You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. For example, you don't provoke an opportunity attack if an explosion hurls you out of a foe's reach or if gravity causes you to fall past an enemy.
I can't reasonably vote 'no' even if it doesn't seem intentional. Otherwise, for example, you could avoid damage by walking away using any number of features that don't use your speed (Restless Avenger is one that comes to mind).
Obviously teleportation moves you (RAW, teleportation is referred to as moving you several times), so then the only reason to say 'no' would be that this somehow requires you to use your speed. This would open the door to you walking away as long as it isn't using your speed.
I would say Restless Avenger does move using the creature’s speed:
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.
So then on your turn you have to subtract that restless avenger movement from the amount you can move that turn?
[Quick reminder that I've asked to avoid discussion in this thread, largely to avoid rehashing everything that has already been covered in the original discussion thread.
Sposta's response primarily consisted of a direct rules quotation, so I considered it within the spirit of the "One Post" exception.]
Re: Consuming Movement
Abilities which reference speed can be said to operate like taking the "Dash" action, which simultaneously raises the cap on total movement, and then subsequently consumes it. This is different from consuming the portion of movement preallocated by the "Move" phase of a combat turn.
To continue this thread of conversation, I would ask that you take it to BeyondMisty's Discussion Thread.
I mean, a legitimate answer to that question isn't a rehash and would have a serious implications to the rules (and how a reasonable person should answer the original question). If you don't want to explore that, then that's fine. On the other hand, You did in fact respond to the question yourself, which seems at odds with your own stated rule -- somewhat disingenuous.
And your statement leaves a lot to be desired (Namely, 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).
Anyway, this is my last post here, since apparently we're not interested in getting to the bottom of the rule interaction.
And your statement leaves a lot to be desired (Namely, 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).
I have answers to these questions if you want them! But best not back n forth in this thread per Op's wishes I'll answer them elsewhere.
Discussion and answers are absolutely valuable, which is why there is a separate discussion thread.
The purpose of this thread is to accumulate opinions from as many different people as possible in an easily skimmable way, and discussion here tends to bury those different voices behind pages of exchanges. People are encouraged to return and change their post and votes as their opinions change.
By personally responding, I wanted to provide a semblance of closure for the question, in case it didn't get continued elsewhere. Without actual moderation powers I'm still trying to figure out the best way to facilitate this in the way that it was intended. (Being able to reply directly to individual posts, like in Stack Exchange, would be awesome.)
As for how the rules indicate "raising the movement cap", they don't explicitly. The RAI was covered in podcasts, and might be in the SAC, which I'll track down for you later this evening. The specific example that was used was how a player can use Dash+Move to jump further than the 30ft listed in their statblock, if they are under the effect of the Jump spell, or otherwise have an exceptionally large jump potential.
Feel free to message me directly, if you want to talk about it further.
Edit: Next time, I'll respond in the discussion thread and link to it here where appropriate.
I'm pretty sure the RAW supports "yes" more than "no", but a straight "yes" answer also leads to nonsensical results in other interactions.
So I voted other, because I think that the DM should decide on a case by case basis.
Could you please provide examples? I'll delete this post once you respond to obey the 1 post for the thread limit (I have another post earlier in the thread), but I'm wondering what nonsensical interactions exist.
I mean, a legitimate answer to that question isn't a rehash and would have a serious implications to the rules (and how a reasonable person should answer the original question).
I would say Restless Avenger does move using the creature’s speed:
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.
So then on your turn you have to subtract that restless avenger movement from the amount you can move that turn?
Why should that be true? Speed is something that affects how far you move on your turn. It’s not like, say, a reaction.
A reaction (like actions and bonus actions) work like money. Once you spend your money you have no more money until next payday. A player “spends” their character’s reaction to do something and then they don’t have a reaction anymore until they get another one next “payday” at the start of their following turn. Each character gets one reaction per round, that’s it.
But that’s not how movement speeds work. A character doesn’t “spend” it, so they don’t have to wait until they get more. Movement speeds are more like a speed limit on a road, it’s just a cap on how fast you are allowed to go, only instead of miles (or kilometers) per hour, it’s measured in feet per deciminute. So if you have a walking speed of 30, you’re allowed to go 30 feet per deciminute. A feature like Relentless Avenger doesn’t eat into your character’s fpd, it instead acts more like a license to speed under specific circumstances.
Another analogy would be like “casual Fridays.” Just because you could wear jeans, a golf shirt and sneakers into the office on Friday doesn’t mean you have to wear slacks, loafers and a shirt & tie on Saturday to make up for it. Ne?
There's not much I can do against having my wishes as OP deliberately ignored, and with 47+ votes, everyone who wanted to toss up an opinion for easy reading has probably already had a chance to do so.
I know we are discussing this in the context of teleportation, but I would suggest that compelled movement (because of dissonant whispers for instance), even under one's own power, is not enough to satisfy the requirement for activating the secondary effect of booming blade because the movement must be willing. I know this is an extremely strict reading of RAW, but RAI agrees. Such movement also gives no indication it would dispel the lingering effect, so I think the victim remains sheathed in booming energy until the duration expires or until the trigger is satisfied.
That last bit is also the way I treat booming blade with regard to teleporting.
There is a two-part test to trigger booming blade's secondary damage. Part 1: You must willingly move. Part 2: You must end up 5' or more away from where you started.
My position:
Teleportation satisfies the second requirement, but not the first.
Standing up from prone satisfies the first, but not the second requirement.
I basically second this. I don’t see teleportation as meeting the definition of “willing” movement by default, any more than I would say standing on a ship in motion would constitute “willing” movement
What do you mean? There are many ways to willingly teleport.
I went with No. No maximum verbos explanation but all I could think about when answering the question was Nightcrawler and I like Nightcrawler.
This problematic twice over:
You're apparently answering how you want the ability to work, not how it does work.
You're getting Nightcrawler's lore exactly wrong. Nightcrawler teleports by stepping into another dimension, traversing the intervening distance, and then stepping back into our dimension. That other dimension is called the Brimstone Dimension. I am emphasizing this in this thread because that is always how 5E's teleporting has been fluffed, and is why e.g. Hallow blocks teleportation when you choose "Extradimensional Interference" - all teleportation in D&D has been extradimensional since 1E, so far as I know. In other words, your comparison to Nightcrawler is very apt - and precisely why you should vote Yes. Nightcrawler, like anyone using Misty Step, is physically moving - just not in the Prime Material.
I went with No. No maximum verbos explanation but all I could think about when answering the question was Nightcrawler and I like Nightcrawler.
This problematic twice over:
You're apparently answering how you want the ability to work, not how it does work.
Works that way if he is the DM lol.
You're getting Nightcrawler's lore exactly wrong. Nightcrawler teleports by stepping into another dimension, traversing the intervening distance, and then stepping back into our dimension. That other dimension is called the Brimstone Dimension. I am emphasizing this in this thread because that is always how 5E's teleporting has been fluffed, and is why e.g. Hallow blocks teleportation when you choose "Extradimensional Interference" - all teleportation in D&D has been extradimensional since 1E, so far as I know. In other words, your comparison to Nightcrawler is very apt - and precisely why you should vote Yes. Nightcrawler, like anyone using Misty Step, is physically moving - just not in the Prime Material.
Huh, you go into an extradimensional space when you teleport? Seems like an important footnote to include in the books somewhere. Imagine what'd happen if you teleported with a bag of holding?
That, is a joke. Before yall get crazy on me about what an "item" means or whatever.
But for reals, teleporting is extradimensional in 5e? Would be great to have sources on this. Might change my entire perspective completely. If you're going to an extradimensional space in between vanishing and reappearing, that... is something.
Edit: It's also sorta hilarious you're picking an argument with someone who is making light of all us maximum verbos explainers...
I went with No. No maximum verbos explanation but all I could think about when answering the question was Nightcrawler and I like Nightcrawler.
You're getting Nightcrawler's lore exactly wrong. Nightcrawler teleports by stepping into another dimension, traversing the intervening distance, and then stepping back into our dimension. That other dimension is called the Brimstone Dimension. I am emphasizing this in this thread because that is always how 5E's teleporting has been fluffed, and is why e.g. Hallow blocks teleportation when you choose "Extradimensional Interference" - all teleportation in D&D has been extradimensional since 1E, so far as I know. In other words, your comparison to Nightcrawler is very apt - and precisely why you should vote Yes. Nightcrawler, like anyone using Misty Step, is physically moving - just not in the Prime Material.
See, I read that as "I like Nightcrawler and wouldn't want him to be hit by Booming Blade", not "Nightcrawler's specific form of teleportation wouldn't trigger Booming Blade"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter) Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It's a No from me. Booming Blade triggers upon moving 5 feet. Misty Step lets the caster cover the distance yes, but the caster is moving 0 feet.
To visualise it, draw a line through all the spaces between the original space and the space the caster entered. For each border (on a grid) the caster moves across, he moves 5 feet. In the case of teleportation, the line would not cross any border as the character doesn't move into any of the spaces between the original space and the destination space. He moves into the destination space, but doesn't cross any border to do so.
To take the argument further, how many feet did you move when teleporting to another world? A lot or none? What if you stood still and cast Etherealness on yourself? Did you move a lot of feet or none?
Disclaimer: Teleportation and Plane shifting are not the same, so my last question is moot from a RAW perspective. However, many people do treat them the same, which is why I included it.
Edit: The rules specify how you count ranges when using a grid:
Ranges. To determine the range on a grid between two things—whether creatures or objects—start counting squares from a square adjacent to one of them and stop counting in the space of the other one. Count by the shortest route.
I went with No. No maximum verbos explanation but all I could think about when answering the question was Nightcrawler and I like Nightcrawler.
This problematic twice over:
You're apparently answering how you want the ability to work, not how it does work.
You're getting Nightcrawler's lore exactly wrong. Nightcrawler teleports by stepping into another dimension, traversing the intervening distance, and then stepping back into our dimension. That other dimension is called the Brimstone Dimension. I am emphasizing this in this thread because that is always how 5E's teleporting has been fluffed, and is why e.g. Hallow blocks teleportation when you choose "Extradimensional Interference" - all teleportation in D&D has been extradimensional since 1E, so far as I know. In other words, your comparison to Nightcrawler is very apt - and precisely why you should vote Yes. Nightcrawler, like anyone using Misty Step, is physically moving - just not in the Prime Material.
Teleportation and plane shifting are two separate things. Teleportation can move you to other worlds, not other planes. Likewise, plane shifting can move you to other planes, not other worlds. If you could come up with a rule reference that state that teleportation can be used for interdimensional travel, that would be great as I haven't been able to find any clear rule statements on the matter other than the clear implications listed above.
It's a No from me. Booming Blade triggers upon moving 5 feet. Misty Step lets the caster cover the distance yes, but the caster is moving 0 feet.
To visualise it, draw a line through all the spaces between the original space and the space the caster entered. For each border (on a grid) the caster moves across, he moves 5 feet. In the case of teleportation, the line would not cross any border as the character doesn't move into any of the spaces between the original space and the destination space. He moves into the destination space, but doesn't cross any border to do so.
Edit: The rules specify how you count ranges when using a grid:
Ranges. To determine the range on a grid between two things—whether creatures or objects—start counting squares from a square adjacent to one of them and stop counting in the space of the other one. Count by the shortest route.
Interesting argument. I'm not sure I follow it though. If I cast Misty Step, I pick a location 30 feet away. I appear at the new location. Is that location not 30 feet away from my previous location? The fact that I didn't physically pass through the intervening space doesn't mean I didn't change locations. It doesn't make the two locations are somehow adjacent to each other (Arcane Gate specifically grants that ability, but Misty Step does not).
It seems to me that this idea that "I didn't move, I teleported." is somehow related to the idea that you don't physically occupy intervening space, unlike Flying, Walking, Burrowing, Climbing, or Swimming. Because teleporting is "vanish and then appear somewhere else." And I get it -- because the ability to vanish and reappear _is_ special when it comes to Opportunity Attack: It happens so fast that the enemy cannot strike out at you. It's also proof against things like Grapple. Teleport is special. It's also not a "movement type".
But I think it's overreaching to say you don't "move" when you teleport. Moving in the game seems like it's complicated, but it really isn't. You start at position A and you end at position B. You have moved between those positions, and the distance between them is measurable. Therefore you've moved X feet. If X>5 and you moved willingly, then Booming Blade's magic kicks in. Simple. Teleport's exceptional abilities are called out in the specific places where it makes a difference (the rules on Opportunity Attacks, for example). Reading more power into Teleportation is unwarranted.
There is a two-part test to trigger booming blade's secondary damage. Part 1: You must willingly move. Part 2: You must end up 5' or more away from where you started.
My position:
Teleportation satisfies the second requirement, but not the first.
Standing up from prone satisfies the first, but not the second requirement.
I basically second this. I don’t see teleportation as meeting the definition of “willing” movement by default, any more than I would say standing on a ship in motion would constitute “willing” movement
What do you mean? There are many ways to willingly teleport.
Not so much. I can willingly cast misty step, but the spell effect is what teleports me. I'm transported by the spell. Similarly, if I was standing on a ship in motion, would you claim my movement due to the ship is willing because I got on the ship? I'm transported by the ship. To me, neither is "willing" innately, since the actual teleport happens whether I will it or not (my will ends the moment I cast the spell, everything after is no longer willing). The same would hold true if I was using a magic item to teleport (the item is moving me). This aligns with the concept of "teleportation" as a form of transport (as described in the teleport and in google definitions) and "transport" as being carried or conveyed (per google definitions)
The only teleportation that might be considered truly "willing" would be a natural or class ability, possibly like the Conjuration Wizards Benign Transposition ability or the Horizon Walker Distant Strike, but to me its just easier to say all teleportation is transport, and transport is not willing movement on the part of the creature being transported (no more than standing on ship you willingly boarded for transport would be)
But I think it's overreaching to say you don't "move" when you teleport. Moving in the game seems like it's complicated, but it really isn't. You start at position A and you end at position B. You have moved between those positions, and the distance between them is measurable. Therefore you've moved X feet.
So if you walk 10 ft and through an arcane gate that connects to a point 300 ft away, and then another 10 ft of walking. Did you move 20 ft, or 320 ft?
You started at A and ended at B. You have moved between those positions. The distance is measurable. Therefore you moved X feet.
What is X? If you measure from A to B through the gate, then it is 20ft. This is the path the character took. But if you measure A to B through normal space then it is 320 ft. This is not the path the character took.
Same applies with other teleports. If you measure the distance through the path the character took, then they didn't move at all. if you measure the path through normal space, they moved however far they teleported.
So, yeah. For determining how far they moved... are you measuring the path they took, or, the straight line through normal space between the points they started/finished at?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I got quotes!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
[PHB] (emphasis added)
I would assume that booming blade uses the same rules as this.
i can roll nat 1s on command
my homebrew thingies
Magic Items - Monsters - Subclasses
So then on your turn you have to subtract that restless avenger movement from the amount you can move that turn?
[Quick reminder that I've asked to avoid discussion in this thread, largely to avoid rehashing everything that has already been covered in the original discussion thread.
Sposta's response primarily consisted of a direct rules quotation, so I considered it within the spirit of the "One Post" exception.]
Re: Consuming Movement
Abilities which reference speed can be said to operate like taking the "Dash" action, which simultaneously raises the cap on total movement, and then subsequently consumes it. This is different from consuming the portion of movement preallocated by the "Move" phase of a combat turn.
To continue this thread of conversation, I would ask that you take it to BeyondMisty's Discussion Thread.
I mean, a legitimate answer to that question isn't a rehash and would have a serious implications to the rules (and how a reasonable person should answer the original question). If you don't want to explore that, then that's fine. On the other hand, You did in fact respond to the question yourself, which seems at odds with your own stated rule -- somewhat disingenuous.
And your statement leaves a lot to be desired (Namely, 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).
Anyway, this is my last post here, since apparently we're not interested in getting to the bottom of the rule interaction.
I have answers to these questions if you want them! But best not back n forth in this thread per Op's wishes I'll answer them elsewhere.
I got quotes!
Discussion and answers are absolutely valuable, which is why there is a separate discussion thread.
The purpose of this thread is to accumulate opinions from as many different people as possible in an easily skimmable way, and discussion here tends to bury those different voices behind pages of exchanges. People are encouraged to return and change their post and votes as their opinions change.
By personally responding, I wanted to provide a semblance of closure for the question, in case it didn't get continued elsewhere. Without actual moderation powers I'm still trying to figure out the best way to facilitate this in the way that it was intended. (Being able to reply directly to individual posts, like in Stack Exchange, would be awesome.)
As for how the rules indicate "raising the movement cap", they don't explicitly. The RAI was covered in podcasts, and might be in the SAC, which I'll track down for you later this evening. The specific example that was used was how a player can use Dash+Move to jump further than the 30ft listed in their statblock, if they are under the effect of the Jump spell, or otherwise have an exceptionally large jump potential.
Feel free to message me directly, if you want to talk about it further.
Edit: Next time, I'll respond in the discussion thread and link to it here where appropriate.
I'm pretty sure the RAW supports "yes" more than "no", but a straight "yes" answer also leads to nonsensical results in other interactions.
So I voted other, because I think that the DM should decide on a case by case basis.
Could you please provide examples? I'll delete this post once you respond to obey the 1 post for the thread limit (I have another post earlier in the thread), but I'm wondering what nonsensical interactions exist.
I agree.
Why should that be true? Speed is something that affects how far you move on your turn. It’s not like, say, a reaction.
A reaction (like actions and bonus actions) work like money. Once you spend your money you have no more money until next payday. A player “spends” their character’s reaction to do something and then they don’t have a reaction anymore until they get another one next “payday” at the start of their following turn. Each character gets one reaction per round, that’s it.
But that’s not how movement speeds work. A character doesn’t “spend” it, so they don’t have to wait until they get more. Movement speeds are more like a speed limit on a road, it’s just a cap on how fast you are allowed to go, only instead of miles (or kilometers) per hour, it’s measured in feet per deciminute. So if you have a walking speed of 30, you’re allowed to go 30 feet per deciminute. A feature like Relentless Avenger doesn’t eat into your character’s fpd, it instead acts more like a license to speed under specific circumstances.
Another analogy would be like “casual Fridays.” Just because you could wear jeans, a golf shirt and sneakers into the office on Friday doesn’t mean you have to wear slacks, loafers and a shirt & tie on Saturday to make up for it. Ne?
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
There's not much I can do against having my wishes as OP deliberately ignored, and with 47+ votes, everyone who wanted to toss up an opinion for easy reading has probably already had a chance to do so.
Thus, I guess the floor is open? Have at it.
[Thank you to those who humored me.]
I know we are discussing this in the context of teleportation, but I would suggest that compelled movement (because of dissonant whispers for instance), even under one's own power, is not enough to satisfy the requirement for activating the secondary effect of booming blade because the movement must be willing. I know this is an extremely strict reading of RAW, but RAI agrees. Such movement also gives no indication it would dispel the lingering effect, so I think the victim remains sheathed in booming energy until the duration expires or until the trigger is satisfied.
That last bit is also the way I treat booming blade with regard to teleporting.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
What do you mean? There are many ways to willingly teleport.
This problematic twice over:
Works that way if he is the DM lol.
Huh, you go into an extradimensional space when you teleport? Seems like an important footnote to include in the books somewhere. Imagine what'd happen if you teleported with a bag of holding?
That, is a joke. Before yall get crazy on me about what an "item" means or whatever.
But for reals, teleporting is extradimensional in 5e? Would be great to have sources on this. Might change my entire perspective completely. If you're going to an extradimensional space in between vanishing and reappearing, that... is something.
Edit: It's also sorta hilarious you're picking an argument with someone who is making light of all us maximum verbos explainers...
I got quotes!
See, I read that as "I like Nightcrawler and wouldn't want him to be hit by Booming Blade", not "Nightcrawler's specific form of teleportation wouldn't trigger Booming Blade"
Active characters:
Askatu, hyperfocused vedalken freedom fighter in Wildspace (Zealot barb/Swashbuckler rogue/Battle Master fighter)
Green Hill Sunrise, jaded tabaxi mercenary trapped in the Dark Domains (Battle Master fighter)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It's a No from me. Booming Blade triggers upon moving 5 feet. Misty Step lets the caster cover the distance yes, but the caster is moving 0 feet.
To visualise it, draw a line through all the spaces between the original space and the space the caster entered. For each border (on a grid) the caster moves across, he moves 5 feet. In the case of teleportation, the line would not cross any border as the character doesn't move into any of the spaces between the original space and the destination space. He moves into the destination space, but doesn't cross any border to do so.
To take the argument further, how many feet did you move when teleporting to another world? A lot or none? What if you stood still and cast Etherealness on yourself? Did you move a lot of feet or none?
Disclaimer: Teleportation and Plane shifting are not the same, so my last question is moot from a RAW perspective. However, many people do treat them the same, which is why I included it.
Edit: The rules specify how you count ranges when using a grid:
Teleportation and plane shifting are two separate things. Teleportation can move you to other worlds, not other planes. Likewise, plane shifting can move you to other planes, not other worlds. If you could come up with a rule reference that state that teleportation can be used for interdimensional travel, that would be great as I haven't been able to find any clear rule statements on the matter other than the clear implications listed above.
Interesting argument.
I'm not sure I follow it though. If I cast Misty Step, I pick a location 30 feet away. I appear at the new location. Is that location not 30 feet away from my previous location? The fact that I didn't physically pass through the intervening space doesn't mean I didn't change locations. It doesn't make the two locations are somehow adjacent to each other (Arcane Gate specifically grants that ability, but Misty Step does not).
It seems to me that this idea that "I didn't move, I teleported." is somehow related to the idea that you don't physically occupy intervening space, unlike Flying, Walking, Burrowing, Climbing, or Swimming. Because teleporting is "vanish and then appear somewhere else."
And I get it -- because the ability to vanish and reappear _is_ special when it comes to Opportunity Attack: It happens so fast that the enemy cannot strike out at you. It's also proof against things like Grapple. Teleport is special. It's also not a "movement type".
But I think it's overreaching to say you don't "move" when you teleport. Moving in the game seems like it's complicated, but it really isn't. You start at position A and you end at position B. You have moved between those positions, and the distance between them is measurable. Therefore you've moved X feet. If X>5 and you moved willingly, then Booming Blade's magic kicks in. Simple.
Teleport's exceptional abilities are called out in the specific places where it makes a difference (the rules on Opportunity Attacks, for example). Reading more power into Teleportation is unwarranted.
Not so much. I can willingly cast misty step, but the spell effect is what teleports me. I'm transported by the spell. Similarly, if I was standing on a ship in motion, would you claim my movement due to the ship is willing because I got on the ship? I'm transported by the ship. To me, neither is "willing" innately, since the actual teleport happens whether I will it or not (my will ends the moment I cast the spell, everything after is no longer willing). The same would hold true if I was using a magic item to teleport (the item is moving me). This aligns with the concept of "teleportation" as a form of transport (as described in the teleport and in google definitions) and "transport" as being carried or conveyed (per google definitions)
The only teleportation that might be considered truly "willing" would be a natural or class ability, possibly like the Conjuration Wizards Benign Transposition ability or the Horizon Walker Distant Strike, but to me its just easier to say all teleportation is transport, and transport is not willing movement on the part of the creature being transported (no more than standing on ship you willingly boarded for transport would be)
So if you walk 10 ft and through an arcane gate that connects to a point 300 ft away, and then another 10 ft of walking. Did you move 20 ft, or 320 ft?
You started at A and ended at B. You have moved between those positions. The distance is measurable. Therefore you moved X feet.
What is X? If you measure from A to B through the gate, then it is 20ft. This is the path the character took. But if you measure A to B through normal space then it is 320 ft. This is not the path the character took.
Same applies with other teleports. If you measure the distance through the path the character took, then they didn't move at all. if you measure the path through normal space, they moved however far they teleported.
So, yeah. For determining how far they moved... are you measuring the path they took, or, the straight line through normal space between the points they started/finished at?
I got quotes!