D&D 5E Rant about Forced Movement

[Hussar]

To be honest, we’ve generally ruled that forced movement doesn’t force repeat effects because it’s just too cheap.

 

[mamba]

It’s better than some of the language contortions I’ve seen in D&D to maneuver around rule lawyers.

I disagree, there is not a rule lawyer at every table, and clearer rules can address some of that (never everything)

 

[mamba]

Nope, this guy.

EDIT: also this.

argh, even worse… anyone who proposes that ‘moves into’ and ‘enters’ are different things should not be allowed to write rules. Sorry JC, you seem like a nice guy, but this way lies madness

 

[mamba]

This is what rulings not rules means. You folks insisted on this. Hell minor clarity of Command causes thousand post threads.

sorry, but I never insisted on intentionally vague rules, only that there does not need to be a clear rule for every eventuality. Give me clear rules for everything you do have rules for, let me figure out how far the halfling can jump while standing on the shoulders of a goliath instead of on the ground

 

[TiQuinn]

argh, even worse… anyone who proposes that ‘moves into’ and ‘enters’ are different things should not be allowed to write rules. Sorry JC, you seem like a nice guy, but this way lies madness

Another one for the “he was his own worst enemy” file in TTRPGs.

 

[TiQuinn]

I disagree, there is not a rule lawyer at every table, and clearer rules can address some of that (never everything)

Even if someone stumbles over interpreting it, I posit that without a rules lawyer at the table, an agreement over the intent or at least how that table will use the spell going forward can be made very quickly.

 

[MarkB]

argh, even worse… anyone who proposes that ‘moves into’ and ‘enters’ are different things should not be allowed to write rules. Sorry JC, you seem like a nice guy, but this way lies madness

He's really not drawing any great distinction between the two, though.

 

[mamba]

Even if someone stumbles over interpreting it, I posit that without a rules lawyer at the table, an agreement over the intent or at least how that table will use the spell going forward can be made very quickly.

the discussions we have here suggest otherwise, at least for some instances / tables… the more often you have to figure something out at the table despite having a written rule, the worse the rules are (I am willing to exempt things like Command or Suggestion from this, as they cannot reasonably list all uses, so they only need to give guidance and limitations)

 

[mamba]

He's really not drawing any great distinction between the two, though.

moves is you moving, enters can be anything that results in you overlapping with an AoE. Tell me a case where it matters whether I moved into the area or whether I find myself in it by some other means. As far as I am concerned the consequences are the same in all cases, so why make the distinction

 

[MarkB]

moves is you moving, enters can be anything that results in you overlapping with an AoE. Tell me a case where it matters whether I moved into the area or whether I find myself in it by some other means. As far as I am concerned the consequences are the same in all cases, so why make the distinction

If an opponent has Polearm Master and you move into melee with them, you provoke an opportunity attack. If you teleport next to them, you don't.