D&D 5E Rant about Forced Movement

[James Gasik]

This is apparently nothing new, but it's my first encounter with it, so bear with me. An enemy Wizard cast sickening radiance, and another enemy punts a PC into it. Like a human, I assume "moves into" means just that, and tell the player to make a Con save. Before the start of their turn, they're coming at me with a "clarification" that "moves" and "enters" are two entirely different things, and being punted into radioactive hell is not damaging at all, provided you didn't walk into it under your own power.

Meanwhile, another player was pulled out of the area before the start of their turn, so they took absolutely no damage! I'm at a complete loss as to how any of this make sense.

If this is a gamist restriction on spells to prevent pinball forced movement strategies, I guess, but why isn't that a general rule? Why do some spells instantly damage you if you "enter" them by any means, and others are like "well, hey, if you get pushed into a wall of lasers and pulled out again, you take no damage"?

It's doubly annoying when I've watched actual play sessions on YouTube and listened to "tactical advice" which are like, "but of course, a grappler can move you into and out of spike growth and murder you like a vorpal cheese grater", but apparently, that's no bueno, lol.

You'd think someone would say "if your DM rules enter and move are the same thing, you can do this"!

It led to a heated argument with my players. Which I abdicated, I mean, if they feel this strongly about it, that can be the rule of the day. But it was really irritating to me that "reading the spell" did not "explain the spell". So much for "natural language"!

 

[mellored]

If this is a gamist restriction on spells to prevent pinball forced movement strategies, I guess, but why isn't that a general rule? Why do some spells instantly damage you if you "enter" them by any means, and others are like "well, hey, if you get pushed into a wall of lasers and pulled out again, you take no damage"?

They changed it for 2024 revision.

Damage happens when you enter, moves over you, or at the END of your turn.

So the wizard cast sickening radiance, everyone immediately takes damage once, then has a chance to get out.


As for spiked growth, I rule that dragging someone moves them into the square you just left. You can't walk next to it and hold someone off to the side.

Also, nothing stops monsters from dragging/pushing PCs. Same rules apply to both sides.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Natural language allows for every table to decide how they want to rule it. Rather than having a set rule that a DM then has to deliberately tell their players "No, we are not playing that way."

One is a conversation, the other is a command. The game tends towards conversations these days. If a person prefers commands, there are other games that give that to them.

 

[mamba]

they're coming at me with a "clarification" that "moves" and "enters" are two entirely different things

who is they, the 2024 rules? Yeah, that is not a clarification, that is BS

 

[Neonchameleon]

The problem is that WotC didn't follow its own paradigm and screwed up in 2024.

There should be three types of zone.

• Physical objects like spikes and blade barriers you get hurt for moving through
• Fast zones like crackling lightning or spirit guardians that you get hurt for starting your turn in - you then get to run out. If you're stupid enough to run into one of these on your turn you take damage.
• Slow zones like Sickening Radiance that hurt after a few seconds if you end the turn there rather than running the hell away

And then the 2024 team messed up and had the zone moving into the target allowing fast zones to trigger again.

 

[mamba]

Natural language allows for every table to decide how they want to rule it. Rather than having a set rule that a DM then has to deliberately tell their players "No, we are not playing that way."

you say that as if it were a benefit that every table has to hash out what the rules mean by themselves

 

[DrJawaPhD]

This is apparently nothing new, but it's my first encounter with it, so bear with me. An enemy Wizard cast sickening radiance, and another enemy punts a PC into it. Like a human, I assume "moves into" means just that, and tell the player to make a Con save. Before the start of their turn, they're coming at me with a "clarification" that "moves" and "enters" are two entirely different things, and being punted into radioactive hell is not damaging at all, provided you didn't walk into it under your own power.

Rules as Written, your players are correct. The distinction is very confusing so it might change in 5.5e (I have no idea)

For Sickening Radiance I would suspect it is an intentional design decision to prevent PCs from pinballing the boss into and out of the area to quickly generate 6 stacks of Exhaustion and instant killing any BBEG.

From an RP perspective, the PC in your scenario was only in the radiance for a couple seconds maximum if they entered and left the area in between their turns which are 6 seconds apart. So taking no damage could make sense to me if you are only in the radioactive area for a couple seconds.

 

[mellored]

The problem is that WotC didn't follow its own paradigm and screwed up in 2024.

There should be three types of zone.

Their paradigm was to reduce rule confusion.

So having all zones work the same would fall under that.

And then the 2024 team messed up and had the zone moving into the target allowing fast zones to trigger again.

If you spend an action to cast/move Moonbeam or Cloud of Daggers, and someone hits you and you lose concentration, then you could end up dealing no damage that way.

No matter how you slice it, there is going to be some weird initiative loophole. So pick your poison.

And IMO, it's simpler to deal damage immediately.

 

[TiQuinn]

It led to a heated argument with my players. Which I abdicated, I mean, if they feel this strongly about it, that can be the rule of the day. But it was really irritating to me that "reading the spell" did not "explain the spell". So much for "natural language"!

IMO, the natural language is fine, it’s the intent and consistency in the ruling that’s important. And I agree with you on the interpretation of the rule.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Rules as Written, your players are correct. The distinction is very confusing so it might change in 5.5e (I have no idea)

For Sickening Radiance I would suspect it is an intentional design decision to prevent PCs from pinballing the boss into and out of the area to quickly generate 6 stacks of Exhaustion and instant killing any BBEG.

From an RP perspective, the PC in your scenario was only in the radiance for a couple seconds maximum if they entered and left the area in between their turns which are 6 seconds apart. So taking no damage could make sense to me if you are only in the radioactive area for a couple seconds.

The horror of six second turns strikes again!