Teleporting Enemies into a Pit: No save?

[Stalker0]

Normally when using forced movement to move an enemy into a damaging square (like a pit), then get a save, success they are knocked prone.

Now forced movement is defined as a push, pull, or slide...no where does it mention teleportation. So if I teleport an enemy over a pit square, do they get any kind of save or do they just suffer the pain?

 

[Mort_Q]

The few times I've seen this question come up, the limited consensus was that being able to drop a NPC into a pit via teleport was a little overpowered, despite the fact that it seems doable by the RAW.

The question seemed to be whether or not "over a pit" or "up in the air" is a legal destination for a teleport.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4t...-teleportation-forced-movement-off-cliff.html

http://www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-4th-edition-rules/252786-teleporting-opponents.html

 

[Regicide]

This is the same question as asking if you can teleport them into a hill, and the same answer. No, you pick the square, not the height. They end up at the bottom of the pit (without the whole falling buisness) assuming it's a legal square.

As far as I know, 4E doesn't have a version of 3E's "Pin To The Sky" spell yet.

 

[Obryn]

This is the same question as asking if you can teleport them into a hill, and the same answer. No, you pick the square, not the height. They end up at the bottom of the pit (without the whole falling buisness) assuming it's a legal square.

As far as I know, 4E doesn't have a version of 3E's "Pin To The Sky" spell yet.

It's not quite the same, though.

In 4e, you can't teleport a target into a hill because you have no line of sight to the inside of the hill. You do, however, have line of sight to spaces above the ground.

-O

 

[Stalker0]

It's not quite the same, though.

In 4e, you can't teleport a target into a hill because you have no line of sight to the inside of the hill.
-O

Even moreso, you can only teleport to a square that you could move to without squeezing, which the inside of the hill doesn't count

 

[Regicide]

It's not quite the same, though.

In 4e, you can't teleport a target into a hill because you have no line of sight to the inside of the hill. You do, however, have line of sight to spaces above the ground.

-O

I wasn't totally clear. You have line of sight on top of the hill. If the idea of a hill is causing problems, assume a square where the floor is 1 foot higher than the surrounding squares. Is that square valid? Yes. Do they end up embedded inside it? No. They end up on the ground in that square.

Even moreso, you can only teleport to a square that you could move to without squeezing, which the inside of the hill doesn't count

You can move to the bottom of the pit without squeezing, then it's a valid square.

 

[James McMurray]

4e tends to ignore the 3rd dimension, and this is another case of that. When you choose a square for something, the system assumes you'll be picking a square on a battlemat, not a location in the world that mat represents. For that reason, and for the sheer brokenness of being able to teleport enemies into a fall, our group says no.

It's not just "can I teleport them over a pit." If the answer to that is "yes," then the answer to "can I teleport them straight up" is also yes. That means that you can put them at a vertical distance from you equal to the range of the teleport. If you are elevated, and/or there is lower terrain nearby, it can be an insane fall.

Levitating wizard: +20'

Low terrain: A 60' dropoff is small for 20th level

Maelstrom of Chaos: port them anywhere in the burst (which is 50' up)

Your attack just did its base damage, plus an extra 13d10 from the fall. If you're flying instead of levitating, make it 26d10 instead.

 

[Stalker0]

It's not just "can I teleport them over a pit." If the answer to that is "yes," then the answer to "can I teleport them straight up" is also yes.

Here's the counterpoint to that. Is it vertical distance from the ground or in relation to you?

For example, in the pit example, I teleport a person who in on solid ground and at the same elevation as me. I move him to the square that is the mouth of the pit. He is now higher above actual ground, but he at the exact same elevation to me as he was just a minute ago. I haven't moved him up or down...the fall will do that, not the teleport.

Here's another example. Lets say I am flying 100 feet above the ground, and I wish to teleport 10 squares east. If there is a hill down there, so that the ground is now only 95 squares away and not 100...does that mean I can't teleport? Or if I can only teleport creatures to ground squares, do flying creatures lose the ability to teleport?

 

[Regicide]

Here's another example. Lets say I am flying 100 feet above the ground, and I wish to teleport 10 squares east. If there is a hill down there, so that the ground is now only 95 squares away and not 100...does that mean I can't teleport? Or if I can only teleport creatures to ground squares, do flying creatures lose the ability to teleport?

A square is a 2 dimensional object. You actually mean cubes, but 4E doesn't deal with cubes.

If you teleport 10 squares east you end up on the ground 10 squares east. Alternately the DM might not allow you to teleport since you can't actually walk from your current location to any other square since you're in mid air, so there aren't any valid squares.

 

[Nightson]

This is one of the big rule oversights with 4th edition (along with weapons as implements). The reason you won't find an answer is that there really isn't an answer. Being allowed to do things like teleport enemies straight up would add way too much damage to effects, but making it so PCs couldn't teleport themselves onto a five foot ledge makes it a lot less useful and there's effects that explicitly allow for vertical PC teleportation.

So best game results, say that you can only teleport enemies horizontally but PCs can teleport vertically.