D&D 5E Rules Question: PC Auras

[dave2008]

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.

 

[Jer]

This.

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.

 

[Reynard]

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.

I was just correcting the rule, not it's relevance on the aura situation.

 

[Reynard]

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.

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.

 

[hawkeyefan]

This is not true per the SRD:

My bad, I misspoke. There are exceptions, like counterspell as @DND_Reborn mentioned. But they're rare.

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.

 

[Reynard]

My bad, I misspoke. There are exceptions, like counterspell as @DND_Reborn mentioned. But they're rare.

It says directly in the SRD that you can. it isn't gated.

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.

I think that's the intent but see my post above about how we got to this reasoning.

 

[billd91]

OK, I looked up the Halo of Spores and, based on its description, I'm going to say that using your own movement to trigger the reaction to inflict the necrotic damage is a no. While I don't think it's a terrible decision to allow it, I'm not sure I'm keen on people being the trigger for their own reactions on their own turns.

 

[hawkeyefan]

It says directly in the SRD that you can. it isn't gated.

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.

 

[Reynard]

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.

 

[hawkeyefan]

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.

Nope, I was just trying to offer an answer to the question! You can do whatever you’d like with the info and with your game.