Entering a Square Requires Their Limited Definition of "Your Move"-only Movement:
PHB Chapter 9 has a sidebar for playing on a grid for "Entering a Square," where "have at least 1 square of movement" is listed as a prerequisite for entering a square. They seem to draw the conclusion that going from square to square is not properly considered "entering a square," unless it was accomplished using "movement" (so not modalities that aren't listed in Chapter 8, and not any other type of forced movement or action-based movement).
I haven't said anything like this in this thread whatsoever. Nothing of the sort. I've stuck purely to the discussion of whether teleportation is or is not move(ment).
[REDACTED]. C_C didn't claim you said it in this thread - that's a caveat you introduced. C_C claimed it was your argument, and you did present it - in another, similar thread. This is the post C_C is referencing.
I almost completely agree, Chicken_Champ. I will just emphasize that none of the quotes that Rav has provided are anything but using "move" or "movement" in their natural language meanings and providing information/rules how motion behaves with certain parts of the game. Their quotes have not eliminated any natural language meanings or defined either of those words to exclude teleportation explicitly.
In what context do you ... in natural English... "spend movement"?
Again, you didn't get the point.
You didn't show that movement (or move, after all they're different words, as you so clearly pointed out) must mean "spend movement."
Keep digging Rav, that hole is getting deeper with every post.
Questions for the Teleportation is Move(ment) crowd(s):
If you misty step 20ft immediately before long jumping, without any walking movement getting used whatsoever, do you consider that as satisfying the requirement to move 10ft before the jump? Why or why not?
Keeping your answer in mind... now, what if you're in the area of Spike Growth and teleport to another area within that same Spike Growth but 30ft away? How much damage are you taking?
Obviously misty stepping before a long jump doesn't count as moving 10 ft. The whole purpose of the requirement is to demonstrate the character has built up speed and momentum. Teleportation doesn't do that. So teleporting isn't moving.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
This shows everyone you misunderstand the rules, and wording of D&D. Spike growth, has an area of a 20ft radial sphere. That sphere's center can be placedup to 150ft away from the caster.
If you can't get an example correct, how can you get the rules correct?
Keep digging Rav, that hole is getting deeper with every post.
Questions for the Teleportation is Move(ment) crowd(s):
If you misty step 20ft immediately before long jumping, without any walking movement getting used whatsoever, do you consider that as satisfying the requirement to move 10ft before the jump? Why or why not?
Keeping your answer in mind... now, what if you're in the area of Spike Growth and teleport to another area within that same Spike Growth but 30ft away? How much damage are you taking?
Obviously misty stepping before a long jump doesn't count as moving 10 ft. The whole purpose of the requirement is to demonstrate the character has built up speed and momentum. Teleportation doesn't do that. So teleporting isn't moving.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
This shows everyone you misunderstand the rules, and wording of D&D.
Do I? Please do tell...
Spike growth, has an area of a 20ft radial sphere.
Right, 20 ft radius. Yes.
That sphere's center can be placedup to 150ft away from the caster.
Doesn't seem relevant but okay.
If you can't get an example correct, how can you get the rules correct?
So, what did I get wrong exactly? You're not saying you couldn't teleport 30ft and stay within a 20ft sphere right?
Because a 20ft radius is 40 ft across...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Questions for the Teleportation is Move(ment) crowd(s):
Keeping your answer in mind... now, what if you're in the area of Spike Growth and teleport to another area within that same Spike Growth but 30ft away? How much damage are you taking?
4d4 (although a reasonable DM might decide 2d4), because spike growth only hurts you when you move into or within the area:
But you claim teleporting is moving. And, if you teleport 30ft within the area of the spell, you've "moved 30ft within the spell area". No?
When a creature moves into or within the area, it takes 2d4 piercing damage for every 5 feet it travels.
When you teleport into a spike growth space, you by definition move into the area. +2d4.
But we started in it, we didn't teleport into it.
While teleporting, you by definition aren't moving into or within spike growth, so 0d4 while traversing the intervening space.
SO. You're saying that teleportation. By definition. Isn't... "moving into or within the area".
So you've join my side of the argument?
When you teleport out from a spike growth space, you aren't moving into spike growth, but you are moving within it as you leave. +2d4
In the example you never left it. You went from a spot inside it to another spot inside it, 30ft.
This is where a reasonable DM might disagree with me, but the disagreement has nothing to do with teleportation. This is the same question as whether or not you take 2d4 damage when walking out of spike growth normally - when you simply walk 5 feet from within spike growth to outside of it, have you moved within spike growth? I say yes, another DM might say no. Regardless, teleportation and walking resolve identically here.
gain, in the example you never leave the spiked growth. maybe revisit the question and try again? I'm curious how you actually feel in a not "gotcha" kinda way.
You're IN the spiked growth, and teleport to another spot, still IN that same spiked growth, but 30ft away. How much damage do you take?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
But you claim teleporting is moving. And, if you teleport 30ft within the area of the spell, you've "moved 30ft within the spell area". No?
No. That's the whole point of teleportation - you don't traverse the intervening space. In this context, you've moved 30 feet, but you haven't moved 30 feet within the spell area, due to what the words "teleport" and "within" mean.
When you teleport into a spike growth space, you by definition move into the area. +2d4.
But we started in it, we didn't teleport into it.
Yes we did. You said you teleported from an sg space to an sg space. That means you teleported into the latter space.
While teleporting, you by definition aren't moving into or within spike growth, so 0d4 while traversing the intervening space.
SO. You're saying that teleportation. By definition. Isn't... "moving into or within the area".
So you've join my side of the argument?
No. Your argument is about your incorrect definition of moving. Mine is about my correct definitions of teleport, into, and within. Teleporting is moving. It is not moving within, in the context we are discussing.
When you teleport out from a spike growth space, you aren't moving into spike growth, but you are moving within it as you leave. +2d4
In the example you never left it. You went from a spot inside it to another spot inside it, 30ft.
You left a spike growth space, as I said in the sentence you quoted. If you're using a grid, spike growth is 64 grid squares large. It is quite easy to start your turn inside one of those squares and then later in your turn be in another of those squares. In order for that to happen, you must leave the first square. Since the core rules don't assume a grid, the more accurate term to use for a discussion of the RAW is space.
This is where a reasonable DM might disagree with me, but the disagreement has nothing to do with teleportation. This is the same question as whether or not you take 2d4 damage when walking out of spike growth normally - when you simply walk 5 feet from within spike growth to outside of it, have you moved within spike growth? I say yes, another DM might say no. Regardless, teleportation and walking resolve identically here.
gain, in the example you never leave the spiked growth. maybe revisit the question and try again? I'm curious how you actually feel in a not "gotcha" kinda way.
You're IN the spiked growth, and teleport to another spot, still IN that same spiked growth, but 30ft away. How much damage do you take?
4d4. I already covered this so I'm not sure what I can productively add.
You take 2d4 damage from the space you start in, because you teleport from it. You take another 2d4 from the space you end in, because you teleport into it. You don't take any damage from the intervening spaces, because you didn't move within them.
Keep digging Rav, that hole is getting deeper with every post.
Questions for the Teleportation is Move(ment) crowd(s):
If you misty step 20ft immediately before long jumping, without any walking movement getting used whatsoever, do you consider that as satisfying the requirement to move 10ft before the jump? Why or why not?
Keeping your answer in mind... now, what if you're in the area of Spike Growth and teleport to another area within that same Spike Growth but 30ft away? How much damage are you taking?
Obviously misty stepping before a long jump doesn't count as moving 10 ft. The whole purpose of the requirement is to demonstrate the character has built up speed and momentum. Teleportation doesn't do that. So teleporting isn't moving.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
This shows everyone you misunderstand the rules, and wording of D&D.
Do I? Please do tell...
Spike growth, has an area of a 20ft radial sphere.
Right, 20 ft radius. Yes.
That sphere's center can be placedup to 150ft away from the caster.
Doesn't seem relevant but okay.
If you can't get an example correct, how can you get the rules correct?
So, what did I get wrong exactly? You're not saying you couldn't teleport 30ft and stay within a 20ft sphere right?
Because a 20ft radius is 40 ft across...
Funny, you never referenced the information within the spoiler.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
there was no misapplying the definition of movement to Teleportation.
I firmly believe that if the game treated teleportation as movement it would just straight up say so. Since it doesn't, the most you can gather from a phrase like that is that 'a type of teleport effect, might, somewhere, someday, be a move, and, if used in this situation, doesn't count as moving for the purposes of this spell'.
Although, I'm gradually changing my take on this type of teleport reference. Some people seem almost eager to misunderstand it as a move, or even as movement. For something that never once shows up in the rules, not a single time... a few people really are voraciously defending the incorrect notion that "teleportation is movement". I mean, not...once is it ever said in the rules. Yet here we are, with many people swearing up and down that's how it works "for reasons" yet, never once appearing in the text of the rules that "teleportation is movement". Clearly, people are primed for this type of misunderstanding for some reason.
I suspect that is because teleportation doesn't really exist. It is something fundamentally foreign to our experience, and our reality. Common Sense can't guide your intuition on it because you very literally don't have experience with it. Nothing you've ever known in your life behaves the way teleportation would. So, naturally, it is just something people are going to need extra clarity on. Essentially, because it's not real and none of us have a shared experience of what it is or how it works...It could behave any number of ways, so the authors need to be very clear how they envision it to work.
So, I can see that side of things too. When writing abilities you must also take your audience's perception into account. If you're at all worried that people don't know the difference between teleporting and moving, then, toss that in there to be extra clear and not have any misunderstanding. Tacking on "without teleporting" makes it super clear to the person using the ability that teleportation doesn't count as moving for triggering this effect. Even if they would have been primed to think otherwise, now it is clear. Teleporting isn't moving (for sure not for this effect).
I find it is sorta odd that people here then look for examples like this in search of a misunderstanding. That's not directed your way even if it sounded like it was. It is just that ability is written to be clear that teleporting never triggers the on-move stuff. But, then, somehow that clarity is used to try to craft the argument that teleportation is moving. I don't think we need to find hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference. The rules just aren't written that way.
You spend movement on your turn's move, an amount up to your speed, this allows you to change location (ie move). <--- In no uncertain terms the game uses these words in this way, repeatedly. Directly. Nothing about this needs to be inferred. Just black and white. Ie is RAW. The game just doesn't talk about teleportation the same way.
Our intuition isn't trustworthy on effects that cannot exist in our reality. So, trust the RAW. What does the book actually say? We know it never says "teleportation is movement" that is for sure.
These are your exact words.
You are of the belief your interpretation of the rules are absolute, and everyone else is flat out wrong.
Although, I'm gradually changing my take on this type of teleport reference. Some people seem almost eager to misunderstand it as a move, or even as movement. For something that never once shows up in the rules, not a single time... a few people really are voraciously defending the incorrect notion that "teleportation is movement". I mean, not...once is it ever said in the rules. Yet here we are, with many people swearing up and down that's how it works "for reasons" yet, never once appearing in the text of the rules that "teleportation is movement". Clearly, people are primed for this type of misunderstanding for some reason.
It does not show up in the rules, because it is implied within the scope of the rules as a whole, not in a piece-meal breakdown you like to use.
You are of the belief if it's not purely a rule, it's incorrect.
I find it is sorta odd that people here then look for examples like this in search of a misunderstanding. That's not directed your way even if it sounded like it was. It is just that ability is written to be clear that teleporting never triggers the on-move stuff. But, then, somehow that clarity is used to try to craft the argument that teleportation is moving. I don't think we need to find hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference The rules just aren't written that way.
Remember Rules As Written are general in scope to gameplay. Spells, Feats, and etc. are the specific instances of the general. They are the hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference, and that begin to turn your interpretation of the rules inside out.
Teleportation is Movement by definition. It's part of the rules, and because it's not absolutely defined in print, you unlike others refuse to accept that.
That fine, you do you. The rest of us will be playing D&D.
Keep digging Rav, that hole is getting deeper with every post.
Questions for the Teleportation is Move(ment) crowd(s):
If you misty step 20ft immediately before long jumping, without any walking movement getting used whatsoever, do you consider that as satisfying the requirement to move 10ft before the jump? Why or why not?
Keeping your answer in mind... now, what if you're in the area of Spike Growth and teleport to another area within that same Spike Growth but 30ft away? How much damage are you taking?
Obviously misty stepping before a long jump doesn't count as moving 10 ft. The whole purpose of the requirement is to demonstrate the character has built up speed and momentum. Teleportation doesn't do that. So teleporting isn't moving.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
This shows everyone you misunderstand the rules, and wording of D&D.
Do I? Please do tell...
Spike growth, has an area of a 20ft radial sphere.
Right, 20 ft radius. Yes.
That sphere's center can be placedup to 150ft away from the caster.
Doesn't seem relevant but okay.
If you can't get an example correct, how can you get the rules correct?
So, what did I get wrong exactly? You're not saying you couldn't teleport 30ft and stay within a 20ft sphere right?
Because a 20ft radius is 40 ft across...
Funny, you never referenced the information within the spoiler.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
there was no misapplying the definition of movement to Teleportation.
What??
I firmly believe that if the game treated teleportation as movement it would just straight up say so. Since it doesn't, the most you can gather from a phrase like that is that 'a type of teleport effect, might, somewhere, someday, be a move, and, if used in this situation, doesn't count as moving for the purposes of this spell'.
Although, I'm gradually changing my take on this type of teleport reference. Some people seem almost eager to misunderstand it as a move, or even as movement. For something that never once shows up in the rules, not a single time... a few people really are voraciously defending the incorrect notion that "teleportation is movement". I mean, not...once is it ever said in the rules. Yet here we are, with many people swearing up and down that's how it works "for reasons" yet, never once appearing in the text of the rules that "teleportation is movement". Clearly, people are primed for this type of misunderstanding for some reason.
I suspect that is because teleportation doesn't really exist. It is something fundamentally foreign to our experience, and our reality. Common Sense can't guide your intuition on it because you very literally don't have experience with it. Nothing you've ever known in your life behaves the way teleportation would. So, naturally, it is just something people are going to need extra clarity on. Essentially, because it's not real and none of us have a shared experience of what it is or how it works...It could behave any number of ways, so the authors need to be very clear how they envision it to work.
So, I can see that side of things too. When writing abilities you must also take your audience's perception into account. If you're at all worried that people don't know the difference between teleporting and moving, then, toss that in there to be extra clear and not have any misunderstanding. Tacking on "without teleporting" makes it super clear to the person using the ability that teleportation doesn't count as moving for triggering this effect. Even if they would have been primed to think otherwise, now it is clear. Teleporting isn't moving (for sure not for this effect).
I find it is sorta odd that people here then look for examples like this in search of a misunderstanding. That's not directed your way even if it sounded like it was. It is just that ability is written to be clear that teleporting never triggers the on-move stuff. But, then, somehow that clarity is used to try to craft the argument that teleportation is moving. I don't think we need to find hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference. The rules just aren't written that way.
You spend movement on your turn's move, an amount up to your speed, this allows you to change location (ie move). <--- In no uncertain terms the game uses these words in this way, repeatedly. Directly. Nothing about this needs to be inferred. Just black and white. Ie is RAW. The game just doesn't talk about teleportation the same way.
Our intuition isn't trustworthy on effects that cannot exist in our reality. So, trust the RAW. What does the book actually say? We know it never says "teleportation is movement" that is for sure.
These are your exact words.
You are of the belief your interpretation of the rules are absolute, and everyone else is flat out wrong.
Correct. I can help you if you actually want to learn the rules.
Although, I'm gradually changing my take on this type of teleport reference. Some people seem almost eager to misunderstand it as a move, or even as movement. For something that never once shows up in the rules, not a single time... a few people really are voraciously defending the incorrect notion that "teleportation is movement". I mean, not...once is it ever said in the rules. Yet here we are, with many people swearing up and down that's how it works "for reasons" yet, never once appearing in the text of the rules that "teleportation is movement". Clearly, people are primed for this type of misunderstanding for some reason.
It does not show up in the rules, because it is implied within the scope of the rules as a whole, not in a piece-meal breakdown you like to use.
Rules don't need to imply anything. Rules tell you stuff. Hunting for implied content is a surefire way to disappear into a rabbithole of "hidden meaning" that just isn't there.
You are of the belief if it's not purely a rule, it's incorrect.
Yeah. If it isn't a rule... it isn't a rule. That is correct.
I find it is sorta odd that people here then look for examples like this in search of a misunderstanding. That's not directed your way even if it sounded like it was. It is just that ability is written to be clear that teleporting never triggers the on-move stuff. But, then, somehow that clarity is used to try to craft the argument that teleportation is moving. I don't think we need to find hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference The rules just aren't written that way.
Remember Rules As Written are general in scope to gameplay.
No. Rules as Written are the entire written rules of the game.
Spells, Feats, and etc. are the specific instances of the general.
Specific instances of the general?
They are the hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference, and that begin to turn your interpretation of the rules inside out.
Uh, no. Spells, Feats, and Etc. are all Rules as Written.
Teleportation is Movement by definition.
No, it isn't.
It's part of the rules, and because it's not absolutely defined in print, you unlike others refuse to accept that.
Quote it then. Don't claim it is a rule and not quote it. Easy enough to do if its true right? Quote the rule that says "Teleportation is movement". That'd end this whole discussion. Why haven't you quoted it?
That fine, you do you. The rest of us will be playing D&D.
Yeah D&D allows you to homebrew all kinds of wild and crazy things. You're genuinely and truly correct to homebrew D&D any and every way you want. Meanwhile, in the topic of Rules as they are Written, I still don't see your supporting evidence. Shame.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
*This thread is meant as a sum-up of an off-topic discussion in another thread. State your own conclusions if you like*
Personally, I believe teleportation is considered a type of movement and that it causes the teleporting creature to enter the area teleported into (thus not bypassing spell effects of spells like Whirlwind). To make the assertion, 2 topics need to be briefly addressed:
1: What does the game consider as movement?
2: When does a creature enter an area?
What does the game consider as movement? There are 3 things (at least) to keep track of when discussing movement in D&D 5e: your move, movement, and speed. I make the distinction between Your Move and Movement to make referencing either easier in case the discussion gets muddled).
Your Move: Throughout the PHB, "your move" is referred to as a specific type of phase (for lack of better word), just like an action, bonus action, reaction are all separate entities. While it might be difficult to think of them as phases due to the lack of set sequence, they are still parts that can make up a whole turn (despite the mutability of said turn). During this phase on your turn you spend movement up to your speed to move around.
Movement: Movement is a general term that describes different types of movement. There is no one definition in the rules that describe how this word is to be understood in all contexts, and it is used in a variety of contexts throughout the rules (when a game term isn't clearly defined, the common English understanding applies in the given context). In the context of Your Move, movement is most often referred to as a consumable resource used to actively move your character around during your turn. Some effects can cause you to spend Your Move to move unwillingly (e.g. Possession/Command/Compulsion). Outside the context of Your Move, movement is also understood to mean: (1) moving unwillingly outside your turn (e.g. Dissonant Whispers); (2) moving willingly using your action/bonus action/reaction (e.g. Teleport/Plane Shift/features such as Skirmisher (Scout Rogue)); or (3) being forcefully moved (e.g. Thunderwave/Scatter/falling).
Speed: A character's speed is the total amount of movement a character can normally spend on its turn. Features, spells, and other effects can alter your speed or grant you movement exceeding the limit set by your speed. Common examples include the Longstrider spell or the Dash action. The word "speed" is also used to describe the different types of movement speeds, such as climbing, flying, burrowing etc.
The rules seem to regard all of the different types of movement I listed in the Movement section as types of movement, no matter whether or not they were willing, unwilling, or forced. Regarding teleportation, the rules seem to consider it a form of movement, which is explicitly stated in the following rules statement in the Movement and Positioning section of PHB: "To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation".
When does a creature enter an area? The rules don't define the word "enter", so the common English understanding applies. As such, a creature seems to be entering an area when the creature changes its position from a point outside the area to a point inside the area. The how or why doesn't seem to matter. Furthermore, spells such as Whirlwind make it clear that it matters who moves when the game asks for someone to be "entering". The spell Magic Circle likewise makes it clear that teleportation can cause a creature to enter an area.
Finally, it is important to keep in mind that the game's mechanics (rules) are created to support the narrative, not vice versa. If it does the opposite (create a logical gap in the narrative), it defeats the purpose of the rules. If one considers teleportation to not be movement and not count as entering an area, an example of a logical gap in the narrative could be having to explain how the teleporting wizard is not affected by all the whirling, razor-sharp blades made by Blade Barrier that he is now standing in the middle of (or being completely unscathed by the Whirlwind he is casually strolling through).
Nicely set out.
I would point out some other data for you to consider:
There is a further distinction between "movement" and "Movement type". Teleport is not considered a movement type (try filtering the Monster list by Movement Type for example). No Monsters (or PCs) have "teleport" as a movement type (unlike in some previous editions), and there's a really good mechanical reason for that. In 5e they changed it so anyone can break up their move and perform some other action in the middle. If you could do that with a Teleport speed, that would be simply too powerful.
Teleport abilities exclusively take an action or bonus action to perform.
That said, I don't think that this detracts from your main points : If you Teleport into an area, you have entered it. If you teleport somewhere you have "moved" there, even if you didn't use "Your Move" to do so.
( Interestingly, the wording on Opportunity Attack suggests that Teleport does count as "moving out of reach", since it calls out teleport as one way to specifically avoid the opportunity attack. If teleport wasn't "moving out of reach" then it wouldn't need to be called out as a specific exception. At least -- that's one way to interpret that passage. )
Addressing the examples of creatures taking damage moving through a zone by teleporting, I think the most reasonable interpretation is to consider the creature to have "entered" the destination square only, since no intervening squares were moved through. So if you start inside the area, take damage for starting your turn there, and then teleport to another square inside the area, you've now entered the area again. (I'm a bit hazy on the ruling for entering and exiting and then re-entering a damaging zone -- it might be that you can only take that damage once per turn..)
After considering this, I think I'm now able to answer the booming blade poll more confidently.
I’d rule teleporting involving spiked growth would only deal deal 2d4 damage, and that would depend on if a creature teleported into spiked growth for some reason.
maybe spiked growth was hidden from them since they may not have been there at the time of casting.
maybe they were subjected to a scatter spell, or were temporarily banished but appeared again in the growth.
I think teleportation is movement, but it’s special movement.
A comment in the Poll thread brought me to an interesting parallel issue: Mounted Combat.
Controlling a mount doesn't consume the rider's movement, so they can "willingly move" into the effect of spells without actually doing anything with their own movement speed.
Similarly, an independent mount results in "forced movement", even if it's at the rider's instruction.
There are 3 things (at least) to keep track of when discussing movement in D&D 5e: your move, movement, and speed. I make the distinction between Your Move and Movement to make referencing either easier in case the discussion gets muddled).
Your Move: Throughout the PHB, "your move" is referred to as a specific type of phase (for lack of better word), just like an action, bonus action, reaction are all separate entities. While it might be difficult to think of them as phases due to the lack of set sequence, they are still parts that can make up a whole turn (despite the mutability of said turn). During this phase on your turn you spend movement up to your speed to move around.
Movement: Movement is a general term that describes different types of movement. There is no one definition in the rules that describe how this word is to be understood in all contexts, and it is used in a variety of contexts throughout the rules (when a game term isn't clearly defined, the common English understanding applies in the given context). In the context of Your Move, movement is most often referred to as a consumable resource used to actively move your character around during your turn. Some effects can cause you to spend Your Move to move unwillingly (e.g. Possession/Command/Compulsion).
Everything up to this point is spot on 100%.
Outside the context of Your Move, movement is also understood to mean: (1) moving unwillingly outside your turn (e.g. Dissonant Whispers);
Why are you calling that movement? That is moving. It uses movement, just as your move uses movement. But, why call it specifically movement, when it instead is moving. The terms used in the spell says, and I quote "to move as far as its speed allows away from you" and never once uses the word movement.
Because it causes you to move as far as your speed allows, you are using a type of movement. One can even make an argument that they need to use the type of movement that has the highest speed, too, at least after they've exhausted the others. Because if you walk 30 ft and have a 60ft fly speed, you still have speed left, and that speed "would allow" you to move farther.
But the term "movement" here is applicable in only exactly the same way as it is during You Move on your turn, Movement Type and Movement Spent. What you're doing is movingwhile using any available movement to accomplish it.
(2) moving willingly using your action/bonus action/reaction (e.g. Teleport/Plane Shift/features such as Skirmisher (Scout Rogue));
Teleports never say Movement, nor even Move. These words are absent from their descriptions. Absent.
Oddly, though... Dissonant Whispers and Skirmisher have nearly identical triggers, both being reactions probably not on your own turn. Why did you separate them into different categories?
Again, like Dissonant Whispers this ability says "You can move up to half your speed as a reaction when an enemy..." meaning it functions essentially identically to a move on your turn would, you spend movement to move. As an extra bonus, that movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks. It is a nice feature that allows you to move by spending movement.
That is just a forced move. You could have a speed of 0 and no available movement types/speed/etc and still suffer forced moves. Forced moves are not any type of movement and do not have speeds. They're typically measured in distances only. You simply get moved. You spend no movement, nor need movement, so this "movement" isn't movement... it is being moved.
You can even forced move inanimate objects that have no speed or movement capability whatsoever.
Speed: A character's speed is the total amount of movement a character can normally spend on its turn. Features, spells, and other effects can alter your speed or grant you movement exceeding the limit set by your speed. Common examples include the Longstrider spell or the Dash action. The word "speed" is also used to describe the different types of movement speeds, such as climbing, flying, burrowing etc.
100%
The rules seem to regard all of the different types of movement I listed in the Movement section as types of movement, no matter whether or not they were willing, unwilling, or forced.
They don't. Especially not forced moves. What type of movement is: being pushed? It isn't any type of movement, not do you have a speed for it. Forced moves are forcing you to move. They're moving you. Yes. But, they don't necessarily use movement or have a movement type nor a movement speed.
Regarding teleportation, the rules seem to consider it a form of movement, which is explicitly stated in the following rules statement in the Movement and Positioning section of PHB: "To move while prone, you must crawl or use magic such as teleportation".
That is not an explicit statement. An explicit statement would be "Teleportation is movement". <--- This is never stated in the rules anywhere. Ever.
Even IF you accepted that statement is indeed saying that teleporting is moving. That still doesn't make it "movement". It has no type, it has no speed, you do not spend it.
Finally, it is important to keep in mind that the game's mechanics (rules) are created to support the narrative, not vice versa. If it does the opposite (create a logical gap in the narrative), it defeats the purpose of the rules. If one considers teleportation to not be movement and not count as entering an area, an example of a logical gap in the narrative could be having to explain how the teleporting wizard is not affected by all the whirling, razor-sharp blades made by Blade Barrier that he is now standing in the middle of (or being completely unscathed by the Whirlwind he is casually strolling through).
2 things. I wanted to avoid "enter' debate entirely but I'll touch on it briefly to state this: Your argument here has nothing to do with the word movement.
This is what it looks like without mentioning movement at all:
If one considers teleportation to not count as entering an area, an example of a logical gap in the narrative could be having to explain how the teleporting wizard is not affected by all the whirling, razor-sharp blades made by Blade Barrier that he is now standing in the middle of (or being completely unscathed by the Whirlwind he is casually strolling through).
You see? You're slipping in an irrelevant point to your argument.
Movement has nothing to do with what you're saying there.
But, as an aside, that 2nd thing: There is no logical gap in that example any more than there is when you're standing in that spell area after it first got cast and just casually not taking damage then either. Is it also a logical gap that casting moonbeam ontop of someone doesn't immediately do damage to them right away? But casting it ontop of someone and then shoving their buddy into the area would trigger it on their buddy. is that also a logical gap? If so, your problem with logical gaps is the rules themselves and you should be looking at homebrewing things.
I would point out some other data for you to consider:
There is a further distinction between "movement" and "Movement type". Teleport is not considered a movement type (try filtering the Monster list by Movement Type for example). No Monsters (or PCs) have "teleport" as a movement type (unlike in some previous editions), and there's a really good mechanical reason for that. In 5e they changed it so anyone can break up their move and perform some other action in the middle. If you could do that with a Teleport speed, that would be simply too powerful.
Teleport abilities exclusively take an action or bonus action to perform.
That said, I don't think that this detracts from your main points : If you Teleport into an area, you have entered it. If you teleport somewhere you have "moved" there, even if you didn't use "Your Move" to do so.
You make excellent points.
( Interestingly, the wording on Opportunity Attack suggests that Teleport does count as "moving out of reach", since it calls out teleport as one way to specifically avoid the opportunity attack. If teleport wasn't "moving out of reach" then it wouldn't need to be called out as a specific exception. At least -- that's one way to interpret that passage. )
With how much confusion there is with teleportation, moving, your move, and movement, I'm glad they went the extra step and clarified that teleporting does not provoke. Just imagine how many people would rule the other direction under the incorrect notion that teleportation was movement had they not added that bit.
After considering this, I think I'm now able to answer the booming blade poll more confidently.
Cool.
Sorry if I mangled the format between you and your reply to Misty. It got funky and doesn't wanna fix itself.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
All we have to do is show that there is a single use of the word “movement” that doesn’t mean “use your speed” and your entire argument is wrong. 100% No if ands or buts about it. There is no reasonable way to argue that movement always means one thing (that isn’t written) when there is proof (words on the page) it doesn’t.
Relentless Avenger
By 7th level, your supernatural focus helps you close off a foe’s retreat. When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, you can move up to half your speed immediately after the attack and as part of the same reaction. This movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
Apart from falling and forced movement, here's another exemple of undefined Movement;
Bait & Switch: When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn't incapacitated. This movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.
Here's now a similar exemple of movement speed now to teleport;
Untamed Champion: Additionally, immediate before or after you cast a spell of 1st level or higher on your turn, you can spend all of your movement speed to teleport up to 15 feet to an unoccupied space that you can see.
All we have to do is show that there is a single use of the word “movement” that doesn’t mean “use your speed” and your entire argument is wrong.
Relentless Avenger
By 7th level, your supernatural focus helps you close off a foe’s retreat. When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, you can move up to half your speed immediately after the attack and as part of the same reaction. This movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
💯
The creature switching position with the fighter using Bait & Switch is not doing so using any of it's speed nor does it even say it moves and yet it's clearly identified as movement.
I’d rule teleporting involving spiked growth would only deal deal 2d4 damage, and that would depend on if a creature teleported into spiked growth for some reason.
maybe spiked growth was hidden from them since they may not have been there at the time of casting.
maybe they were subjected to a scatter spell, or were temporarily banished but appeared again in the growth.
I think teleportation is movement, but it’s special movement.
I’ll keep enjoying this exciting “discussion”.
Yes, precisely my point when I said a fellow reasonable DM might rule that it's 2d4, not 4d4, because they don't consider moving out to be moving within, but moving into is incontrovertible.
All we have to do is show that there is a single use of the word “movement” that doesn’t mean “use your speed” and your entire argument is wrong. 100% No if ands or buts about it. There is no reasonable way to argue that movement always means one thing (that isn’t written) when there is proof (words on the page) it doesn’t.
Relentless Avenger
By 7th level, your supernatural focus helps you close off a foe’s retreat. When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, you can move up to half your speed immediately after the attack and as part of the same reaction. This movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
💯
This doesn't show what you seem to think it does.
This ability allows you to move. Right? Well how far?
Move up to half your speed. Oh... speed. You can move... up to your half your speed... What's "speed" mean? What even is half of it?
Speed is a reference to your movement type. Walking speed. Flying Speed. etc. You have a listed speed in ft for any movement type you have available to you.
Relentless Avenger lets you move up to your half that speed. Whichever of those movement speeds you have or want to spend your movement on. You wanna fly? Fly. You wanna walk? Walk. If you have the movement speed... you can use that type of movement with Relentless Avenger.
And, as an added bonus, whatever movement you do use, it doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.
This is functionally identical to how your move on your turn works (if you had also disengaged) just at only half the overall distance, and triggered as it specifies.
Someone once asked a powerful question:
How do the rules indicate that some feature "raises your cap on movement and allows you to consume it" vs "just moving you" and why some arbitrary features fit into one category and others don't without any textual difference indicating so).
Your Move, the portion of your turn you get by default, allows you to move up to a distance equal to your movement speed. It is kinda like an action, reaction, bonus action in some senses... it is a discrete portion of your turn. "Your Move"
You can split Your Move up into pieces throughout your turn. Your Move allows you "To Move". I know we just used "move" twice there in two different ways. But, you have Your Move and you can cause your character To Move. To Move, you are changing locations via an ability, effect, spell, etc that allows you To Move. Your Move, by default... allows you To Move. But to do so, you must Spend Movement.
The ability above, Relentless Avenger, says "You can move". This is permissive text that is granting our character the opportunity "To Move". Now, it has some additional text to further explain the method of how we get to move. It goes on to say "up to half your speed". As per the Movement and Positioning Rules, we know that is how Your Move also works. You get To Move, on Your Move, a distance up to your Speed by Spending Movement.
So, as you can see, nothing about if this is arbitrary. Relentless Avenger specifically grants the ability To Move a distance up to half Your Speed. This is most certainly your own movement and follows the same exact phrasing as the default Your Move does.
An ability that is "just moving you" wouldn't reference Your Speed in this same way. The rules for movement will occasionally use Speed and Movement interchangeably and they are a linked concept. Movement comes in different Types all of which have Speeds.
Conversely, something is "moving you" if it isn't using Your Movement (ie any of your movement speeds).
In other words, you "can move" on your turn a certain distance, and, if an ability says you "can move" that is also giving you the opportunity, a separate and distinct one, to move a distance. This is additive, because each is granting their own amount of distance you can move, that amount being specified as some function of your movement speed. If something else just says it "moves you 10 ft" then you have Been Moved. That wasn't a flying movement or a swimming movement or any type of movement. You just got bodily manhandled or something and chucked 10ft in distance. That isn't Your Movement. Clearly. So, that is something "just moving you".
The Movement and Position rules of the PHB are a great resource for figuring out how that all works. If you want the original text, that is where to source it.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
[REDACTED]. C_C didn't claim you said it in this thread - that's a caveat you introduced. C_C claimed it was your argument, and you did present it - in another, similar thread. This is the post C_C is referencing.
Again, you didn't get the point.
You didn't show that movement (or move, after all they're different words, as you so clearly pointed out) must mean "spend movement."
Keep digging Rav, that hole is getting deeper with every post.
Questions for the Teleportation is Move(ment) crowd(s):
Obviously misty stepping before a long jump doesn't count as moving 10 ft. The whole purpose of the requirement is to demonstrate the character has built up speed and momentum. Teleportation doesn't do that. So teleporting isn't moving.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
Because a 20ft radius is 40 ft across...
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
But you claim teleporting is moving. And, if you teleport 30ft within the area of the spell, you've "moved 30ft within the spell area". No?
SO. You're saying that teleportation. By definition. Isn't... "moving into or within the area".
So you've join my side of the argument?
In the example you never left it. You went from a spot inside it to another spot inside it, 30ft.
gain, in the example you never leave the spiked growth. maybe revisit the question and try again? I'm curious how you actually feel in a not "gotcha" kinda way.
You're IN the spiked growth, and teleport to another spot, still IN that same spiked growth, but 30ft away. How much damage do you take?
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Lets say there is a magic circle in the spike growth, does that change the answer?
No. That's the whole point of teleportation - you don't traverse the intervening space. In this context, you've moved 30 feet, but you haven't moved 30 feet within the spell area, due to what the words "teleport" and "within" mean.
No. Your argument is about your incorrect definition of moving. Mine is about my correct definitions of teleport, into, and within. Teleporting is moving. It is not moving within, in the context we are discussing.
You left a spike growth space, as I said in the sentence you quoted. If you're using a grid, spike growth is 64 grid squares large. It is quite easy to start your turn inside one of those squares and then later in your turn be in another of those squares. In order for that to happen, you must leave the first square. Since the core rules don't assume a grid, the more accurate term to use for a discussion of the RAW is space.
4d4. I already covered this so I'm not sure what I can productively add.
You take 2d4 damage from the space you start in, because you teleport from it. You take another 2d4 from the space you end in, because you teleport into it. You don't take any damage from the intervening spaces, because you didn't move within them.
Funny, you never referenced the information within the spoiler.
If you think teleporting is moving, then... "while within the area" ... they ... "moved 30 ft". That's 12d4 damage? Does this actually make any sense though? They never went through those spaces... seems like one of those instances where misapplying the definition of movement to teleportation has derived nonsensical results.
there was no misapplying the definition of movement to Teleportation.
These are your exact words.
You are of the belief your interpretation of the rules are absolute, and everyone else is flat out wrong.
It does not show up in the rules, because it is implied within the scope of the rules as a whole, not in a piece-meal breakdown you like to use.
You are of the belief if it's not purely a rule, it's incorrect.
Remember Rules As Written are general in scope to gameplay. Spells, Feats, and etc. are the specific instances of the general. They are the hidden scraps of knowledge secreted away into the corners of the rules that can only be deciphered by inference, and that begin to turn your interpretation of the rules inside out.
Teleportation is Movement by definition. It's part of the rules, and because it's not absolutely defined in print, you unlike others refuse to accept that.
That fine, you do you. The rest of us will be playing D&D.
What??
Correct. I can help you if you actually want to learn the rules.
Rules don't need to imply anything. Rules tell you stuff. Hunting for implied content is a surefire way to disappear into a rabbithole of "hidden meaning" that just isn't there.
Yeah. If it isn't a rule... it isn't a rule. That is correct.
No. Rules as Written are the entire written rules of the game.
Specific instances of the general?
Uh, no. Spells, Feats, and Etc. are all Rules as Written.
No, it isn't.
Quote it then. Don't claim it is a rule and not quote it. Easy enough to do if its true right? Quote the rule that says "Teleportation is movement". That'd end this whole discussion. Why haven't you quoted it?
Yeah D&D allows you to homebrew all kinds of wild and crazy things. You're genuinely and truly correct to homebrew D&D any and every way you want. Meanwhile, in the topic of Rules as they are Written, I still don't see your supporting evidence. Shame.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Nicely set out.
I would point out some other data for you to consider:
That said, I don't think that this detracts from your main points : If you Teleport into an area, you have entered it. If you teleport somewhere you have "moved" there, even if you didn't use "Your Move" to do so.
( Interestingly, the wording on Opportunity Attack suggests that Teleport does count as "moving out of reach", since it calls out teleport as one way to specifically avoid the opportunity attack. If teleport wasn't "moving out of reach" then it wouldn't need to be called out as a specific exception. At least -- that's one way to interpret that passage. )
Addressing the examples of creatures taking damage moving through a zone by teleporting, I think the most reasonable interpretation is to consider the creature to have "entered" the destination square only, since no intervening squares were moved through. So if you start inside the area, take damage for starting your turn there, and then teleport to another square inside the area, you've now entered the area again. (I'm a bit hazy on the ruling for entering and exiting and then re-entering a damaging zone -- it might be that you can only take that damage once per turn..)
After considering this, I think I'm now able to answer the booming blade poll more confidently.
I’d rule teleporting involving spiked growth would only deal deal 2d4 damage, and that would depend on if a creature teleported into spiked growth for some reason.
maybe spiked growth was hidden from them since they may not have been there at the time of casting.
maybe they were subjected to a scatter spell, or were temporarily banished but appeared again in the growth.
I think teleportation is movement, but it’s special movement.
I’ll keep enjoying this exciting “discussion”.
A comment in the Poll thread brought me to an interesting parallel issue: Mounted Combat.
Controlling a mount doesn't consume the rider's movement, so they can "willingly move" into the effect of spells without actually doing anything with their own movement speed.
Similarly, an independent mount results in "forced movement", even if it's at the rider's instruction.
Everything up to this point is spot on 100%.
Why are you calling that movement? That is moving. It uses movement, just as your move uses movement. But, why call it specifically movement, when it instead is moving. The terms used in the spell says, and I quote "to move as far as its speed allows away from you" and never once uses the word movement.
Because it causes you to move as far as your speed allows, you are using a type of movement. One can even make an argument that they need to use the type of movement that has the highest speed, too, at least after they've exhausted the others. Because if you walk 30 ft and have a 60ft fly speed, you still have speed left, and that speed "would allow" you to move farther.
But the term "movement" here is applicable in only exactly the same way as it is during You Move on your turn, Movement Type and Movement Spent. What you're doing is moving while using any available movement to accomplish it.
Teleports never say Movement, nor even Move. These words are absent from their descriptions. Absent.
Oddly, though... Dissonant Whispers and Skirmisher have nearly identical triggers, both being reactions probably not on your own turn. Why did you separate them into different categories?
Again, like Dissonant Whispers this ability says "You can move up to half your speed as a reaction when an enemy..." meaning it functions essentially identically to a move on your turn would, you spend movement to move. As an extra bonus, that movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks. It is a nice feature that allows you to move by spending movement.
That is just a forced move. You could have a speed of 0 and no available movement types/speed/etc and still suffer forced moves. Forced moves are not any type of movement and do not have speeds. They're typically measured in distances only. You simply get moved. You spend no movement, nor need movement, so this "movement" isn't movement... it is being moved.
You can even forced move inanimate objects that have no speed or movement capability whatsoever.
100%
They don't. Especially not forced moves. What type of movement is: being pushed? It isn't any type of movement, not do you have a speed for it. Forced moves are forcing you to move. They're moving you. Yes. But, they don't necessarily use movement or have a movement type nor a movement speed.
That is not an explicit statement. An explicit statement would be "Teleportation is movement". <--- This is never stated in the rules anywhere. Ever.
Even IF you accepted that statement is indeed saying that teleporting is moving. That still doesn't make it "movement". It has no type, it has no speed, you do not spend it.
2 things. I wanted to avoid "enter' debate entirely but I'll touch on it briefly to state this: Your argument here has nothing to do with the word movement.
This is what it looks like without mentioning movement at all:
You see? You're slipping in an irrelevant point to your argument.
Movement has nothing to do with what you're saying there.
But, as an aside, that 2nd thing: There is no logical gap in that example any more than there is when you're standing in that spell area after it first got cast and just casually not taking damage then either. Is it also a logical gap that casting moonbeam ontop of someone doesn't immediately do damage to them right away? But casting it ontop of someone and then shoving their buddy into the area would trigger it on their buddy. is that also a logical gap? If so, your problem with logical gaps is the rules themselves and you should be looking at homebrewing things.
You make excellent points.
With how much confusion there is with teleportation, moving, your move, and movement, I'm glad they went the extra step and clarified that teleporting does not provoke. Just imagine how many people would rule the other direction under the incorrect notion that teleportation was movement had they not added that bit.
Cool.
Sorry if I mangled the format between you and your reply to Misty. It got funky and doesn't wanna fix itself.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
All we have to do is show that there is a single use of the word “movement” that doesn’t mean “use your speed” and your entire argument is wrong. 100% No if ands or buts about it. There is no reasonable way to argue that movement always means one thing (that isn’t written) when there is proof (words on the page) it doesn’t.
Relentless Avenger
By 7th level, your supernatural focus helps you close off a foe’s retreat. When you hit a creature with an opportunity attack, you can move up to half your speed immediately after the attack and as part of the same reaction. This movement doesn’t provoke opportunity attacks.
💯
Apart from falling and forced movement, here's another exemple of undefined Movement;
Bait & Switch: When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn't incapacitated. This movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.
Here's now a similar exemple of movement speed now to teleport;
Untamed Champion: Additionally, immediate before or after you cast a spell of 1st level or higher on your turn, you can spend all of your movement speed to teleport up to 15 feet to an unoccupied space that you can see.
No. Context is not required for always. By definition.
By the way, also you've conflated using (as in consuming) with referencing.
The creature switching position with the fighter using Bait & Switch is not doing so using any of it's speed nor does it even say it moves and yet it's clearly identified as movement.
Yes, precisely my point when I said a fellow reasonable DM might rule that it's 2d4, not 4d4, because they don't consider moving out to be moving within, but moving into is incontrovertible.
This doesn't show what you seem to think it does.
This ability allows you to move. Right? Well how far?
Move up to half your speed. Oh... speed. You can move... up to your half your speed... What's "speed" mean? What even is half of it?
Speed is a reference to your movement type. Walking speed. Flying Speed. etc. You have a listed speed in ft for any movement type you have available to you.
Relentless Avenger lets you move up to your half that speed. Whichever of those movement speeds you have or want to spend your movement on. You wanna fly? Fly. You wanna walk? Walk. If you have the movement speed... you can use that type of movement with Relentless Avenger.
And, as an added bonus, whatever movement you do use, it doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.
This is functionally identical to how your move on your turn works (if you had also disengaged) just at only half the overall distance, and triggered as it specifies.
Your Move, the portion of your turn you get by default, allows you to move up to a distance equal to your movement speed. It is kinda like an action, reaction, bonus action in some senses... it is a discrete portion of your turn. "Your Move"
You can split Your Move up into pieces throughout your turn. Your Move allows you "To Move". I know we just used "move" twice there in two different ways. But, you have Your Move and you can cause your character To Move. To Move, you are changing locations via an ability, effect, spell, etc that allows you To Move. Your Move, by default... allows you To Move. But to do so, you must Spend Movement.
The ability above, Relentless Avenger, says "You can move". This is permissive text that is granting our character the opportunity "To Move". Now, it has some additional text to further explain the method of how we get to move. It goes on to say "up to half your speed". As per the Movement and Positioning Rules, we know that is how Your Move also works. You get To Move, on Your Move, a distance up to your Speed by Spending Movement.
So, as you can see, nothing about if this is arbitrary. Relentless Avenger specifically grants the ability To Move a distance up to half Your Speed. This is most certainly your own movement and follows the same exact phrasing as the default Your Move does.
An ability that is "just moving you" wouldn't reference Your Speed in this same way. The rules for movement will occasionally use Speed and Movement interchangeably and they are a linked concept. Movement comes in different Types all of which have Speeds.
Conversely, something is "moving you" if it isn't using Your Movement (ie any of your movement speeds).
In other words, you "can move" on your turn a certain distance, and, if an ability says you "can move" that is also giving you the opportunity, a separate and distinct one, to move a distance. This is additive, because each is granting their own amount of distance you can move, that amount being specified as some function of your movement speed. If something else just says it "moves you 10 ft" then you have Been Moved. That wasn't a flying movement or a swimming movement or any type of movement. You just got bodily manhandled or something and chucked 10ft in distance. That isn't Your Movement. Clearly. So, that is something "just moving you".
The Movement and Position rules of the PHB are a great resource for figuring out how that all works. If you want the original text, that is where to source it.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
So Relentless avenger consumes your speed for your turn?