Push+Wall=save

[eamon]

What happens if the creature merely thinks it's being pushed into "Hindering Terrain"? Can it save and drop prone?

The rules concerning saves vs. forced movement are just inconsistent. They should either apply at the target's whim, or not at all, since they represent a voluntary action (dropping prone).

As a minor detail, the rules should explicitly address whether you can choose to make such a saving throw when already prone.

 

[Hypersmurf]

What happens if the creature merely thinks it's being pushed into "Hindering Terrain"? Can it save and drop prone?

The rules concerning saves vs. forced movement are just inconsistent. They should either apply at the target's whim, or not at all, since they represent a voluntary action (dropping prone).

The saving throw is a mechanic.

If the creature is being pushed into Hindering Terrain, it can attempt to drop prone. It may succeed, it may fail, based on the roll of the die.

If the creature only thinks it is being pushed into Hindering Terrain, it can attempt to drop prone... but it will fail. Just as it would if it rolled a 7.

As far as the creature is concerned, there's no difference between failing a save to fall prone when being pushed into actual spikes, and not getting a save to fall prone when being pushed into illusory spikes. In both cases, it tried to fall prone, but didn't make it in time before it got shoved.

-Hyp.

 

[Baumi]

I'm with Hypersmurf on this Debate and think that spells do not count as hindering terrain.

I think the Save rule is just intended to avoid too easy knockouts that could come from accidentally placing too punishing terrain. Spells are already balanced for the level (damage and effect), but if you eyeballed the terrain wrong it can do much higher damage than intended and can also take the enemy out for several rounds (climbing out of the pit), so the save is a safety-net for the gm especially because elite and solo monsters have higher saves and therefore are not so easily disabled for a few rounds.

On the other hand Spells (Walls, Zones) are much more balanced and leads to fun tactical choices, especially because the players (or monsters) have more control over the placement ... and if the players have more fun, then the GM should have it too.

 

[keterys]

The only real problem I have is with certain spells you can bounce people in and out of them repeatedly. That and the disconnect between whether something is called terrain or not but functions identically.

Still, something like that new spellscar that lets you sustain every turn for a slide 10... that's an easy 5 hits of a lot of spell effects. Every turn. That's rough. Others like positioning strike or tornado aren't quite as severe, but still add up quite a lot more damage onto an encounter power.

 

[javcs]

I'm going with Hypersmurf on the logical argument.

A: All
S: Hindering Terrain
P: <Properties>

Thus we have the logical proposition of ASP.
ASP does not simply convert into APS, All <Properties> are Hindering Terrain; ASP partially converts into the weaker statement IPS (Some <Properties> are Hindering Terrain.

 

[catsclaw227]

The only real problem I have is with certain spells you can bounce people in and out of them repeatedly. That and the disconnect between whether something is called terrain or not but functions identically.

Still, something like that new spellscar that lets you sustain every turn for a slide 10... that's an easy 5 hits of a lot of spell effects. Every turn. That's rough. Others like positioning strike or tornado aren't quite as severe, but still add up quite a lot more damage onto an encounter power.

This is why I have had to rule it as hindering terrain.

Otherwise, we would have the rogue delay until after the wizard (or cleric), they lay down the Wall of Fire (or Blade Barrier) on (or next to) the enemy and then the rogue uses a power to slide the enemy in and out and in again to the wall. That's two sets of bigtime damage for a single effect (and that doesn't include the damage for the rogue power either (or his sneak attack if it applies).

With Blade Barrier (the example that came up in our game) it would allow the Rogue (Trickster, Artful Dodger) to use Tornado Strike, sliding his enemies 5 (1+Cha) squares and do:

2d6 + Dex + Magic Short Sword (+9),
plus 3d6 Sneak Attack,
plus 3d6 + Wisdom + Magic Implement (+9),
plus 3d6 + Wisdom + Magic Implement (+9)

Against TWO targets!!! That is the equiv of 11d6 + 27 damage each, averaging 65 damage per enemy. God forbid he doesn't critical.

 

[Goumindong]

Challenging Terrain: Examples: Deep water.

"... therefore deep water is not challenging terrain."

I'm sensing a fundamental disconnect here.

Examples are not rules text. Even then, by your argument, the only things that can ever be challenging terrain are those listed in the examples.

Do you see how foolish that is?

This is your argument

"Dogs: Dogs are mammals with the following features

Examples: Corgy, Poodle, Terrier, Pit bull

Therefore a Retriever is not a dog"

Similarly, "Hindering terrain has quality X" does not logically imply "Quality X means hindering terrain".

Except when it does.

You see. Definitions for labels work both ways. Its not an = statement, its an == statement. It works both ways, like AC/DC.

Spells are already balanced for the level (damage and effect)

Spells are balanced for the level when they are counted as hindering terrain.

 

[keterys]

That is the equiv of 11d6 + 27 damage each, averaging 65 damage per enemy. God forbid he doesn't critical.

An optimal use is actually a third hit - plus the fourth when the creature starts its turn in the wall, but that's not really the rogue doing that one.

Unless it happens in the second round after they shift out the first round. In which case it is four hits on top of the tornado. So 17d6 + 45 each.

 

[Goumindong]

The saving throw is a mechanic.

If the creature is being pushed into Hindering Terrain, it can attempt to drop prone. It may succeed, it may fail, based on the roll of the die.

If the creature only thinks it is being pushed into Hindering Terrain, it can attempt to drop prone... but it will fail. Just as it would if it rolled a 7.

As far as the creature is concerned, there's no difference between failing a save to fall prone when being pushed into actual spikes, and not getting a save to fall prone when being pushed into illusory spikes. In both cases, it tried to fall prone, but didn't make it in time before it got shoved.

-Hyp.

Man what? You seriously think there is no difference between succeeding 55% of the time when you think you are being pushed into hindering terrain and succeeding 0% of the time when you think you are being pushed into hindering terrain?

From the creatures point of view it is attempting to fall prone before a certain location. From the creatures point of view, whether or not its hindering terrain is immaterial.

So why don't we allow creatures to just make a save to fall prone and end forced movement whenever they want[once per move]? Because it limits the usefulness of forced movement, and because adding that decision making process is a pain in the butt for DMs

 

[catsclaw227]

An optimal use is actually a third hit - plus the fourth when the creature starts its turn in the wall, but that's not really the rogue doing that one.

Unless it happens in the second round after they shift out the first round. In which case it is four hits on top of the tornado. So 17d6 + 45 each.

And this is a good point. The rogue in my description isn't really even "optimized". Though in my example Blade Barrier acts as difficult terrain, so it's x2 to enter. In (2), out (1), In (2) for 5 movement. This is even more deadly with Wall of Fire.

And since the wall can be sustained, the rogue can use another power to shift the opponent around too. This doesn't even consider that other PCs also have sliding powers. Elites or Solos are screwed with this capability.