QUick question - Push effects do not to be in line right?

You got a link to a quote where a designer said 'We intended you to be able to slide someone into the same zone five times then have them get hit by it when they start their turn' or something similar?

As opposed to the absolutely correct link of 'Yes, the rules allow you do...' - though in the wall of fire example it's extremely hard since it takes 3 extra movement, but lots of things don't. I've seen that one.

I think my favorite example for this one is the spell Grease, where you attack someone and if you succeed you knock them prone, and if you miss, you slide them out of the zone, then back into it, and attack them again. Repeat until prone.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



I did that with a rope bridge encounter I ran, but all the railings did was allow the party not to fall prone if they made the first save, and get a reroll if they didn't - on the reroll, if succeeded, they did fall prone.

Or in other words, there are no rules as to how railings work, and it is up the DM to determine their effect.
 

Railing don't need rules.

They are there for a single purpose: to avoid people falling over.

They should work as a wall.

Not much point in having a railing if they don't work that way.

A faulty railing OTOH...
 

Eh, railings that stop you from going over the edge, but still have you potentially fall prone can make sense.

And railings that can stop someone from falling... _once_... also sound good.

Or railings that remove X amount of forced movement, but more than that and off you go...
 

Eh, railings that stop you from going over the edge, but still have you potentially fall prone can make sense.

And railings that can stop someone from falling... _once_... also sound good.

Or railings that remove X amount of forced movement, but more than that and off you go...

That railing vs. forced movement is a good rule of thumb, I had a similar situation during a fight at an inn. Use of forced movement through the balcony railing, I counted the railing as an extra square of movement, so it took 2 squares of slide or push to get someone against the railing over it.
 

reading this thread made me think of another situation.

Can push effects pull a flyer down?

Let's say a creature is 3 squares away from a wizard, and 3 square up. Using 4e's diagonal math, that's simply 3 squares away.

The wizard casts a push 3 effect on the creature. For the 1st move, the wizard moves the creature 4 squares away, and 2 squares up. By diagonal math, its 4 squares away....a legal push.

The wizard continues in this manner, not only knocking the flyer farther away, but also dropping it to the ground.

Is this legal?

I think RAW it is, and I think I'm fine with that. 4e's combat is more about getting into the face of your enemy than 3e's was, so if this helps the meleers hit fliers without needing special gear I'm all for it.
 

RAW it isn't, because forced movement can't move a target vertically _but_ wizards has also stated that's an unintended consequence of a rule designed to stop forced movement from causing falling damage (and proning), so _many_ DMs allow forced movement to work.
 

Honestly, this is the sort of ultra-cheesy thing that I think a DM is more than within their right to not allow (I only allow effects for 'entering or start in a zone' powers once per turn per zone, myself).

Ultra-cheese or not, it's perfectly legal, but not as effective as people might think.

(had to wade into this one, 'cos it's an extremely common mistake I see on tables)

DMG p61 defines Hindering Terrain as (also) damages creatures that enter it.
The rule that allows a save to prevent falling off a cliff is on DMG p44, and ... it's ... Hindering Terrain.

Just saying, attempting to push foes into a wall of fire gives 'em a save.
Also, note that falling prone is a consequence, and not a cost.
So creatures already prone can attempt more saves.
 

Remove ads

Top