The 3rd option is that Teleportation is movement, but has a "Not Applicable" distance value, so it would satisfy "move 0", as opposed to "doesn't move".
I'd be happy to agree to that compromise. Teleportation is moving (I don't consider there to be a meaningful distinction between that word and movement), but for any effect which does not specify or assume a point of reference for that movement the distance moved is 0ft.
So if it's a question of moving 30ft AWAY, then teleporting definitely moves you 30ft. If it's moving INTO, then teleporting in is moving in (and is entering).
Then teleporting through (i.e. from one side to the other) is usually not going to trigger anything that requires moving through our moving within an effect.
The edge cases are movement without reference. Any effect that says "you can't move" would not necessarily prevent teleportation. Then there are some effects that trigger from moving certain distances, but not specifically from, to, through or into anything. So far, I think we have only seen two of those come up in pages of 'debate'; Feline Agility and Booming Blade. I'm happy for teleportation to count as moving, but moving 0ft in both of those cases.
The hairs people will split, the hoops they will jump through, to say moving 0 feet is still moving.
Occam's razor, people.
On the contrary, I'm going to great lengths to say that moving a great distance can still be considered moving 0 feet (under specific circumstances for certain triggered effects).
I'll chime in with my 2 cents only to come at it from a slightly different angle. So let's say you use you action to cast misty step, teleporting yourself 30ft, if you have a 30ft move you can still take your move action to move an additional 30ft (by walking) after you've teleported (for a total of 60 feet of movement, but requiring you to use your action and your move action).
It's my understanding that every turn unless otherwise stated you get an action (cast a spell, attack, etc), a bonus action (usually for an off hand attack or class ability), a move action (moving up to your speed) and a reaction. So it is entirely feasible to consider teleport as an action and a form of movement (using your action to cast the spell thus moving) but not consider it a move action (using your own two legs to move). This in my opinion allows you to still move after you teleport
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
Equating teleportation to moving means inventing something not expressed in the rules. You might as well say grease is flammable and does bonus fire damage, when ignited, like the contents of an oil flask.
(Yes, I know that's a bit of a straw man.)
Things in the books expressly tell us what they are, what they do, and what we, as players and DMs, can do with them. Silence is not an answer. We don't need a description to tell us something isn't true. We need it to tell us it is true. And equating teleportation to moving isn't something expressly told us. It's inference, and one I do not believe holds up to any serious scrutiny.
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
The book indicates that teleportation is moving three times. The book never says teleportation is not moving.
The hairs people will split, the hoops they will jump through, to say moving 0 feet is still moving.
Occam's razor, people.
On the contrary, I'm going to great lengths to say that moving a great distance can still be considered moving 0 feet (under specific circumstances for certain triggered effects).
That's arguably worse. Why not be consistent? Why is your idea of what constitutes moving fluid?
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
The book indicates that teleportation is moving three times. The book never says teleportation is not moving.
I count maybe one, if you look at the rule coving being Prone, in the combat section.
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
The book indicates that teleportation is moving three times. The book never says teleportation is not moving.
I count maybe one, if you look at the rule coving being Prone, in the combat section.
Things I can find get more and more tenuous/consequentialist (teleporting not being moving has weird consequences) from here:
Glyph of Warding's wording was errataed to simply state that if it's moved, it breaks - the old wording was more flowery, saying that it had to remain in its place, and then going on to explain what distance broke it. The latter implies that anything capable of changing its place is by definition moving it. But it's pretty bogus trying to ignore errata to come to a conclusion. Post-errata, it is simply a consequence of teleportation not being movement that it would let you change a glyph's location without breaking it.
Frightened only limits willing movement (the phrase is "willingly move"), so if teleportation isn't movement, you can willingly move closer to what you're frightened of.
The "Movement and Position" section later in this chapter gives the rules for your move.
Yes, your move, as in expending speed on your turn (and others) in combat. That chapter has no bearing on other types of moving, which include RAW examples like:
Travelling over longer distances and outside of combat/initiative scenarios
Falling
Being moved around by spell and other game effects (like thorn whip)
Traveling on/in vehicles
3 of these examples can also occur in combat, and teleportation, if you consider it to be moving, can occur both inside and outside combat. The problem (which has been driving this whole thread (and the numerous threads it has spawned) is whether you consider teleportation to be "movement" (which I'm defining as the Chapter 9 definitions), "moving" (the general term that would include "movement" and all of the above other kinds of moving), both, or neither. The game gives very little to no guidance on what teleportation is in regards to movement/moving/etc, and so we go around and around in circles because we all have different opinions as to what it is in the absence of a real definition or set of general rules.
What's funny is that the actual question in the OP was if you teleport into an Area of Effect, have you "entered" it (as it pertains to triggering effects)? has been all but forgotten as the discussion has evolved. Whether you consider teleporting to be "movement" or "moving" the answer to that should be Yes. Only if you don't think it's either would the answer to that be No.
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
The "movement" rules in Chapter 9 dictate movement in combat/initiative only, specifically movement that can be undertaken by the creatures own body. That chapter is not relevant to moving that can be outside of combat (that is the "movement" section of chapter 8) or moving that is not performed by the body. But those types of moving exist in the game, often as one-off effects. If I walk 10 feet, and then am snared and pulled up 10 feet, I moved 20 feet, even though only 10 feet of that would be covered in the "movement" section of Chapter 9.
You are right, though, that teleporting is not described explicity as movement, but neither is falling, neither is the 10' pull of Thorn Whip, but both of the latter examples would be "moving" in the IRL common english sense. You have to understand that the rules use both a game term "Movement" and a standard english term "move".
Equating teleportation to moving means inventing something not expressed in the rules. You might as well say grease is flammable and does bonus fire damage, when ignited, like the contents of an oil flask.
The rules are nowhere near comprehensive enough in 5e to be able to work without some form of extrapolation or interpretation. I've heard 4e was more comprehensive (and that people hated it), but that's not what 5e is.
(Yes, I know that's a bit of a straw man.)
don't use a logical fallacy to make your argument if you know it's a logical fallacy...
Things in the books expressly tell us what they are, what they do, and what we, as players and DMs, can do with them. Silence is not an answer. We don't need a description to tell us something isn't true. We need it to tell us it is true. And equating teleportation to moving isn't something expressly told us. It's inference, and one I do not believe holds up to any serious scrutiny.
This is true, but the game does expect us to use "plain english" in interpreting the rules. If plain english can define moving as a change of position over time, and teleportation is a change of position over a very short amount of time (not zero time, an instant has a quantity, just a very very small one). What teleportation moves through, is obviously not the material world, but plenty of fantasy precedents would allow you to describe it as moving through something (alternate dimensions, other planes, the weave itself, etc), and narrative description is what this game is all about.
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
The book indicates that teleportation is moving three times. The book never says teleportation is not moving.
I count maybe one, if you look at the rule coving being Prone, in the combat section.
Things I can find get more and more tenuous/consequentialist (teleporting not being moving has weird consequences) from here:
Glyph of Warding's wording was errataed to simply state that if it's moved, it breaks - the old wording was more flowery, saying that it had to remain in its place, and then going on to explain what distance broke it. The latter implies that anything capable of changing its place is by definition moving it. But it's pretty bogus trying to ignore errata to come to a conclusion. Post-errata, it is simply a consequence of teleportation not being movement that it would let you change a glyph's location without breaking it.
Frightened only limits willing movement (the phrase is "willingly move"), so if teleportation isn't movement, you can willingly move closer to what you're frightened of.
Hallow appears to apply an exclusive or to teleportation and movement.
That's all I found on a quick perusal.
All of which is inference. Teleportation is never once explicitly stated as moving or called a move.
Again, I will draw people's attention to pages 189 and 190 of the Player's Handbook.
Your Turn
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed — sometimes called your walking speed — is noted on your character sheet.
The most common actions you can take are described in the "Actions in Combat" section later in this chapter. Many class features and other abilities provide additional options for your action.
The "Movement and Position" section later in this chapter gives the rules for your move.
You can forgo moving, taking an action, or doing anything at all on your turn. If you can't decide what to do on your turn, consider taking the Dodge or Ready action, as described in "Actions in Combat."
Movement and Position
In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed. You can use as much or as little of your speed as you like on your turn, following the rules here.
Your movement can include jumping, climbing, and swimming. These different modes of movement can be combined with walking, or they can constitute your entire move. However you're moving, you deduct the distance of each part of your move from your speed until it is used up or until you are done moving.
The “Special Types of Movement” section in chapter 8 gives the particulars for jumping, climbing, and swimming.
As far as explicit text is concerned, this is it. Teleportation is conspicuously absent. Why? Because there's no speed. It had a speed in 4th edition, but this isn't fourth edition.
If you attempt to Shove someone away, you don't move them. You push them. If you cast thorn whip, you can't move the target. But you can pull them closer. And when you look at every single feature or spell which allows for teleportation, not a single one uses the word "move."
This has all been people inventing connections and interpretations which are neither expressed nor implied. You only see what you want to see. And if y'all want to house rule this at your table, then fine. But you will make people unhappy if you do. And for no other reason than needlessly overcomplicating the rules you play by. You do not get to say this is how the rules work. You are spreading misinformation. And that is the only reason I haven't quit the insanity already. Someone has to correct you.
All of which is inference. Teleportation is never once explicitly stated as moving or called a move.
Again, I will draw people's attention to pages 189 and 190 of the Player's Handbook.
Your Turn
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed — sometimes called your walking speed — is noted on your character sheet.
The most common actions you can take are described in the "Actions in Combat" section later in this chapter. Many class features and other abilities provide additional options for your action.
The "Movement and Position" section later in this chapter gives the rules for your move.
You can forgo moving, taking an action, or doing anything at all on your turn. If you can't decide what to do on your turn, consider taking the Dodge or Ready action, as described in "Actions in Combat."
Movement and Position
In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed. You can use as much or as little of your speed as you like on your turn, following the rules here.
Your movement can include jumping, climbing, and swimming. These different modes of movement can be combined with walking, or they can constitute your entire move. However you're moving, you deduct the distance of each part of your move from your speed until it is used up or until you are done moving.
The “Special Types of Movement” section in chapter 8 gives the particulars for jumping, climbing, and swimming.
As far as explicit text is concerned, this is it. Teleportation is conspicuously absent. Why? Because there's no speed. It had a speed in 4th edition, but this isn't fourth edition.
If you attempt to Shove someone away, you don't move them. You push them. If you cast thorn whip, you can't move the target. But you can pull them closer. And when you look at every single feature or spell which allows for teleportation, not a single one uses the word "move."
This has all been people inventing connections and interpretations which are neither expressed nor implied. You only see what you want to see. And if y'all want to house rule this at your table, then fine. But you will make people unhappy if you do. And for no other reason than needlessly overcomplicating the rules you play by. You do not get to say this is how the rules work. You are spreading misinformation. And that is the only reason I haven't quit the insanity already. Someone has to correct you.
The bolded is absolutely a semantic discussion, not a technical one, and plain english would disagree with your assertion. If I say "I pushed the vase to the other end of the table" it is not incorrect to say "I moved the vase to the other end of the table". "Push" is more specific than "move", but they are the same thing. With thorn whip, saying "I pulled the orc 10 feet closer to me" is the same as if I said "I moved the orc 10 feet closer to me".
"move" is a generic term, "push", "pull", "transport", "carry", etc are versions of "move" that are descriptively more specific, but are all variations of "move"
I would add that, to that first example, changing the verb to another specific version of move does not change the end result, that the vase was at one end of the table, and now it is at the other. The verb indicates the means by which I did so, either generally, via "moved" or specifically, via "pushed", "pulled", "carried", "transported", etc.
Teleportation is defined in the game in a number of places as "transport". If those two are synonymous (as indicated in the RAW), then I can insert "teleported" into the same sentence for the same result, and all could be generalized by substituting "moved"
The same works for a number of other effects, like "levitated", "telekinetically transferred", etc...
Finally, look up any of the definitions of the more specific verbs...how many use "move" in their definitions. I'll check (via Google/Oxford):
Move: go in a specified direction or manner; change position.
Push: exert force on (someone or something), typically with one's hand, in order to move them away from oneself or the origin of the force.
Pull: exert force on (someone or something) so as to cause movement toward oneself.
Carry: support and move (someone or something) from one place to another.
Now to verbs that reference other words that mean "move":
Transport: take or carry (people or goods) from one place to another by means of a vehicle, aircraft, or ship. (if carry means move, and transport means carry, then transport means move)
Teleport: transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
All of which is inference. Teleportation is never once explicitly stated as moving or called a move.
Again, I will draw people's attention to pages 189 and 190 of the Player's Handbook.
Your Turn
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed — sometimes called your walking speed — is noted on your character sheet.
The most common actions you can take are described in the "Actions in Combat" section later in this chapter. Many class features and other abilities provide additional options for your action.
The "Movement and Position" section later in this chapter gives the rules for your move.
You can forgo moving, taking an action, or doing anything at all on your turn. If you can't decide what to do on your turn, consider taking the Dodge or Ready action, as described in "Actions in Combat."
Movement and Position
In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed. You can use as much or as little of your speed as you like on your turn, following the rules here.
Your movement can include jumping, climbing, and swimming. These different modes of movement can be combined with walking, or they can constitute your entire move. However you're moving, you deduct the distance of each part of your move from your speed until it is used up or until you are done moving.
The “Special Types of Movement” section in chapter 8 gives the particulars for jumping, climbing, and swimming.
As far as explicit text is concerned, this is it. Teleportation is conspicuously absent. Why? Because there's no speed. It had a speed in 4th edition, but this isn't fourth edition.
If you attempt to Shove someone away, you don't move them. You push them. If you cast thorn whip, you can't move the target. But you can pull them closer. And when you look at every single feature or spell which allows for teleportation, not a single one uses the word "move."
This has all been people inventing connections and interpretations which are neither expressed nor implied. You only see what you want to see. And if y'all want to house rule this at your table, then fine. But you will make people unhappy if you do. And for no other reason than needlessly overcomplicating the rules you play by. You do not get to say this is how the rules work. You are spreading misinformation. And that is the only reason I haven't quit the insanity already. Someone has to correct you.
The bolded is absolutely a semantic discussion, not a technical one, and plain english would disagree with your assertion. If I say "I pushed the vase to the other end of the table" it is not incorrect to say "I moved the vase to the other end of the table". "Push" is more specific than "move", but they are the same thing. With thorn whip, saying "I pulled the orc 10 feet closer to me" is the same as if I said "I moved the orc 10 feet closer to me".
"move" is a generic term, "push", "pull", "transport", "carry", etc are versions of "move" that are descriptively more specific, but are all variations of "move"
edit: removed unnecessary quotes
Language is an art; the rules, a conversation. You can accept or reject what they have to say, but they are what they are. And, in the context of the rules, move has a clear definition. It's even bolded when the rules first reference it in the PHB. When the word is present, the rules are referencing that rule. And when it's absent, that rule is not being referenced.
And this isn't uncommon. There are countless professions where a common word carries a specific meaning on the job. And any meaning outside that specific one is discounted; deemed irrelevant. Crawford, and the rest of the team at WotC, weren't subtle when they wrote the rules. There's nothing hidden; held back as a secret to be uncovered by only the most canny of eyes. If the word move does not appear, then the rule isn't being referenced.
By your own admission, you're relying on a colloquial meaning of the word and employing it where it's not expressed. You are, expressly, going against the RAW. And there is no Sage Advice article to support so much as your interpretation of the rules.
Both dissonant whispers and thorn whip reposition the target. The former references both move and speed. The affected creature may provoke an Opportunity Attack, but they won't trigger the secondary damage of booming blade because it's compelled and not willing. The same, for the record, can also be said of command. The latter, however, will do neither. The reposition is both unwilling and not a move because neither move nor speed is referenced. Ditto for the Way of the Four Elements monk's Fist of Unbroken Air and Water Whip Elemental Disciplines. They push and pull, but they don't move.
The orc's Aggressive trait references both move and speed. So features like the Way of Shadow monk's Shadow Step and the Oath of Vengeance paladin's Relentless Avenger. If you use them, you move. But spells like dimension door and misty step do not. If you use these, you have not moved. Your relative position has changed, but you have not moved. They don't even have material or somatic components. A sorcerer could cast them without so much as blinking.
The common usage does not matter. What matters is whether or not the word move appears. Again, you are needlessly complicating this.
Finally, look up any of the definitions of the more specific verbs...how many use "move" in their definitions. I'll check (via Google/Oxford):
Move: go in a specified direction or manner; change position.
Push: exert force on (someone or something), typically with one's hand, in order to move them away from oneself or the origin of the force.
Pull: exert force on (someone or something) so as to cause movement toward oneself.
Carry: support and move (someone or something) from one place to another.
Now to verbs that reference other words that mean "move":
Transport: take or carry (people or goods) from one place to another by means of a vehicle, aircraft, or ship. (if carry means move, and transport means carry, then transport means move)
Teleport: transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
Fire engines are red. Red is a colour. Fire engines are colours?
No, that's abusing how flexible the verb "to be" is. Here's the exchange again, with a more mathematical bent:
Iconarising: If carry is a subset of move, and transport is a subset of carry, then transport is a subset of carry.
You: Fire engine is a subset of red object, and red is a subset of colour. Is fire engine a subset of colour?
Logical answer: False. You never established that fire engines were a subset of red, so red being a subset of colour does not mean anything for fire engine. You established fire engine is a subset of red object, and that red is a subset of colour, but you never established red object is a subset of colour or that fire engine is a subset of red.
Stepping away from just logic so we can answer unanswered questions, red object isn't a subset of colour and fire engine isn't a subset of red.
Put another way: you shifted definitions of "red" halfway through from an adjective (in the first sentence) to a noun (in the second sentence), and then tried to reconcile the two, even though red's definition as an adjective is wildly different from its definition as a noun. Unsurprisingly, you reached a false conclusion (that fire engines are colours). By contrast, Iconarising did not do this with the terms they were discussing.
Finally, look up any of the definitions of the more specific verbs...how many use "move" in their definitions. I'll check (via Google/Oxford):
Move: go in a specified direction or manner; change position.
Push: exert force on (someone or something), typically with one's hand, in order to move them away from oneself or the origin of the force.
Pull: exert force on (someone or something) so as to cause movement toward oneself.
Carry: support and move (someone or something) from one place to another.
Now to verbs that reference other words that mean "move":
Transport: take or carry (people or goods) from one place to another by means of a vehicle, aircraft, or ship. (if carry means move, and transport means carry, then transport means move)
Teleport: transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
Fire engines are red. Red is a colour. Fire engines are colours?
Note that transport is 'take or carry.' Note also 'or be transported.'
The bolded does not follow the logic you think it does (see quindraco's post above). My logic applies to synonyms, which was the entire point of the post. "Move" "carry" "transport" are synonyms (source Google/Oxford), "Fire Engine" and "Red" are not.
Also: Take: carry or bring with one; convey. (this is the definition synonymous with "transport" per source.)
Don't deliberately ignore intent, logic, grammar, and english to try and keep your point valid...it isn't as good a look as you think it is.
I'd be happy to agree to that compromise. Teleportation is moving (I don't consider there to be a meaningful distinction between that word and movement), but for any effect which does not specify or assume a point of reference for that movement the distance moved is 0ft.
So if it's a question of moving 30ft AWAY, then teleporting definitely moves you 30ft. If it's moving INTO, then teleporting in is moving in (and is entering).
Then teleporting through (i.e. from one side to the other) is usually not going to trigger anything that requires moving through our moving within an effect.
The edge cases are movement without reference. Any effect that says "you can't move" would not necessarily prevent teleportation. Then there are some effects that trigger from moving certain distances, but not specifically from, to, through or into anything. So far, I think we have only seen two of those come up in pages of 'debate'; Feline Agility and Booming Blade. I'm happy for teleportation to count as moving, but moving 0ft in both of those cases.
The hairs people will split, the hoops they will jump through, to say moving 0 feet is still moving.
Occam's razor, people.
Is that razor in the box with Schrodinger's Cat?
Unfortunately, simple is not what the rules and mechanics of D&D 5E are, if it were there would little use for discussing how it all works together.
On the contrary, I'm going to great lengths to say that moving a great distance can still be considered moving 0 feet (under specific circumstances for certain triggered effects).
I'll chime in with my 2 cents only to come at it from a slightly different angle. So let's say you use you action to cast misty step, teleporting yourself 30ft, if you have a 30ft move you can still take your move action to move an additional 30ft (by walking) after you've teleported (for a total of 60 feet of movement, but requiring you to use your action and your move action).
It's my understanding that every turn unless otherwise stated you get an action (cast a spell, attack, etc), a bonus action (usually for an off hand attack or class ability), a move action (moving up to your speed) and a reaction. So it is entirely feasible to consider teleport as an action and a form of movement (using your action to cast the spell thus moving) but not consider it a move action (using your own two legs to move). This in my opinion allows you to still move after you teleport
I typed about this before, people confusing colloquial movement with how the book uses the term. Your character changes locations, and if you're playing with miniatures or on a VTT you move the token, but the character doesn't "move." If they did, wouldn't a single teleportation effect use "move" in their description? Wouldn't all of them, for the sake of consistency?
Equating teleportation to moving means inventing something not expressed in the rules. You might as well say grease is flammable and does bonus fire damage, when ignited, like the contents of an oil flask.
(Yes, I know that's a bit of a straw man.)
Things in the books expressly tell us what they are, what they do, and what we, as players and DMs, can do with them. Silence is not an answer. We don't need a description to tell us something isn't true. We need it to tell us it is true. And equating teleportation to moving isn't something expressly told us. It's inference, and one I do not believe holds up to any serious scrutiny.
The book indicates that teleportation is moving three times. The book never says teleportation is not moving.
That's arguably worse. Why not be consistent? Why is your idea of what constitutes moving fluid?
I count maybe one, if you look at the rule coving being Prone, in the combat section.
Where are the other two?
From Chapter 9: Combat
Teleportation as movement in the PHB:
Teleportation as not movement in the PHB:
That's all I found on a quick perusal.
Yes, your move, as in expending speed on your turn (and others) in combat. That chapter has no bearing on other types of moving, which include RAW examples like:
3 of these examples can also occur in combat, and teleportation, if you consider it to be moving, can occur both inside and outside combat. The problem (which has been driving this whole thread (and the numerous threads it has spawned) is whether you consider teleportation to be "movement" (which I'm defining as the Chapter 9 definitions), "moving" (the general term that would include "movement" and all of the above other kinds of moving), both, or neither. The game gives very little to no guidance on what teleportation is in regards to movement/moving/etc, and so we go around and around in circles because we all have different opinions as to what it is in the absence of a real definition or set of general rules.
What's funny is that the actual question in the OP was if you teleport into an Area of Effect, have you "entered" it (as it pertains to triggering effects)? has been all but forgotten as the discussion has evolved. Whether you consider teleporting to be "movement" or "moving" the answer to that should be Yes. Only if you don't think it's either would the answer to that be No.
The "movement" rules in Chapter 9 dictate movement in combat/initiative only, specifically movement that can be undertaken by the creatures own body. That chapter is not relevant to moving that can be outside of combat (that is the "movement" section of chapter 8) or moving that is not performed by the body. But those types of moving exist in the game, often as one-off effects. If I walk 10 feet, and then am snared and pulled up 10 feet, I moved 20 feet, even though only 10 feet of that would be covered in the "movement" section of Chapter 9.
You are right, though, that teleporting is not described explicity as movement, but neither is falling, neither is the 10' pull of Thorn Whip, but both of the latter examples would be "moving" in the IRL common english sense. You have to understand that the rules use both a game term "Movement" and a standard english term "move".
The rules are nowhere near comprehensive enough in 5e to be able to work without some form of extrapolation or interpretation. I've heard 4e was more comprehensive (and that people hated it), but that's not what 5e is.
don't use a logical fallacy to make your argument if you know it's a logical fallacy...
This is true, but the game does expect us to use "plain english" in interpreting the rules. If plain english can define moving as a change of position over time, and teleportation is a change of position over a very short amount of time (not zero time, an instant has a quantity, just a very very small one). What teleportation moves through, is obviously not the material world, but plenty of fantasy precedents would allow you to describe it as moving through something (alternate dimensions, other planes, the weave itself, etc), and narrative description is what this game is all about.
All of which is inference. Teleportation is never once explicitly stated as moving or called a move.
Again, I will draw people's attention to pages 189 and 190 of the Player's Handbook.
As far as explicit text is concerned, this is it. Teleportation is conspicuously absent. Why? Because there's no speed. It had a speed in 4th edition, but this isn't fourth edition.
If you attempt to Shove someone away, you don't move them. You push them. If you cast thorn whip, you can't move the target. But you can pull them closer. And when you look at every single feature or spell which allows for teleportation, not a single one uses the word "move."
This has all been people inventing connections and interpretations which are neither expressed nor implied. You only see what you want to see. And if y'all want to house rule this at your table, then fine. But you will make people unhappy if you do. And for no other reason than needlessly overcomplicating the rules you play by. You do not get to say this is how the rules work. You are spreading misinformation. And that is the only reason I haven't quit the insanity already. Someone has to correct you.
The bolded is absolutely a semantic discussion, not a technical one, and plain english would disagree with your assertion. If I say "I pushed the vase to the other end of the table" it is not incorrect to say "I moved the vase to the other end of the table". "Push" is more specific than "move", but they are the same thing. With thorn whip, saying "I pulled the orc 10 feet closer to me" is the same as if I said "I moved the orc 10 feet closer to me".
"move" is a generic term, "push", "pull", "transport", "carry", etc are versions of "move" that are descriptively more specific, but are all variations of "move"
edit: removed unnecessary quotes
I would add that, to that first example, changing the verb to another specific version of move does not change the end result, that the vase was at one end of the table, and now it is at the other. The verb indicates the means by which I did so, either generally, via "moved" or specifically, via "pushed", "pulled", "carried", "transported", etc.
Teleportation is defined in the game in a number of places as "transport". If those two are synonymous (as indicated in the RAW), then I can insert "teleported" into the same sentence for the same result, and all could be generalized by substituting "moved"
The same works for a number of other effects, like "levitated", "telekinetically transferred", etc...
Finally, look up any of the definitions of the more specific verbs...how many use "move" in their definitions. I'll check (via Google/Oxford):
Move: go in a specified direction or manner; change position.
Push: exert force on (someone or something), typically with one's hand, in order to move them away from oneself or the origin of the force.
Pull: exert force on (someone or something) so as to cause movement toward oneself.
Carry: support and move (someone or something) from one place to another.
Now to verbs that reference other words that mean "move":
Transport: take or carry (people or goods) from one place to another by means of a vehicle, aircraft, or ship. (if carry means move, and transport means carry, then transport means move)
Teleport: transport or be transported across space and distance instantly.
Language is an art; the rules, a conversation. You can accept or reject what they have to say, but they are what they are. And, in the context of the rules, move has a clear definition. It's even bolded when the rules first reference it in the PHB. When the word is present, the rules are referencing that rule. And when it's absent, that rule is not being referenced.
And this isn't uncommon. There are countless professions where a common word carries a specific meaning on the job. And any meaning outside that specific one is discounted; deemed irrelevant. Crawford, and the rest of the team at WotC, weren't subtle when they wrote the rules. There's nothing hidden; held back as a secret to be uncovered by only the most canny of eyes. If the word move does not appear, then the rule isn't being referenced.
By your own admission, you're relying on a colloquial meaning of the word and employing it where it's not expressed. You are, expressly, going against the RAW. And there is no Sage Advice article to support so much as your interpretation of the rules.
Both dissonant whispers and thorn whip reposition the target. The former references both move and speed. The affected creature may provoke an Opportunity Attack, but they won't trigger the secondary damage of booming blade because it's compelled and not willing. The same, for the record, can also be said of command. The latter, however, will do neither. The reposition is both unwilling and not a move because neither move nor speed is referenced. Ditto for the Way of the Four Elements monk's Fist of Unbroken Air and Water Whip Elemental Disciplines. They push and pull, but they don't move.
The orc's Aggressive trait references both move and speed. So features like the Way of Shadow monk's Shadow Step and the Oath of Vengeance paladin's Relentless Avenger. If you use them, you move. But spells like dimension door and misty step do not. If you use these, you have not moved. Your relative position has changed, but you have not moved. They don't even have material or somatic components. A sorcerer could cast them without so much as blinking.
The common usage does not matter. What matters is whether or not the word move appears. Again, you are needlessly complicating this.
No, that's abusing how flexible the verb "to be" is. Here's the exchange again, with a more mathematical bent:
Iconarising: If carry is a subset of move, and transport is a subset of carry, then transport is a subset of carry.
You: Fire engine is a subset of red object, and red is a subset of colour. Is fire engine a subset of colour?
Logical answer: False. You never established that fire engines were a subset of red, so red being a subset of colour does not mean anything for fire engine. You established fire engine is a subset of red object, and that red is a subset of colour, but you never established red object is a subset of colour or that fire engine is a subset of red.
Stepping away from just logic so we can answer unanswered questions, red object isn't a subset of colour and fire engine isn't a subset of red.
Put another way: you shifted definitions of "red" halfway through from an adjective (in the first sentence) to a noun (in the second sentence), and then tried to reconcile the two, even though red's definition as an adjective is wildly different from its definition as a noun. Unsurprisingly, you reached a false conclusion (that fire engines are colours). By contrast, Iconarising did not do this with the terms they were discussing.
The bolded does not follow the logic you think it does (see quindraco's post above). My logic applies to synonyms, which was the entire point of the post. "Move" "carry" "transport" are synonyms (source Google/Oxford), "Fire Engine" and "Red" are not.
Also: Take: carry or bring with one; convey. (this is the definition synonymous with "transport" per source.)
Don't deliberately ignore intent, logic, grammar, and english to try and keep your point valid...it isn't as good a look as you think it is.