What happens when... (Travel Domain Grappling Question)

[helium3]

The total duration for the domain power is a lot less, that's true, but it only functions as needed, when needed, and does so automatically. Using your houserule, for example, if you were fighting a creature with improved grab and got hit in round one, your FoM power would activate. If you did not get hit in round 2, then your FoM power would not activate. If you then got hit by a hold person in round 3, it would activate, using up the second round of your power.

No, not only do I think that your houserule is more useful than just freedom of movement 1/day, but it's way unbalanced for a domain power.

It's unbalanced when compared to other domain powers? The only significant difference between our house rule and the way that one could read the domain power as described in the player's hand book (I can't seem to find the domains in the SRD anywhere) is that it also affects creature's attempts to grab and grapple the character. The other applications, IE fighting underwater, being tied up, being hindered by terrain and being grappled by NPC's aren't going to matter a whole heck of a lot in most encounters. Heck, even being immune to being grabbed and spells that impede movement isn't going to be very useful most of the time. A T-Rex may have a hard time swallowing a cleric with the travel domain, but that cleric is still going to get bit. I guess I just don't subscribe to the belief that "balance" is best ensured by making sure that all things are perfectly equal in some esoteric sense of "value." All spells of a given level aren't balanced such that they are equal. Some domains flat out suck compared to others. Hell, some CLASSES suck compared to others.

But I guess it doesn't really matter. We ruled that way because we like it, and we didn't think it somehow "broke" the travel domain. I still think it's better to have a simpler understanding of the rules that prevents argument like "does my domain power work against the telekinesis spell that the wizard cast?" If you've got a wizard casting that spell in combat against PC's, it's high level combat and slow enough as is. The last thing you need is to have a 15 minute discussion in the middle of combat about how a variant version of a spell would interact with a spell being cast by an opponent.

 

[KarinsDad]

A wall doesn't impede movement? Can you walk through a wall? That doesn't make any sense. How about if you're surrounded by walls and can't fly or burrow? Is your movement impeded now? How about if you're in darkness?

The point is that a wall prevents movement in certain directions, but it does not impede movement. The character is not the target of, or in the area affect of, the wall.

Impeding movement is when the character is either prevented from moving completely, or his movement is slowed up in some fashion by an effect.

It is not when he cannot go in a given direction.

Freedom of Movement is not total intangibility.

 

[KarinsDad]

Paralyzation could be seen as reducing movement statistic to zero, tho.

It's still that direct effect versus indirect effect thing.
I know, that it is a thin line, that's just how I see it.

What direct versus indirect thing?

I've looked in the rules and cannot find it.

What page is it on?

 

[KarinsDad]

Hrm. What if someone summoned a troll, and it started grappling the cleric? It's magic, and it's impeding the cleric's movement... I might have to re-think my position on this.

A summoned troll is a creature, not a spell effect.

The spell effect on a summoned creature is what is keeping it at the location, not the creature itself.

So you can Dispel the summoning of the troll, but you cannot dispel the troll itself. The troll is not magic, it is "real".

Wouldn't the travel domain get you out of a Hold Person, too?

Yes. It is a spell effect that impedes movement.

 

[Nareau]

OK then. Let's try these:

Would Freedom of Movement allow you to move normally while influenced by a Command spell if the command were "Stop!"?

Would Freedom of Movement allow you to move normally while influenced by a Sleep spell?

Spider

 

[Thanee]

What page is it on?

PHB p. 188 and 233.

Bye
Thanee

 

[billd91]

OK then. Let's try these:

Would Freedom of Movement allow you to move normally while influenced by a Command spell if the command were "Stop!"?

Would Freedom of Movement allow you to move normally while influenced by a Sleep spell?

Spider

I would think not. Both of these spells are compulsion effects. They don't directly impede movement. They prevent the target's will from allowing them to move.

Personally, I'm not at all sure I'd let it affect Hold Person, which is also a compulsion effect as well. While I can understand that's one of the classic examples of spells that impede movement, having Freedom of Movement selectively break compulsions or not is a bit dodgy.

 

[Infiniti2000]

It's also the way the domain power works - with the minor quibble of whether or not it would apply to the Improved Grab or not.

Yes, I know, but I was pointing out that the domain power does not grant all the abilities of FoM and arguing that allowing that was IMO better than actually have FoM 1/day (which is what I that the person I was reponding to was thinking). I was pointing out what you say as part of the domain power. I'm not sure I'm making sense, but hopefully I am.

It's unbalanced when compared to other domain powers?

Yes, most definitely IMO. A level/per day use of FoM usable automatically as a free action is too much. Allowing it without the grappling component is not. You will be grappled far more frequently than you will be subjected to the other effects.

The point is that a wall prevents movement in certain directions, but it does not impede movement.

With all due respect, you still aren't making any sense. First you say, "If the spell impedes movement (regardless of how), the ability ignores it." A wall definitely impedes movement in the direction of the wall. I can't see how you don't agree with that statement. By your own statement, "the ability ignores [the wall]." If I'm in the middle of an entangle and I have fly and make my save, I can fly upwards without impedence. Therefore, by your rule that the effect does not impede movement in at least one direction, the ability does not function. So, therefore, I can conclude (based on your logic) that FoM does not work vs. entangle when moving on the ground as long as the person can fly. I ask you to think about this one a little more and reconsider your position. Specifically, "It is not when he cannot go in a given direction."

 

[Nail]

If I'm in the middle of an entangle and I have fly and make my save, I can fly upwards without impedence. Therefore, by your rule that the effect does not impede movement in at least one direction, the ability does not function. So, therefore, I can conclude (based on your logic) that FoM does not work vs. entangle when moving on the ground as long as the person can fly.

The Entangle spell also keeps you rooted to the spot......so being able to fly is irrelevant.


"Grasses, weeds, bushes, and even trees wrap, twist, and entwine about creatures in the area or those that enter the area, holding them fast and causing them to become entangled."

 

[Infiniti2000]

The Entangle spell also keeps you rooted to the spot......so being able to fly is irrelevant.

I said "make my save" which means I am not rooted to spot but I can only move at half speed through the area. If I had fly, I could move upwards without penalty though because I'm not moving through the area. Now, we all know that FoM would allow you to move on the ground without the movement penalty, right? But, based on KarinsDad's logic, since the entangle doesn't impede your movement except in two directions (not up), then FoM wouldn't work.