don't see why it couldn't figure out two reference frames, one for "your environment" at the origin of the spell, and another for the environment at the destination.  Then it could recreate the subject's momentum relative to the origin frame in the destination frame.  And of course it would be a DM call as to what the teleport spell chooses as the environment frame if you're doing something like teleporting between two moving ships.Which has nothing to do with the rules of physics applying, of course, but it does seem like plausible spell behavior that would result in the appearance of maintained momentum (falling guys are still falling after a teleport) without all the nasty issues people have brought up in the thread.I think the line about the rules of physics can be safely discounted anyway.  It's background for an answer, not an answer in itself, and it's wrong on its face -- if the laws of physics still applied during the spell, the teleport couldn't happen in the first place.  At best, it could mean "Nothing in the rules suggests that the rules of physics wouldn’t continue to apply", excepting the event of the teleport itself.  Which still leaves it wide open as to what happens during the event of the teleport (when physics don't apply).</blockquote>

Verification