dave2008
Legend
That is correct, but not relevant for your question. The answer is: no it doesn't work RAW or RAI like the player wants it to. However, you can rule however you want.This is not true per the SRD:
That is correct, but not relevant for your question. The answer is: no it doesn't work RAW or RAI like the player wants it to. However, you can rule however you want.This is not true per the SRD:
Yeah then I'd personally tell him no - the intent of the rule is that the target moves into the zone, not that the zone moves over the target. If he has an ally who can push the target into the aura I'd allow forced movement to trigger it but otherwise that's just not how it's supposed to work.This.
I was just correcting the rule, not it's relevance on the aura situation.That is correct, but not relevant for your question. The answer is: no it doesn't work RAW or RAI like the player wants it to. However, you can rule however you want.
It stems from a rule we use where the initial casting of a spell counts as "the enemy entered the area" if they were already in the area of effect. I honestly don't know if that is a legacy rule, a house rules, something we made up or what, but it is how we have played for a few years anyway. This is the first time a PC has had an ability where that rule has caused some problems, though.Yeah then I'd personally tell him no - the intent of the rule is that the target moves into the zone, not that the zone moves over the target. If he has an ally who can push the target into the aura I'd allow forced movement to trigger it but otherwise that's just not how it's supposed to work.
This is not true per the SRD:
It says directly in the SRD that you can. it isn't gated.My bad, I misspoke. There are exceptions, like counterspell as @DND_Reborn mentioned. But they're rare.
I think that's the intent but see my post above about how we got to this reasoning.The trigger sounds like it is the other character moving, which would happen on its turn (unless perhaps it had a reaction that allowed it to move on another's turn, but either way, it would be some kind of action taken by that character, not the PC). The PC's action can't be a trigger for the PC's reaction.
It says directly in the SRD that you can. it isn't gated.
You seem to think that I am trying to justify this thing by manipulating the language of the rules. i am absolutely not doing that. i was literally just pointing out what the rules say so we can have a clear discussion going forward.Given the requirement of a trigger of some sort, do you think that the wording in the SRD is to allow for things like counterspell, which takes place on your turn as a reaction to another reaction? Or do you think the intent is to remove the trigger as a requirement?
The trigger in this case sounds like something that can only happen on another character’s turn. They either begin their turn there, or they use movement to enter the area.
Allowing this to key off the PC’s action rather than the target’s potentially opens a can of worms in how reactions are used.
You seem to think that I am trying to justify this thing by manipulating the language of the rules. i am absolutely not doing that. i was literally just pointing out what the rules say so we can have a clear discussion going forward.
Personally, I want to ban this use of "reaction" because it portends badly for the future when some gross aura ability comes into play. I just want a well established foundation for the rule, because my players appreciate rules based rulings.