D&D 5E Rant about Forced Movement

[TiQuinn]

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)

I think there’s a difference between arguing a rule on a forum versus figuring out a rule at the table.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

This reminds me of one of my favorite gaming moments.

I'm running 4e. I don't remember the module name, but it came after Keep on the Shadowfell. Party was level 7. The next problem was getting through a room where duergar had set up a blockade and were just guarding their border, hunkered down behind barrels and boxes.

Party is working on ideas, and one of the players - nicest guy ever, but not terribly bright (like Meatwad on ATHF) - goes, "I'm going to charge into the room, and when I do, they'll all run at me and I'll attack them all."

Wut.

So, a discussion happens. No, that won't work. It will work, he says. Why the F would they leave cover and come attack you, that makes no sense. I have this ability.

Wut. That ability doesn't do that. There's NO way. You must be reading it wrong.

We'll be damned if his seventh level daily, I think, literally let him run into the room, and any enemies within X squares were pulled to him, and he got an attack on each and every one of them. That was beefy, comical, and pretty cool all in all.

YMMV

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

This reminds me of one of my favorite gaming moments.

I'm running 4e. I don't remember the module name, but it came after Keep on the Shadowfell. Party was level 7. The next problem was getting through a room where duergar had set up a blockade and were just guarding their border, hunkered down behind barrels and boxes.

Party is working on ideas, and one of the players - nicest guy ever, but not terribly bright (like Meatwad on ATHF) - goes, "I'm going to charge into the room, and when I do, they'll all run at me and I'll attack them all."

Wut.

So, a discussion happens. No, that won't work. It will work, he says. Why the F would they leave cover and come attack you, that makes no sense. I have this ability.

Wut. That ability doesn't do that. There's NO way. You must be reading it wrong.

We'll be damned if his seventh level daily, I think, literally let him run into the room, and any enemies within X squares were pulled to him, and he got an attack on each and every one of them. That was beefy, comical, and pretty cool all in all.

YMMV

Come and Get It!

The poster child of all that is wrong in the world for many h4ters. It still think it was a super cool and thematic mass taunt.
Having it be a a weapon attack against Will and having mindless creature be affected was a bit much, though (IMO, most mindless creatures should be immune to all mind-affecting effect, anyways)

 

[jasper]

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.

Natural language is great. But some gamers are not natural........

 

[Maxperson]

Never mind.

 

[CreamCloud0]

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.

isn't that a difference of how you move rather than the cause of movement though?

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I feel you on the players throwing a fit during the session. Is this going to kill your character? No? Then please just let me make a ruling now and we can discuss it after game.

As far as the distinction in 5e (which, as we've seen, a lot of us unfortunately won't even catch unless we see online discussions about it) I think there is merit to its existence. Having been working on designing a lot of spells recently, sometimes it's subtle distinctions that determine how well (as in balanced and effective at working as intended rather than some other way) a spell is.

Because I have a lot of 5e experience (both actual play and speculative) I find myself refining and carefully rewording spells to attempt to make them work as intended.

Had a spell that makes a 5' aura and you have to save or get pushed back. Then I realized someone could just keep moving forward until they make their save or run out of movement. It might be clear to me that the intent was if you fail you just can't get into that space on your turn, but that is not what it said.

So yeah, since the book doesn't have a section that officially describes the difference between move into and enter (like it does for describing attack = make an attack roll) they really should have put more words in the spell. Something like "voluntarily uses their movement speed to enter the area". However, I would suggest against summarily treating all forms of getting into an aura the same, either by going with the hidden intended jargon (frustrations aside) or by carefully examining the spell to determine why they might be distinguishing between those things (as well as start of turn versus end of turn damage). While sometimes they goofed, most of the times those aspects of the spell really do function best when used as intended (once we know how to figure out what that is!) (I'm addressing 2014, no clue how it works in practice in 2024.)

 

[Maxperson]

What I hate about spells are the ones that only damage or make things difficult for your enemies. Like if a giant enters an area of Wrath of Nature(Xanathar's) and decides that the damage and inconvenience aren't worth it and switches sides, does the spell somehow know it's not an enemy any longer and stop affecting it?

Area spells should just affect everyone or everyone, but the caster. None of this "allies" and "enemies" stuff.

 

[SkidAce]

What I hate about spells are the ones that only damage or make things difficult for your enemies. Like if a giant enters an area of Wrath of Nature(Xanathar's) and decides that the damage and inconvenience aren't worth it and switches sides, does the spell somehow know it's not an enemy any longer and stop affecting it?

Area spells should just affect everyone or everyone, but the caster. None of this "allies" and "enemies" stuff.

Mostly agree with you.

I guess we kind of rationalized it as the caster controlling who got hurt or not, not the ongoing spell itself. A sort of concentration that could be modified before we had concentration in the game.

But yah...its weird.

 

[Micah Sweet]

What I hate about spells are the ones that only damage or make things difficult for your enemies. Like if a giant enters an area of Wrath of Nature(Xanathar's) and decides that the damage and inconvenience aren't worth it and switches sides, does the spell somehow know it's not an enemy any longer and stop affecting it?

Area spells should just affect everyone or everyone, but the caster. None of this "allies" and "enemies" stuff.

Agreed. The concept really breaks verisimilitude for me.