Phased creature ends movement in a wall?

[KarinsDad]

You're reading RAW, not RAI.

As far as I can tell, I'm doing both. You don't happen to like RAW in this case, so you are claiming that it is not RAI. That doesn't make it so.

Such an interpretation makes that situation doable, but such a situation is definitely unfun and unfair.

Possibly. What is preventing the PCs from just walking away? Must foes always be killed in order for there to be fun?

First of all, it says that creatures occupy squares, but it doesn't actually say that large objects can't occupy squares. You can't take that to mean objects don't, just as you can't assume that, for example, elves aren't smart because you know for a fact that all eladrin are smart. Just because all eladrin are doesn't mean that all elves can't be either; just because all creatures occupy squares doesn't mean that all objects can't either.

Occupied Squares is a game mechanics term and there is an entire section on it called, curiously enough, "Occupied Squares". So yes, creatures occupy squares, objects do not in the game system.

Second, if a wall takes up the entire square and has a shelf on it, technically the shelf is in the square that the creature is in when next to the shelf. Small objects like that and dropped items do not occupy the square; they are too tiny. Medium objects and larger, I would say, occupy squares. Small creatures can occupy squares since they are moving around, but Small objects (like certain types of difficult terrain) are still and so a creature can enter that space. Tiny creatures don't even really occupy spaces until there's four of them in the same space; why would Tiny objects?

Who said that a wall must be contained within an entire square in order to be blocking terrain? You are working on a faulty premise here.

Third, if a phasing creature can end its move in a space with a wall (hypothetically assuming that blocking terrain does not count as occupied squares), how does it make sense that it can't end its move in a space with a creature, which takes up less room and is probably easier to go through?

It doesn't have to make sense. It's the rule. There are literally dozens of rules that don't make sense.


I understand that you do not like the scenario as presented, but that doesn't mean that the DM did not follow RAW. As far as I can tell, he did. This just happens to be a scenario that the designers did not envision ahead of time. It happens.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Two observations:

1) Blocking terrain blocks LoE when a line cannot be traced that doesn't TOUCH the terrain (PHB 273) "If every imaginary line you trace to a target passes through or touches a solid obstacle, you don't have line of effect to the target". If you are inside a wall then no line can be traced which doesn't touch that wall, even at corners that are at the edge of the square, the end of the line still touches. Thus a ghost inside a wall has no LoE to ANYTHING at all, technically not even itself.

2) The interpretation of 'occupied' as only applying to squares containing creatures is dubious. Terrain features are described as being able to 'fill' the square they are in. If a thing fills a square, then by any reasonable use of the English language it also occupies that square. The use of word occupy in the rules on phasing MAY or MAY NOT be intended in the formal or the informal sense. MANY sections of the 4e rules use words in a more informal way. I don't pretend to know what the author of the specific text on phasing intended but there is no iron-clad RAW argument here.

So, a ghost can't attack from inside a wall by RAW, clearly, and whether or not it can end its move inside the wall is an unsettled question. Personally I seem to remember some kind of statement, possibly by CS or some such that stated phasing doesn't let you end a move inside a wall, but I wouldn't consider that evidence of much without being able to quote it.

I would say the OP's DM shouldn't have been allowing the ghosts to attack and I doubt there is an aura that has an instantaneous effect (I certainly don't recall one). Letting the enemy end its turn inside the wall is arguable and if it makes an interesting encounter then OK, whatever. Sounds like the players felt frustrated, but then not all player frustration is entirely justified. DM's should be sensitive to the possibility though and provide SOME way of solving those sorts of encounters.

 

[KarinsDad]

Two observations:

1) Blocking terrain blocks LoE when a line cannot be traced that doesn't TOUCH the terrain (PHB 273) "If every imaginary line you trace to a target passes through or touches a solid obstacle, you don't have line of effect to the target". If you are inside a wall then no line can be traced which doesn't touch that wall, even at corners that are at the edge of the square, the end of the line still touches. Thus a ghost inside a wall has no LoE to ANYTHING at all, technically not even itself.

Good point. That takes care of the Aura and attack issue as long as one considers the starting square to have the imaginary lines touching. PCs outside of the blocking terrain are also invisible to the phasing creature. No LOE, no LOS.

2) The interpretation of 'occupied' as only applying to squares containing creatures is dubious. Terrain features are described as being able to 'fill' the square they are in. If a thing fills a square, then by any reasonable use of the English language it also occupies that square. The use of word occupy in the rules on phasing MAY or MAY NOT be intended in the formal or the informal sense. MANY sections of the 4e rules use words in a more informal way. I don't pretend to know what the author of the specific text on phasing intended but there is no iron-clad RAW argument here.

If there wasn't an entire section on "Occupied Squares" and other rules that referred to occupied or unoccupied such as "Pick up an object in your space or in an unoccupied square within reach", where the only rational meaning is that a creature is in the square, then I would agree with you.

As is, the main references to occupied square or unoccupied square refer to squares with creatures in them or not.

If you can find ones that explicitly refer to objects, then your POV has some RAW merit.


There is a difference between how we want a rule to work and how the rule actually works.


And actually, I see no problem with a phasing creature ending its turn in a solid object. As long, as you also pointed out, that the creature cannot attack from there. Good job.

 

[Enclave]

Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with the ghost going in the wall and staying there.

However, attacking from within the wall? Ouch. I'd treat that more along the lines of the thing has no clue where any of you are while it's in the wall, so if it's attacking using ranged attacks, it'd be basically missing almost exclusively, hell you could walk away and it wouldn't even know.

Now if it is doing melee attacks from behind the wall and say has reach 2 or something like that, well that's where readied actions come in. I'd treat that along the lines of you ready an action to attack it when it attacks you, it's arms shoot out of the wall and you are now trying to cut those suckers off.

Course if I was DMing I'd never do anything this cheesy in the first place.

 

[Camelot]

Two observations:

1) Blocking terrain blocks LoE when a line cannot be traced that doesn't TOUCH the terrain (PHB 273) "If every imaginary line you trace to a target passes through or touches a solid obstacle, you don't have line of effect to the target". If you are inside a wall then no line can be traced which doesn't touch that wall, even at corners that are at the edge of the square, the end of the line still touches. Thus a ghost inside a wall has no LoE to ANYTHING at all, technically not even itself.

This makes a lot more sense. While your second point, I agree, is still debatable, it is true that any line the phasing creature would draw to its targets would be touching the wall it is in, regardless of if the square is occupied or not. I actually like this better than my points, because with this interpretation, a creature can phase through a lot of solid object, but it just can't see anything.

I wonder, was it intended for phasing creatures to be able to see while they're inside an object, even if it is in the middle of a move? I would think not; a creature phasing through a wall has no idea what's on the other side until they get there.

 

[Benlo]

Who exactly did the DM design this encounter for? Unless he planned for you to batter the wall down or something, he basically designed one hell of an unfun encounter, at least as far as my tastes go.

 

[Jhaelen]

As far as I can tell, I'm doing both. You don't happen to like RAW in this case, so you are claiming that it is not RAI. That doesn't make it so.

Yep, let's use the acronym RAIIT: Rules as I interpret them. IMG, that's the only interpretation that counts.