Skirmish and full attack

[Hypersmurf]

However, I wouldn't have a problem with the scout going 5' forward, then 5' to the left and attacking with Skirmish.

Hmm, okay. I disagree - I think that's exactly what "she moves at least 10 feet away from where she was at the start of her turn" prohibits. After she's moved five feet forward, how far away from where she was at the start of her turn is she? Five feet. After she's then moved another five feet to the left, how far away from where she was at the start of her turn is she? Five feet.

If she moved ten feet forward, then five feet back, and then attacked, though, Skirmish would be fine, because this is now a round in which she's moved at least 10 feet away from where she was at the start of her turn.

On rereading the erratum, though, I have changed my opinion on the teleport trick. I think teleporting 10 feet and then moving five feet satisfies the "moves at least 10 feet away from where she was at the start of her turn" condition, but I forgot that there's another sentence in the erratum:

"The extra damage applies only to attacks made after the scout has moved at least 10 feet."

She might be fifteen feet away from where she was at the start of her turn, but she's only moved 5 feet to get there, so Skirmish isn't yet active. So I suspect my ruling on falling would be the same - you move five feet, and fall 20 feet - you're 20-25 feet from where you were at the start of your turn, and you've moved, but you haven't moved at least 10 feet.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

Hmm, okay. I disagree - I think that's exactly what "she moves at least 10 feet away from where she was at the start of her turn" prohibits.

As I said, we disagree.

 

[Caliban]

I find it interesting in pretty much every thread Hyp and you have both been in, you have reached your limit with regard to "what about X hypothetical scenario" questions.

That would be because that's his most common form of debating technique. As I said, it's one I happen to dislike, and not just when he does it.