A prone creature's only movement option is to crawl, unless it stands up and thereby ends the condition."
"To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation."
Teleportation can be done while prone, but your only Movement option while prone is crawling. Therefore, definitively, teleportation is not Movement.
The second bullet is very clear that you can move by teleporting though. That statement clearly describes both “crawling” and “using magic such as teleportation” as ways to move.
Are you saying getting knocked prone allows anyone and everyone to simply teleport? Hot take.
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
What? The level of misinterpretation you are using here looks intentional. No, Iconarising is not claiming that being prone gives you the power to teleport. We (and the actual text you have quoted) says that when you are prone, you can only move by either crawling or teleporting. Those are the two ways you can move. Crawling is a way to move. Teleporting is a way to move. Those are the two ways to move while you are prone and other ways to move are denied until you stand up. That's what the quoted sentence says.
This is one of 4 and a half instances (that have come up so far) of the rule books referring to the concept of teleporting using the word "move". You have studiously ignored most, and tend to redirect to your personal definition of the word "movement" whenever you want to avoid discussion.
So, in the books we can see that the writers use the word "move" when they are talking about teleportation. They never state that teleportation is not "moving". This seems like a pretty open-and-shut case to me. If you are hoping to prove the opposite then you should be able to directly address how these 4 uses of the word "move" are invalid.
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
And again, I simply argue back that the normal, common use of 'transport,' its common definition does not take teleporting into account because teleportation is not real.
I think you are working backwards here. "Transport" does not have to take teleportation into account. The writers have called Teleporting "instant transport". They have made the connection that teleporting is like transporting and included the subset of teleportation in the larger set of "transport". The logical path is: 1) to teleport is to be "Instantly Transported" (source, RAW). 2) To be transported is to be moved (source, natural language/plain english, previously cited by me in this thread). 3). If #1 and #2 are true, then to teleport is to be moved.
We are going around in circles here. The Devs are not going to issue a 5e 'plain English' dictionary. We should simply accept that we are using different definitions, that neither of us will convince the other side to change their views on the proper definitions to use and to simply accept that and move on.
I'm perfectly happy to stop and move on at this point, but I don't appreciate people saying that I'm "wrong" or "breaking the rules" for interpreting the rules using natural language/plain english (ie the way they are supposed to be). That we can come up with different possible interpretations is ok (I've said so in prior posts), its when people say that only their way is "correct" when its really just their interpretation that I get rankled. Anyway, best of luck to you and your games!
I do not have any problems with you or anyone else having a different interpretation. However those accusations that alternative views are 'wrong' have been going both ways.
One side has said "We think your interpretation is wrong, and that the rules don't say what you think they say." At least one person on the other side has said "What you're saying is deviating from RAW and it's homebrewing."
That latter stance implies that the person holding it no longer recognizes this as a debate about how to interpret the rules, but only how to "win the internet". ;)
"Plain English" means it is simple and unpretentious.
"Natural language" means the rules are written in a conversational tone. It's reflective of how languages evolve organically. But it doesn't mean there cannot be extravagance that you wouldn't find with "plain English."
The fact still remains that natural language is specifically called out as being used in their books. Your repeated insistence on things not actually presented in the books indicates you want it to be something it isn't.
At this point, I'm chalking it up to ego. The impression I have is you think this is some debate that can be won, but it's not. Not because you're incorrect, but because I think you misunderstand what an actual discourse should be. There are no points to be scored, no bragging rights to walk away with. The point is to learn from one another.
I just don't think you've made a compelling argument. Every spell you referenced still uses moves in terms of speed. Teleportation has no speed. Your own evidence argues against your point.
I'm done engaging with you. Call that a win, if you want. The people I feel most sorry for are those who listen to you.
Re: your last line, visualize all the damage done to who knows how many tables when players or DM's read this nonsense, and think "well, if the thread is 22 pages long there must be something to it". Then they export this to their tables, where the various DM's and players then have to argue with some player/DM who says "but I read it on the DBB forums". I have said it before. I know the mods won't step into this kind of thing. But they should. This disinformation does a massive disservice to the D&D community.
I created this thread for 2 reasons:
1) The topic is interesting and a little complex and so I was looking for input to inform my own decisions on the matter. 2) The topic had already completely derailed another thread, so I thought it'd be wise to dedicate a separate thread to the topic as to save the content of other threads. This thread is as such indented to be a place where people can say their piece on the matter, wear their enthusiasm for the topic thin and thereby keep it from spilling into other threads.
That being said, I do realize that very few are going to read through 23 pages of frustrated debate, and that those who do will likely be more confused about the topic than they were when they began reading the first page.
I am going to edit to my original post to include a disclaimer that no conclusions seem to have been reached after 23 pages of discussion.
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
The game encourages homebrew. You're not "wrong" or "breaking the rules" if you homebrew stuff. Just make sure your players know you intend to deviate from the RAW, and how, and there shouldn't be an issue.
Sure, but that applies to everyone, like when you deviate from the RAW and have teleportation not count as movement.
I want you to cite for everyone where the rules for Movement and Position even remotely hints at teleportation counting as movement.
"Plain English" means it is simple and unpretentious.
"Natural language" means the rules are written in a conversational tone. It's reflective of how languages evolve organically. But it doesn't mean there cannot be extravagance that you wouldn't find with "plain English."
The fact still remains that natural language is specifically called out as being used in their books. Your repeated insistence on things not actually presented in the books indicates you want it to be something it isn't.
At this point, I'm chalking it up to ego. The impression I have is you think this is some debate that can be won, but it's not. Not because you're incorrect, but because I think you misunderstand what an actual discourse should be. There are no points to be scored, no bragging rights to walk away with. The point is to learn from one another.
I just don't think you've made a compelling argument. Every spell you referenced still uses moves in terms of speed. Teleportation has no speed. Your own evidence argues against your point.
I'm done engaging with you. Call that a win, if you want. The people I feel most sorry for are those who listen to you.
Re: your last line, visualize all the damage done to who knows how many tables when players or DM's read this nonsense, and think "well, if the thread is 22 pages long there must be something to it". Then they export this to their tables, where the various DM's and players then have to argue with some player/DM who says "but I read it on the DBB forums". I have said it before. I know the mods won't step into this kind of thing. But they should. This disinformation does a massive disservice to the D&D community.
I created this thread for 2 reasons:
1) The topic is interesting and a little complex and so I was looking for input to inform my own decisions on the matter. 2) The topic had already completely derailed another thread, so I thought it'd be wise to dedicate a separate thread to the topic as to save the content of other threads. This thread is as such indented to be a place where people can say their piece on the matter, wear their enthusiasm for the topic thin and thereby keep it from spilling into other threads.
That being said, I do realize that very few are going to read through 23 pages of frustrated debate, and that those who do will likely be more confused about the topic than they were when they began reading the first page.
I am going to edit to my original post to include a disclaimer that no conclusions seem to have been reached after 23 pages of discussion.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. The original question has been answered. Teleportation would still count as entering the space or area of effect. You just aren't using your move to do so. The issue is whether or not teleportation counts as moving. It certainly isn't movement or part of a character's move. So, just for the sake of consistency, it shouldn't be. And yet, people want to keep arguing otherwise.
And, I'm sorry, but it's this kind of splitting hairs that derailed everything. Move is consistently used in relation to speed, regardless of whatever colloquial usage we employ outside playing the game. The PHB just doesn't care about the difference.
How many edge cases might there even be? I've looked, and I haven't seen discussions like this anywhere else.
The game encourages homebrew. You're not "wrong" or "breaking the rules" if you homebrew stuff. Just make sure your players know you intend to deviate from the RAW, and how, and there shouldn't be an issue.
Sure, but that applies to everyone, like when you deviate from the RAW and have teleportation not count as movement.
I want you to cite for everyone where the rules for Movement and Position even remotely hints at teleportation counting as movement.
Check the post below (which is the one right above yours) which cites text from the exact chapter and section (Chapter 9: Combat, Movement and Position, Being Prone. Does that count as "remotely close"? The full section lists two options for "moving" while prone; crawling, or "magic such as teleportation" by the rules of grammar, both of those would count as "moving.
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. The original question has been answered. Teleportation would still count as entering the space or area of effect. You just aren't using your move to do so. The issue is whether or not teleportation counts as moving. It certainly isn't movement or part of a character's move. So, just for the sake of consistency, it shouldn't be. And yet, people want to keep arguing otherwise.
They do.. because the rules aren't intended to be read as a restrictive formula. IMO, it leads to more inconsistency if you read "move" everywhere in the rules as "using movement speed" because of all the myriad examples where something moves without doing so.
If you read the Movement rules as a subset of "ways things can move" rather than an exhaustive prescription, then the rules are much more easily understood and more consistent.
And, I'm sorry, but it's this kind of splitting hairs that derailed everything. Move is consistently used in relation to speed, regardless of whatever colloquial usage we employ outside playing the game. The PHB just doesn't care about the difference.
How many edge cases might there even be? I've looked, and I haven't seen discussions like this anywhere else.
Perhaps because no one else thinks Teleport doesn't move you somewhere else? It's only the rigid constructionist rules-lawyer types who care about the distinction between moving and Movement. Honestly, who comes up with an argument like It's moving, but not Movement.. but it only moves you 0 feet because you didn't pass through the intervening space, and it wasn't willing movement because the magic did it to you. ? This is nothing more than a grab-bag of justifications for avoiding a conclusion one doesn't like. It's a twisting pretzel of rationalizations, not a reasonable argument.
You can dropprone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation. Every foot of movement while crawling costs 1 extra foot. Crawling 1 foot in difficult terrain, therefore, costs 3 feet of movement.
So, as written, standing up costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. However to move at all other than by teleporting, you need to crawl, which costs 3 feet for every foot of movement. So to stand up you need to use 3 x half your speed, or 1 and a half times your speed. Which is impossible since even if you dashed, that just increases your speed. You would still need 1.5 x your new speed to stand up.
So, RAW, it would seem that unless you teleport, you cannot stand up.
This is the section of the rules you are relying on as evidence?
Standing up doesn't change your location. You stand in your same location, and so you're not moving (although it costs you movement to stand up). Crawling changes your location.
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
And yet under that same section, in full, says:
You can dropprone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation. Every foot of movement while crawling costs 1 extra foot. Crawling 1 foot in difficult terrain, therefore, costs 3 feet of movement.
So, as written, standing up costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. However to move at all other than by teleporting, you need to crawl, which costs 3 feet for every foot of movement. So to stand up you need to use 3 x half your speed, or 1 and a half times your speed. Which is impossible since even if you dashed, that just increases your speed. You would still need 1.5 x your new speed to stand up.
So, RAW, it would seem that unless you teleport, you cannot stand up.
This is the section of the rules you are relying on as evidence?
This is an excellent argument that by definition, standing up isn't moving, even though it costs movement. That rule about moving costing double really puts the nail in the coffin on standing up being moving, if there was any doubt.
It's not part of a creature's move, and it doesn't follow any of the rules for movement.
But it is called "move". Which is kind of my point. You (and others) keep saying that:
"No, the word move has a specific meaning in the rules. There's an entire section in Chapter 9 dedicated to describing just what a move is and how it works. Move and movement are inseparable. And move is consistently used to refer to a creature expending speed; be it willing or compelled." (citation: Post #434 by Jounichi1983, this thread)
But it is plain as day that there are examples where the word "move" is used that doesn't reference a creature's speed, or the use of a creatures move on a turn. I listed about 10 examples in post #435. Every one of those examples do not reference the creature's movement speed, or movement (note: many reference distance, but distance is not the same as speed). And in the very chapter and section you keep citing as "describing just what a move is and how it works", there is a reference to teleportation being a kind of move. not a Move, not the use of speed, but as a way to move. That should prove that the game uses the term "move" in ways that don't just mean the use of speed.
The game does this in other places too, and a lot of it stems from the use of very generic words as game terms. For example, in the game, you have Action, actions, and action. What does this mean? it means that sometimes the game means an Action (the specific unit of your turn), an action (the conglomerate of Actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions, the best place to see this is in the description of Bonus Actions under the "your turn" section of chapter 9, which describes Bonus Actions as: "Various class features, spells, and other abilities let you take an additional action on your turn called a bonus action" Obviously the rules aren't saying Bonus Actions and Actions are the same thing, but it uses the same word to mean the specific "Action" and the general set of actions you can take on a turn. The last use is the general word, which gets dropped a few times where it would be used in plain english, like in the idiomatic phrase "a piece of the action".
Move and move are similar, in that you have specific game terms that are referenced as "your move" that do refer to the move you can do on a turn with your speed, but the game also uses the word to mean a more generic movement that doesn't follow Chapter 9, but instead follows what plain english would refer to as "moving".
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
And yet under that same section, in full, says:
You can dropprone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation. Every foot of movement while crawling costs 1 extra foot. Crawling 1 foot in difficult terrain, therefore, costs 3 feet of movement.
So, as written, standing up costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. However to move at all other than by teleporting, you need to crawl, which costs 3 feet for every foot of movement. So to stand up you need to use 3 x half your speed, or 1 and a half times your speed. Which is impossible since even if you dashed, that just increases your speed. You would still need 1.5 x your new speed to stand up.
So, RAW, it would seem that unless you teleport, you cannot stand up.
This is the section of the rules you are relying on as evidence?
This is an excellent argument that by definition, standing up isn't moving, even though it costs movement. That rule about moving costing double really puts the nail in the coffin on standing up being moving, if there was any doubt.
Really.... so if paralyzed :
Paralyzed
A paralyzed creature is incapacitated (see the condition) and can't move or speak.
one can stand up?
Excellent -- another example of the use of the word "move" outside the context of the strict movement rules. The natural language interpretation of what it means to be paralyzed is that they can't even twitch. Which, in this case, is a more expansive understanding of "move" than much of the rest of the rules, which usually means "change location."
See how insisting on using the same narrow definition of the word "move" everywhere leads to nonsensical interpretations?
Excellent -- another example of the use of the word "move" outside the context of the strict movement rules. The natural language interpretation of what it means to be paralyzed is that they can't even twitch. Which, in this case, is a more expansive understanding of "move" than much of the rest of the rules, which usually means "change location."
See how insisting on using the same narrow definition of the word "move" everywhere leads to nonsensical interpretations?
This goes both ways though. It means that 'move' does not necessarily mean the same thing in every context. Therefore even though teleportation does 'change location' it does not do so by passing through the intervening distance, the conventional definition of moving. Therefore it is not necessarily movement for purposes of spells that react to movement.
If that is what you are getting at, we are in full agreement.
In which context does "teleport" come up, if not a change of location?
More specifically : in what context is "move" referring to "passing through the intervening distance" instead of simply changing location (by whatever means)?
I would argue that, when spells or effects refer to passing through an area, then that's what they mean. For example: difficult terrain, or ongoing spells like spike growth. It's usually obvious from the spell or effect when physically passing through something is needed to trigger the effect. It's also usually obvious from the context when simply being in the new location is what's meant by "move".
The problems only arise when one insists on only one interpretation of "move" for all things.
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
And yet under that same section, in full, says:
You can dropprone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation. Every foot of movement while crawling costs 1 extra foot. Crawling 1 foot in difficult terrain, therefore, costs 3 feet of movement.
So, as written, standing up costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. However to move at all other than by teleporting, you need to crawl, which costs 3 feet for every foot of movement. So to stand up you need to use 3 x half your speed, or 1 and a half times your speed. Which is impossible since even if you dashed, that just increases your speed. You would still need 1.5 x your new speed to stand up.
So, RAW, it would seem that unless you teleport, you cannot stand up.
This is the section of the rules you are relying on as evidence?
A few comments: move, Movement, and Speed in Chapter 9 are not one and the same; in fact they can't be, because they are different parts of speech. To move (verb) is to cover a distance (ie change position) and can be about traversing a distance, or in rarer cases (like the paralysis condition) about the movement of limbs or body parts. A creatures Movement (as it is used in game) is a resource (a noun) that you can spend to move, and is usually expressed as a distance, and A creature's Speed is the maximum amount of movement it gets to spend per turn to move, without using their action, bonus action, or reaction to increase it. Sometimes (because the rules are not written with a lot of precision), the game refers to your move (a noun) or your movement to mean your distance traveled for a particular turn (which might include movement and other kinds of moving), rather than the resource you spend to move (verb). While these definitions aren't explicit, they can be understood in the plain english reading of the rules in Chapter 9. But note that the verb "move" can never be the same as the nouns "move" "movement" or "speed" because of the parts of speech rule.
Under these definitions. Standing up is not moving (at least not the distance traversing kind, because it doesn't cover a distance), but you spend movement to do it, an amount of which is equal to half your speed (half your max). Also under these definitions, difficult terrain can be described as requiring you to spend additional movement in order to move (1 extra foot per foot)
Most creatures can only move on their own by spending an amount of movement up to the limit of their speed, but 1) some have the ability to use actions, bonus actions, or reactions to increase their speed. 2) some have abilities that allow them to move without spending movement, and 3) outside forces and effects can cause a creature to move without requiring them to spend movement.
An example of 1) is a creature using it's action to Dash, or an Orc using the bonus action granted by its Aggressive trait
An example of 2) is the Storm Sorcerers tempestuous magic, which is a one-time ability to move without raising your speed or spending movement
An example of 3) is the Crusher Feat, which can force a creature hit to move 5 feet, or the telekinesis spell, which allows the caster to move a creature up to 30 feet.
So back to teleportation. Teleportation certainly causes you to change position, but it does so in a way different from any other "normal" means of moving, because it doesn't cross the space between departure and arrival. If the fact that it isn't "normal" is enough for you to say it isn't considered moving, that is fine, but if changing position is all you require for your definition of "move" (the verb), then it is moving (the verb). In no case is it "movement" because 1) teleporting is a verb, not a noun and 2) teleporting doesn't require you to spend movement, nor does it affect your speed. But here is where we are all differing.
This also explains why teleporting is described as a way to move in the prone section of chapter 9. That rule is writing as if it is a way to move (verb). But again, if you don't think it is, that is fine. There's enough wiggle room in the rules for different interpretations here, because there is not an explicit definition.
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
And yet under that same section, in full, says:
You can dropprone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation. Every foot of movement while crawling costs 1 extra foot. Crawling 1 foot in difficult terrain, therefore, costs 3 feet of movement.
So, as written, standing up costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. However to move at all other than by teleporting, you need to crawl, which costs 3 feet for every foot of movement. So to stand up you need to use 3 x half your speed, or 1 and a half times your speed. Which is impossible since even if you dashed, that just increases your speed. You would still need 1.5 x your new speed to stand up.
So, RAW, it would seem that unless you teleport, you cannot stand up.
This is the section of the rules you are relying on as evidence?
@Kotath that interpretation might be a bit off ( and please don't think i'm posting just to say it's wrong, maybe just misunderstood )
If you are prone, it will take half of your movement speed just to stand up ( if your movement speed is 30ft, 15ft is used to stand up, [ I'm thinking because of heavy armor it's takes quite a bit to get off the ground, and the reason it's half regardless of armor/no armor is defining rules on a case per case basis is overkill ] [ side note - would using a different type of speed like flying sill allow standing up? ( another thread on this?)] , and 15ft is left to move around. ), but if you don't have that half of speed left you can't stand up. ( if you only have say 10ft of your 30ft left, your stuck prone till your speed comes back up. )
If while prone you want to move to another location, you have two options :
1.) you crawl which takes -
a.) 2ft of speed to move 1ft ( normal terrain )
b.) 3ft of speed to move 1ft ( difficult terrain )
2.) magic use of teleportation ( which means you will still be prone after teleporting) - you moved (X)ft teleporting. ( Take Misty Step: 30ft ), then you still have your speed to ether crawl further away, or stand up and move the remainder of your speed away. ( again if your movement speed is 30ft, 15ft is used to stand up and 15ft is left to move around. )
I believe that is why the Rule As Written is worded as such, to give a creature a wider range of movement than what would be allowed if just a creatures movement speed were available.
The designers of the rules can't make teleporting a movement speed, there is just no way to define it's speed that would not have the effect of destroying the game. And if they had put teleportation in the Movement section of the rules, that too would cause people to attach a speed to teleportation.
So, what was done was to use the teleport spell as the general rule and mechanic for teleportation, and use the reference to the spell as a special type of movement within the context of how teleportation can be used to move.
To me, that was the only way to have it in the game as a movement a creature can have like flying, but not break the rest of the game, and I feel it fit's well into the rules of the game without really being considered "Homebrew".
Like the Oracle told Neo in the second Matrix movie :
" it's really just up to you. Just have to make up your own *BLEEP* mind to ether accept what I'm going to tell you, or reject it. Candy? "
Excellent -- another example of the use of the word "move" outside the context of the strict movement rules. The natural language interpretation of what it means to be paralyzed is that they can't even twitch. Which, in this case, is a more expansive understanding of "move" than much of the rest of the rules, which usually means "change location."
See how insisting on using the same narrow definition of the word "move" everywhere leads to nonsensical interpretations?
This goes both ways though. It means that 'move' does not necessarily mean the same thing in every context. Therefore even though teleportation does 'change location' it does not do so by passing through the intervening distance, the conventional definition of moving. Therefore it is not necessarily movement for purposes of spells that react to movement.
If that is what you are getting at, we are in full agreement.
In which context does "teleport" come up, if not a change of location?
More specifically : in what context is "move" referring to "passing through the intervening distance" instead of simply changing location (by whatever means)?
I would argue that, when spells or effects refer to passing through an area, then that's what they mean. For example: difficult terrain, or ongoing spells like spike growth. It's usually obvious from the spell or effect when physically passing through something is needed to trigger the effect. It's also usually obvious from the context when simply being in the new location is what's meant by "move".
The problems only arise when one insists on only one interpretation of "move" for all things.
I'd agree with that. It feels like there are two extreme positions, either 'always applies' or 'never applies.'
Hmm. That's interesting that you feel like these are the two extremes in this argument. I have always been arguing against any extreme reading of the word move. It's pretty plain to me that, most of the time the game says "move" it means "to change location". It's not all the time, but the context for when they mean something else is usually pretty clear (Paralyzed for example, or anything that says "move through the area", or "using your movement speed" etc). Any interpretation that requires a rigid definition that is always true in all contexts is, IMO, doomed. That's why so many people in this thread refer to "using plain English" or "natural language". That's essentially advising people to read the words using their normal meaning in the context of the text. Does the game use some standard constructions for consistency? Absolutely. Does it also use the same words more broadly outside those contexts? Yes indeed.
So would you say that, when the rules use "move" to mean "change location", teleport counts as moving (although never a Movement Type, or using a movement speed)?
See, I don't read it as giving you permission to do those things, so my reading doesn't lead to that same conclusion. That text seems to be outlining possible exceptions to a restriction, instead of granting options.
But hey, if you want to say in your games that getting knocked prone unlocks in people the magical powers of teleportation, more power to you I guess.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
And yet under that same section, in full, says:
You can dropprone without using any of your speed. Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.
To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation. Every foot of movement while crawling costs 1 extra foot. Crawling 1 foot in difficult terrain, therefore, costs 3 feet of movement.
So, as written, standing up costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. However to move at all other than by teleporting, you need to crawl, which costs 3 feet for every foot of movement. So to stand up you need to use 3 x half your speed, or 1 and a half times your speed. Which is impossible since even if you dashed, that just increases your speed. You would still need 1.5 x your new speed to stand up.
So, RAW, it would seem that unless you teleport, you cannot stand up.
This is the section of the rules you are relying on as evidence?
@Kotath that interpretation might be a bit off ( and please don't think i'm posting just to say it's wrong, maybe just misunderstood )
If you are prone, it will take half of your movement speed just to stand up ( if your movement speed is 30ft, 15ft is used to stand up, [ I'm thinking because of heavy armor it's takes quite a bit to get off the ground, and the reason it's half regardless of armor/no armor is defining rules on a case per case basis is overkill ] [ side note - would using a different type of speed like flying sill allow standing up? ( another thread on this?)] , and 15ft is left to move around. )
If while prone you want to move to another location, you have two options :
1.) you crawl which takes -
a.) 2ft of speed to move 1ft ( normal terrain )
b.) 3ft of speed to move 1ft ( difficult terrain )
2.) magic use of teleportation ( which means you will still be prone after teleporting) - you moved (X)ft teleporting. ( Take Misty Step: 30ft ), then you still have your speed to ether crawl further away, or stand up and move the remainder of your speed away. ( again if your movement speed is 30ft, 15ft is used to stand up and 15ft is left to move around. )
I believe that is why the Rule As Written is worded as such, to give a creature a wider range of movement than what would be allowed if just a creatures movement speed were available.
The designers of the rules can't make teleporting a movement speed, there is just no way to define it's speed that would not have the effect of destroying the game. And if they had put teleportation in the Movement section of the rules, that too would cause people to attach a speed to teleportation.
So, what was done was to use the teleport spell as the general rule and mechanic for teleportation, and use the reference to the spell as a special type of movement within the context of how teleportation can be used to move.
To me, that was the only way to have it in the game as a movement a creature can have like flying, but not break the rest of the game, and I feel it fit's well into the rules of the game without really being considered "Homebrew".
Like the Oracle told Neo in the second Matrix movie :
" it's really just up to you. Just have to make up your own *BLEEP* mind to ether accept what I'm going to tell you, or reject it. Candy? "
It does not actually say 'move to another location,' though. It says 'move.'
Now I agree with your interpretation regarding prone movement, but my point was as a counter to those insisting that teleporting means 'moving' and using that line as proof that movement is movement is movement and teleportation is movement.
Just as it means something different with respect to standing up than it does to moving laterally while prone, to me, it has a different meaning with respect to teleportation moving one.
I understand, The rules can be interpreted countless ways, each unique to the reader.
A laundry list of how various spell effects can "move" does not apply to how a character can move. It's worth remembering when the rules for Movement and Position are exclusively for when referring to what creatures can do with their move.
If you're going to continue insisting that creatures can teleport as part of their move, then you're insisting that teleportation is Movement. And that's a patently false assertion.
And now we have a new conundrum: if a creature is paralyzed, and being paralyzed means they cannot move, can they be moved by another character or effect? If you accept that move refers to any and all possible movement a character can be subject to, up to and including pulling, pushing, and teleportation, then they're locked in place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
What? The level of misinterpretation you are using here looks intentional. No, Iconarising is not claiming that being prone gives you the power to teleport. We (and the actual text you have quoted) says that when you are prone, you can only move by either crawling or teleporting. Those are the two ways you can move. Crawling is a way to move. Teleporting is a way to move. Those are the two ways to move while you are prone and other ways to move are denied until you stand up. That's what the quoted sentence says.
This is one of 4 and a half instances (that have come up so far) of the rule books referring to the concept of teleporting using the word "move". You have studiously ignored most, and tend to redirect to your personal definition of the word "movement" whenever you want to avoid discussion.
So, in the books we can see that the writers use the word "move" when they are talking about teleportation. They never state that teleportation is not "moving". This seems like a pretty open-and-shut case to me. If you are hoping to prove the opposite then you should be able to directly address how these 4 uses of the word "move" are invalid.
That's kind of Rav's shtick though
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
One side has said "We think your interpretation is wrong, and that the rules don't say what you think they say."
At least one person on the other side has said "What you're saying is deviating from RAW and it's homebrewing."
That latter stance implies that the person holding it no longer recognizes this as a debate about how to interpret the rules, but only how to "win the internet". ;)
I created this thread for 2 reasons:
1) The topic is interesting and a little complex and so I was looking for input to inform my own decisions on the matter.
2) The topic had already completely derailed another thread, so I thought it'd be wise to dedicate a separate thread to the topic as to save the content of other threads. This thread is as such indented to be a place where people can say their piece on the matter, wear their enthusiasm for the topic thin and thereby keep it from spilling into other threads.
That being said, I do realize that very few are going to read through 23 pages of frustrated debate, and that those who do will likely be more confused about the topic than they were when they began reading the first page.
I am going to edit to my original post to include a disclaimer that no conclusions seem to have been reached after 23 pages of discussion.
The text doesn't give teleporting power, basically other than by crawling, it irrefutably refers to teleportiation as move;
To move while prone...you must use magic such as teleportation.
I want you to cite for everyone where the rules for Movement and Position even remotely hints at teleportation counting as movement.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. The original question has been answered. Teleportation would still count as entering the space or area of effect. You just aren't using your move to do so. The issue is whether or not teleportation counts as moving. It certainly isn't movement or part of a character's move. So, just for the sake of consistency, it shouldn't be. And yet, people want to keep arguing otherwise.
And, I'm sorry, but it's this kind of splitting hairs that derailed everything. Move is consistently used in relation to speed, regardless of whatever colloquial usage we employ outside playing the game. The PHB just doesn't care about the difference.
How many edge cases might there even be? I've looked, and I haven't seen discussions like this anywhere else.
Check the post below (which is the one right above yours) which cites text from the exact chapter and section (Chapter 9: Combat, Movement and Position, Being Prone. Does that count as "remotely close"? The full section lists two options for "moving" while prone; crawling, or "magic such as teleportation" by the rules of grammar, both of those would count as "moving.
It's not part of a creature's move, and it doesn't follow any of the rules for movement.
They do.. because the rules aren't intended to be read as a restrictive formula.
IMO, it leads to more inconsistency if you read "move" everywhere in the rules as "using movement speed" because of all the myriad examples where something moves without doing so.
If you read the Movement rules as a subset of "ways things can move" rather than an exhaustive prescription, then the rules are much more easily understood and more consistent.
Perhaps because no one else thinks Teleport doesn't move you somewhere else?
It's only the rigid constructionist rules-lawyer types who care about the distinction between moving and Movement.
Honestly, who comes up with an argument like
It's moving, but not Movement.. but it only moves you 0 feet because you didn't pass through the intervening space, and it wasn't willing movement because the magic did it to you.
?
This is nothing more than a grab-bag of justifications for avoiding a conclusion one doesn't like. It's a twisting pretzel of rationalizations, not a reasonable argument.
Standing up doesn't change your location. You stand in your same location, and so you're not moving (although it costs you movement to stand up). Crawling changes your location.
This is an excellent argument that by definition, standing up isn't moving, even though it costs movement. That rule about moving costing double really puts the nail in the coffin on standing up being moving, if there was any doubt.
But it is called "move". Which is kind of my point. You (and others) keep saying that:
"No, the word move has a specific meaning in the rules. There's an entire section in Chapter 9 dedicated to describing just what a move is and how it works. Move and movement are inseparable. And move is consistently used to refer to a creature expending speed; be it willing or compelled." (citation: Post #434 by Jounichi1983, this thread)
But it is plain as day that there are examples where the word "move" is used that doesn't reference a creature's speed, or the use of a creatures move on a turn. I listed about 10 examples in post #435. Every one of those examples do not reference the creature's movement speed, or movement (note: many reference distance, but distance is not the same as speed). And in the very chapter and section you keep citing as "describing just what a move is and how it works", there is a reference to teleportation being a kind of move. not a Move, not the use of speed, but as a way to move. That should prove that the game uses the term "move" in ways that don't just mean the use of speed.
The game does this in other places too, and a lot of it stems from the use of very generic words as game terms. For example, in the game, you have Action, actions, and action. What does this mean? it means that sometimes the game means an Action (the specific unit of your turn), an action (the conglomerate of Actions, Bonus Actions, and Reactions, the best place to see this is in the description of Bonus Actions under the "your turn" section of chapter 9, which describes Bonus Actions as: "Various class features, spells, and other abilities let you take an additional action on your turn called a bonus action" Obviously the rules aren't saying Bonus Actions and Actions are the same thing, but it uses the same word to mean the specific "Action" and the general set of actions you can take on a turn. The last use is the general word, which gets dropped a few times where it would be used in plain english, like in the idiomatic phrase "a piece of the action".
Move and move are similar, in that you have specific game terms that are referenced as "your move" that do refer to the move you can do on a turn with your speed, but the game also uses the word to mean a more generic movement that doesn't follow Chapter 9, but instead follows what plain english would refer to as "moving".
Excellent -- another example of the use of the word "move" outside the context of the strict movement rules. The natural language interpretation of what it means to be paralyzed is that they can't even twitch. Which, in this case, is a more expansive understanding of "move" than much of the rest of the rules, which usually means "change location."
See how insisting on using the same narrow definition of the word "move" everywhere leads to nonsensical interpretations?
In which context does "teleport" come up, if not a change of location?
More specifically : in what context is "move" referring to "passing through the intervening distance" instead of simply changing location (by whatever means)?
I would argue that, when spells or effects refer to passing through an area, then that's what they mean. For example: difficult terrain, or ongoing spells like spike growth. It's usually obvious from the spell or effect when physically passing through something is needed to trigger the effect.
It's also usually obvious from the context when simply being in the new location is what's meant by "move".
The problems only arise when one insists on only one interpretation of "move" for all things.
A few comments: move, Movement, and Speed in Chapter 9 are not one and the same; in fact they can't be, because they are different parts of speech. To move (verb) is to cover a distance (ie change position) and can be about traversing a distance, or in rarer cases (like the paralysis condition) about the movement of limbs or body parts. A creatures Movement (as it is used in game) is a resource (a noun) that you can spend to move, and is usually expressed as a distance, and A creature's Speed is the maximum amount of movement it gets to spend per turn to move, without using their action, bonus action, or reaction to increase it. Sometimes (because the rules are not written with a lot of precision), the game refers to your move (a noun) or your movement to mean your distance traveled for a particular turn (which might include movement and other kinds of moving), rather than the resource you spend to move (verb). While these definitions aren't explicit, they can be understood in the plain english reading of the rules in Chapter 9. But note that the verb "move" can never be the same as the nouns "move" "movement" or "speed" because of the parts of speech rule.
Under these definitions. Standing up is not moving (at least not the distance traversing kind, because it doesn't cover a distance), but you spend movement to do it, an amount of which is equal to half your speed (half your max). Also under these definitions, difficult terrain can be described as requiring you to spend additional movement in order to move (1 extra foot per foot)
Most creatures can only move on their own by spending an amount of movement up to the limit of their speed, but 1) some have the ability to use actions, bonus actions, or reactions to increase their speed. 2) some have abilities that allow them to move without spending movement, and 3) outside forces and effects can cause a creature to move without requiring them to spend movement.
An example of 1) is a creature using it's action to Dash, or an Orc using the bonus action granted by its Aggressive trait
An example of 2) is the Storm Sorcerers tempestuous magic, which is a one-time ability to move without raising your speed or spending movement
An example of 3) is the Crusher Feat, which can force a creature hit to move 5 feet, or the telekinesis spell, which allows the caster to move a creature up to 30 feet.
So back to teleportation. Teleportation certainly causes you to change position, but it does so in a way different from any other "normal" means of moving, because it doesn't cross the space between departure and arrival. If the fact that it isn't "normal" is enough for you to say it isn't considered moving, that is fine, but if changing position is all you require for your definition of "move" (the verb), then it is moving (the verb). In no case is it "movement" because 1) teleporting is a verb, not a noun and 2) teleporting doesn't require you to spend movement, nor does it affect your speed. But here is where we are all differing.
This also explains why teleporting is described as a way to move in the prone section of chapter 9. That rule is writing as if it is a way to move (verb). But again, if you don't think it is, that is fine. There's enough wiggle room in the rules for different interpretations here, because there is not an explicit definition.
@Kotath that interpretation might be a bit off ( and please don't think i'm posting just to say it's wrong, maybe just misunderstood )
If you are prone, it will take half of your movement speed just to stand up ( if your movement speed is 30ft, 15ft is used to stand up, [ I'm thinking because of heavy armor it's takes quite a bit to get off the ground, and the reason it's half regardless of armor/no armor is defining rules on a case per case basis is overkill ] [ side note - would using a different type of speed like flying sill allow standing up? ( another thread on this?)] , and 15ft is left to move around. ), but if you don't have that half of speed left you can't stand up. ( if you only have say 10ft of your 30ft left, your stuck prone till your speed comes back up. )
If while prone you want to move to another location, you have two options :
1.) you crawl which takes -
a.) 2ft of speed to move 1ft ( normal terrain )
b.) 3ft of speed to move 1ft ( difficult terrain )
2.) magic use of teleportation ( which means you will still be prone after teleporting) - you moved (X)ft teleporting. ( Take Misty Step: 30ft ), then you still have your speed to ether crawl further away, or stand up and move the remainder of your speed away. ( again if your movement speed is 30ft, 15ft is used to stand up and 15ft is left to move around. )
I believe that is why the Rule As Written is worded as such, to give a creature a wider range of movement than what would be allowed if just a creatures movement speed were available.
The designers of the rules can't make teleporting a movement speed, there is just no way to define it's speed that would not have the effect of destroying the game. And if they had put teleportation in the Movement section of the rules, that too would cause people to attach a speed to teleportation.
So, what was done was to use the teleport spell as the general rule and mechanic for teleportation, and use the reference to the spell as a special type of movement within the context of how teleportation can be used to move.
To me, that was the only way to have it in the game as a movement a creature can have like flying, but not break the rest of the game, and I feel it fit's well into the rules of the game without really being considered "Homebrew".
Like the Oracle told Neo in the second Matrix movie :
" it's really just up to you. Just have to make up your own *BLEEP* mind to ether accept what I'm going to tell you, or reject it. Candy? "
Hmm. That's interesting that you feel like these are the two extremes in this argument. I have always been arguing against any extreme reading of the word move. It's pretty plain to me that, most of the time the game says "move" it means "to change location". It's not all the time, but the context for when they mean something else is usually pretty clear (Paralyzed for example, or anything that says "move through the area", or "using your movement speed" etc). Any interpretation that requires a rigid definition that is always true in all contexts is, IMO, doomed. That's why so many people in this thread refer to "using plain English" or "natural language". That's essentially advising people to read the words using their normal meaning in the context of the text.
Does the game use some standard constructions for consistency? Absolutely.
Does it also use the same words more broadly outside those contexts? Yes indeed.
So would you say that, when the rules use "move" to mean "change location", teleport counts as moving (although never a Movement Type, or using a movement speed)?
I understand, The rules can be interpreted countless ways, each unique to the reader.
A laundry list of how various spell effects can "move" does not apply to how a character can move. It's worth remembering when the rules for Movement and Position are exclusively for when referring to what creatures can do with their move.
If you're going to continue insisting that creatures can teleport as part of their move, then you're insisting that teleportation is Movement. And that's a patently false assertion.
And now we have a new conundrum: if a creature is paralyzed, and being paralyzed means they cannot move, can they be moved by another character or effect? If you accept that move refers to any and all possible movement a character can be subject to, up to and including pulling, pushing, and teleportation, then they're locked in place.