Travel Domain: Escape a grapple?

[Shadowdweller]

Nobody will understand, or rather everyone will have their own unique understanding and they will get snippy in their debates on Enworld.

Speaking of which, my apologies if my most recent post was a little bit 'snippy'. I was/is a bit drugged up in response to illness.

 

[Artoomis]

... Contrast this and the powerful travel domain spells with the Trickery domain which ONLY gets a few class skills. I'm sorry, but no. The Designers are just not THAT stupid.

Let's compare:

TRAVEL DOMAIN
Granted Powers: For a total time per day of 1 round per cleric level you possess, you can act normally regardless of magical effects that impede movement as if you were affected by the spell freedom of movement. This effect occurs automatically as soon as it applies, lasts until it runs out or is no longer needed, and can operate multiple times per day (up to the total daily limit of rounds).
This granted power is a supernatural ability.
Add Survival to your list of cleric class skills.

TRICKERY DOMAIN
Granted Power: Add Bluff, Disguise, and Hide to your list of cleric class skills.

If you've ever tried to build a cleric who wanted to use Hider in combat, you'd know the value of having these class skills. Max ranks in Hide and Bluff can be awesome in combat. Max ranks in disguise can be great for roleplaying, but not very valuable in combat. Skill use can be a very key part of combat, especially knowing that most opponents will not put max ranks in Spot.

It does indeed look like the Travel domain may be the most powerful of the core domains - this is, of course, very much dependent upon the campaign and what foes the DM chooses.

 

[Tatsukun]

It does indeed look like the Travel domain may be the most powerful of the core domains - this is, of course, very much dependent upon the campaign and what foes the DM chooses.

Well, Magic is good too. I recently built a Cleric 1 / swachbuckler who uses a wand in her off hand. With one level of cleric (and the Magic domain) she can use any wand.

Her other Domain was a difficult choice between luck and travel.

-Tatsu

 

[drnuncheon]

but the spirit of what is being said seems to obviously include all effects

I still don't understand how people are making the leap from being unhindered by magical effects to being unhindered by all effects.

Did they just put the word 'magical' in there because they like to say 'magical'?

Can we ignore the word 'magical' anywhere else it appears, assuming it means 'any'?

J

 

[Rugger]

Yeah but he sent it to Custserve. I predict…

They will pass it on to Skippy the sage who will say that it is in fact the spell Freedom of Movement, with a duration of 24 hours cast automatically every morning. Also, since “effects that hinder movement” do not affect you, your clothes fall off so you can’t have any gear. In essence, you get the feat Vow of Poverty free at first level but you don’t have to follow any code to maintain it.

He will site the fact that clothes restrict you and the fact that the spell is clerical as the basis of his arguments.

Custserve, on the other hand, will reply that it only applies to magical effects, such as armor check penalties.

People will reply to Custserve (ignoring Skippy) and a second email from Custserve will contain only one word, “Potato”.

Nobody will understand, or rather everyone will have their own unique understanding and they will get snippy in their debates on Enworld.

So it shall be.

-Tatsu

Teehee!

....but the scary thing is that that's not too much of an exaggeration...

- Rugger
"I Lurk!"

 

[evilbob]

Did they just put the word 'magical' in there because they like to say 'magical'?

If you think of it as an example of part of what you could be avoiding, it makes sense.

Can we ignore the word 'magical' anywhere else it appears, assuming it means 'any'?

Oh, I see, so what you're saying there is that any time there is an error or misinterpretation in the book, we should immediately change anything else that is similar, anywhere else in the book, right? So now that sundering is not a standard action, I'll just make sure I erase the "standard action" header on that table in the PHB and replace it with "all of these are attack actions, too."

(I appologize if that was too snippy, too.)

 

[Liquidsabre]

If you think of it as an example of part of what you could be avoiding, it makes sense.

Sounds like you're avoiding it.

Oh, I see, so what you're saying there is that any time there is an error or misinterpretation in the book, we should immediately change anything else that is similar, anywhere else in the book, right?

So you think the word magical is in error then? That otherwise you recognize that this sentence and the word "magical" means: only magical effects are ignored as per Freedom of Move? Good, at least you've taken that first step.

(snipped snippy stuff)

 

[Caliban]

If you think of it as an example of part of what you could be avoiding, it makes sense.

Yes, but nothing in the sentence indicates that is meant to be "an example". Why do you think it should be read that way? I'm truly mystified.

 

[Artoomis]

Yes, but nothing in the sentence indicates that is meant to be "an example". Why do you think it should be read that way? I'm truly mystified.

"...you can act normally regardless of..." is rather inexact and vague and could mean, in this instance:

"...you can act normally in spite of such things as ...."

or

"...you can act normally when your movement is restricted, but only when restricted by magic, ...."

The fact is that the sentence structure chosen here is not one that should be used when attempting to spell out a very specific rule. Let's go back to the example of bad weather not stopping a hike.

"Our hike will continue regardless of bad weather." Gee, that seems straight forward, doesn't it? But it's not.

Does this mean:

"Our hike will continue in spite of such things as bad weather." This would mean other things might prevent the hike, but not things less sever than bad weather.

This is fairly obvious what is meant in context, I think, but the language used could just as easily mean:

"Only bad weather will not prevent our hike." This would mean that ONLY bad weather will prevent the hike. Death of all the hikers will not, for example, prevent the hike!!

I hope this example show you how poor the choice of "regardless" was in this instance.

The point, of course, is that one cannot hang one's hat on the term "regardless" because, as used hear, it could mean either that this domain power works vs. magic only or works just the same as Freedom of Movement.

It is, quite simply, poorly written.

 

[Lamoni]

Yes, but nothing in the sentence indicates that is meant to be "an example". Why do you think it should be read that way? I'm truly mystified.

I think both sides have explained themselves quite clearly.

"Regardless of" is not all inclusive. If something said that it could be worn regardless of if you were wearing heavy armor, would that mean that it only applied to heavy armor and not medium armor or light armor? Possibly. You could argue that if it had meant any armor, it would have said so. However, it is equally understandable that they meant all armor even though they only listed heavy armor in the "regardless of..." phrase. I know this example doesn't exist, but I purposefully chose one that didn't exist so people might look at it more objectively.

English is a fun language because it seems that no matter how carefully you word something, it can validly be interpreted in a different way than was intended. Now when you take a little less care in the wording, more problems arise.

It very well might have meant that it only applied to magical effects. It also very well might have meant that it worked just like the spell and only listed magical effects in the "regardless of..." clause because those were the most restrictive in the author's mind.

Both sides have been discussed very clearly. Now we are waiting on a reply from customer service. It is very true that they may give an answer that people don't like and it most likely won't solve anything. No matter what answer they give, half will say that they interpreted the rules wrong and discount the answer. What better source is there for an official ruling though? In every individual game you are are free to modify any rule you like or interpret it how you please. This starts to become house rules, but there is absolutely no problem with house rules. They may even make the game better.