Just pointing out Rav is extremely correct, and the issue isn't limited to knocking someone straight up. You could use a Bludgeoning weapon with Reach (e.g. a Glaive using PAM, or a Whip using a Genielock [Dao]'s ability add Bludgeoning to anything) to Crusher someone from 10' away from you to 5' away from you, and there's no question the maneuver is legal. It's not relevant in any way to the rules analysis whether or not you can come up with a "cool story" or "internal logic". That's simply not how 5E works - rules don't rely on anyone's understanding of why they work, or on anyone's specific flavor for how they work. Rules do what they say they do, and if we can come up with an explanation, great. If we can't - e.g. the new Drakewarden's drake that can fly while carrying any small enough rider except for if the rider is their own Drakewarden, in which case it can't fly until level 15 - then the rule is the rule anyway.
You have yet to explain how one narrates any kind of 'cool story' with Crusher knocking someone back towards you.
Even magic has internal logic. You have provided precisely none.
I can generate an infinite number of ways Crusher could work, but none of them are relevant to understanding its RAW, and hence none of them are relevant to this forum. For example, I could have a Genielock [Dao] flavor the feat as their Patron literally telling them how to bend spacetime to their will, so when they Bludgeon someone, a spontaneous gravity well appears - thanks to the Dao's powers - and pulls the target into the target space. Is this cool? I don't know. Does it matter for interpreting the RAW? Definitely not. I could do the same thing with a Druid and say that they know how to manipulate air, water, and earth - the media a target creature is generally in - provided they use a Bludgeoning attack as a carrier, so the target creature is generally pushed into position by said media (e.g. if this is done underwater, a spontaneous pressure differential appears in the surrounding water, and the target is forced to move due to the same physics that causes a champagne bottle to audibly pop when you open it). This is equally irrelevant to the RAW.
The hypothetical 10 feet of movement isn't a problem. Functionally, it's no different than if they had just moved 5 feet horizontally. After all, they aren't falling enough to cause damage. The issue is what constitutes a space. The rules of the game don't care about vertical movement with regards to space, and the feat only cares that the space is unoccupied, which leaves us with only one option: horizontal movement.
The feat can only move the target horizontally because diagonally up only matters if the space is occupied due to terrain, and the feat cannot move a target into an occupies space so the diagonal is rendered impossible.
It could make a huge difference if there are hazzards 10 ft away and would greatly increase possible destination options.
No, it won't. If you sent them diagonally 5 feet up, say at a 45 degree angle, they're not going to fall another 5 feet for 10 away. They're going to crash back down the same space away as if you had just pushed them into it directly.
The only way it might have an impact if if the added distance up into the air was enough for them to take fall damage, such as an extra 1d6 as they fall to a lower elevation or into a trap. But not only is that a fringe case, now you're also actively trying to add an altitude to something which doesn't expressly have one. Which is, strictly speaking, homebrew territory. Remember, you're not just moving the target 5 feet. You're moving it 5 feet into an unoccupied space. And spaces are, by default, 5 feet square. They're not cubes, they can't be. If they were, we'd have races in the PHB that occupy two vertical spaces.
So, at what height does the adjacent space stop being occupied? Or can you just send them flying up to an elevation that's empty because it's technically only one space away? Verticality is a can of worms that Crusher expressly isn't interested in opening.
The crusher feat can be used in tandem with ongoing spells effects that deal damage to creatures when they enter a the area on a turn. There are several spells that can be used to do this. The lowest level and probably least impactful example would be create the bonfire cantrip. It’s description causes a creature to make a saving throw when it moves into the bonfires space for the first time on a turn. This has synergy with the crusher feat, as a large or smaller creature who is in the spell effects space on an allies turn can be moved 5ft upward and out of the spells space, but then move back into the space when they fall down 5ft. Since this is the first time the creature moved into that space the spell effect in, it would cause a save and potentially deal damage.
this can be done with cloud of daggers and other spell effects.
some spell effects extend out from a point that can be a place in the air, but have a radius that can extend downward in such a precise way that medium creatures can move around relatively free from harm under the space, but larger creatures would have a difficult time doing so. Sickening radiance for example has a radius of 30ft, so placing the sphere 35ft up can create a pocket of relative safety for medium creatures underneath the effect. And if a medium creature is knocked upward on a turn it must make that save or take damage and immediately fall down. The gravity takes away the possibility of a target starting its turn in the area, but it potentially gives more opportunities to cause it to get forced into that area by number of turns available.
Cool. They still can't be knocked up 5 feet into the air.
Yea they can.
Are we really going to keep doing this dance? The only stipulation is they're knocked 5 feet into an unoccupied space. Because each space is a 5 foot square. You can't knock them straight up 5 feet into that hypothetical space because that space doesn't exist. This is because spaces don't have a height; unless you're trying to impose them. And diagonals are utterly pointless because (A) spaces don't have a height and (B) there's no functional point if they're just going to "fall" back down another 5 feet onto the ground.
Which means now you're just trying to cheese this because a ledge might be only 5 feet lower or there's a strange AoE that's just above everyone else's heads but somehow doesn't affect anyone. Seriously, if we're going to even pretend to entertain the Sickening Radiance in the sky example then we have to clearly define height for spaces. And these heights, RAW, do not exist. Which means engaging in homebrew. And this is a RAW forum, so it's a moot point.
So what should they be? five-foot cubes? 125 cubic feet of volume? What does this mean for characters taller than the "space" like Dragonborn and Goliaths?
And we all know you can't add something the feat doesn't include (i.e. silence is not consent).
So, please, explain your position. Because I'd love for this to make even an inkling of sense.
The hypothetical 10 feet of movement isn't a problem. Functionally, it's no different than if they had just moved 5 feet horizontally. After all, they aren't falling enough to cause damage. The issue is what constitutes a space. The rules of the game don't care about vertical movement with regards to space, and the feat only cares that the space is unoccupied, which leaves us with only one option: horizontal movement.
The feat can only move the target horizontally because diagonally up only matters if the space is occupied due to terrain, and the feat cannot move a target into an occupies space so the diagonal is rendered impossible.
It could make a huge difference if there are hazzards 10 ft away and would greatly increase possible destination options.
No, it won't. If you sent them diagonally 5 feet up, say at a 45 degree angle, they're not going to fall another 5 feet for 10 away. They're going to crash back down the same space away as if you had just pushed them into it directly.
The only way it might have an impact if if the added distance up into the air was enough for them to take fall damage, such as an extra 1d6 as they fall to a lower elevation or into a trap. But not only is that a fringe case, now you're also actively trying to add an altitude to something which doesn't expressly have one. Which is, strictly speaking, homebrew territory. Remember, you're not just moving the target 5 feet. You're moving it 5 feet into an unoccupied space. And spaces are, by default, 5 feet square. They're not cubes, they can't be. If they were, we'd have races in the PHB that occupy two vertical spaces.
So, at what height does the adjacent space stop being occupied? Or can you just send them flying up to an elevation that's empty because it's technically only one space away? Verticality is a can of worms that Crusher expressly isn't interested in opening.
The crusher feat can be used in tandem with ongoing spells effects that deal damage to creatures when they enter a the area on a turn. There are several spells that can be used to do this. The lowest level and probably least impactful example would be create the bonfire cantrip. It’s description causes a creature to make a saving throw when it moves into the bonfires space for the first time on a turn. This has synergy with the crusher feat, as a large or smaller creature who is in the spell effects space on an allies turn can be moved 5ft upward and out of the spells space, but then move back into the space when they fall down 5ft. Since this is the first time the creature moved into that space the spell effect in, it would cause a save and potentially deal damage.
this can be done with cloud of daggers and other spell effects.
some spell effects extend out from a point that can be a place in the air, but have a radius that can extend downward in such a precise way that medium creatures can move around relatively free from harm under the space, but larger creatures would have a difficult time doing so. Sickening radiance for example has a radius of 30ft, so placing the sphere 35ft up can create a pocket of relative safety for medium creatures underneath the effect. And if a medium creature is knocked upward on a turn it must make that save or take damage and immediately fall down. The gravity takes away the possibility of a target starting its turn in the area, but it potentially gives more opportunities to cause it to get forced into that area by number of turns available.
Cool. They still can't be knocked up 5 feet into the air.
Yea they can.
Are we really going to keep doing this dance? The only stipulation is they're knocked 5 feet into an unoccupied space. Because each space is a 5 foot square. You can't knock them straight up 5 feet into that hypothetical space because that space doesn't exist. This is because spaces don't have a height; unless you're trying to impose them. And diagonals are utterly pointless because (A) spaces don't have a height and (B) there's no functional point if they're just going to "fall" back down another 5 feet onto the ground.
Which means now you're just trying to cheese this because a ledge might be only 5 feet lower or there's a strange AoE that's just above everyone else's heads but somehow doesn't affect anyone. Seriously, if we're going to even pretend to entertain the Sickening Radiance in the sky example then we have to clearly define height for spaces. And these heights, RAW, do not exist. Which means engaging in homebrew. And this is a RAW forum, so it's a moot point.
So what should they be? five-foot cubes? 125 cubic feet of volume? What does this mean for characters taller than the "space" like Dragonborn and Goliaths?
And we all know you can't add something the feat doesn't include (i.e. silence is not consent).
So, please, explain your position. Because I'd love for this to make even an inkling of sense.
First off your wrong about spaces and squares. Playing on a grid is actually a variant to the rules when talking about space, even if it is a widely accepted and used way to play.
players hand book page 192 has more information about this.
an unoccupied space is anywhere that isn't occupied my creatures or objects that take up space.
space is everywhere. Up down left right.. all around. Hell space is even below the character, it’s just that the space below a character is usually occupied by the ground or w/e creatures might be standing on.
to say that there is no space above a character is just wrong no matter how you attempt to describe it.
especially in a game that is clearly designed to have 3 dimensions and effects. Cones are just triangles in your game? Cubes are just squares? Cylinders and spheres are just shitty circles? What do you even do as a caster? The 2d world you seem to be heavily advocating for sounds horrible to me.
what do you do when creatures fly? What’s the point of flying if the space you’re trying to travel in “hypothetically doesn’t exist”?
Yes, Playing on a Grid is an optional rule. The rules also clearly define what Space is. Space is a function of creature size, is tied to a controlled area, and only relevant on the horizontal plane. Space, as a game mechanic, does not have rules for operating in three dimensions.
Which is why I'm saying you're trying to pass off homebrew as RAW. And you are objectively incorrect for doing so. To be clear, I don't care what you do at your own table. But there is a distinct and noticeable difference between the two. Just as there is a distinct and noticeable difference between a 2'9" halfling and a 7'10" goliath. Both are medium creatures and both control the same space. You could knock the smallest halfling 5 feet up into the air and they still couldn't match the height of the tallest goliath. Oh, they'd be close, but they wouldn't leave the space. So that automatically disqualifies vertical movement; even if it were expressly allowed by clearly defining the vertical dimensions of a Space.
So, you're not knocking them up into a Space. And if you move them diagonally, then they're just 5 feet off the ground one unoccupied 5-foot Space over. Mechanically, it's no different than just pushing them straight into the Space. You're just unnecessarily complicating things for yourself.
The feat lets you move them horizontally one 5-foot space over. And only if there is a lack of solid ground or some other hazard does it matter.
P.S.
[REDACTED] It's fine if you want to homebrew verticality into how you interpret spaces. But that then becomes a hill to die on. To move a target 5 feet vertically, or even just diagonally into another space, you must cap spaces at 5 feet high. And, I say again, you now have playable character races which fit into and control more than one space.
If you want to embrace that degree of head-scratching, then fine. You go do you. But that's not RAW, and this is a RAW forum.
Notes: Please keep posts respectful and constructive.
You are practiced in the art of crushing your enemies, granting you the following benefits:
Increase your Strength or Constitution by 1, to a maximum of 20.
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space, provided the target is no more than one size larger than you.
When you score a critical hit that deals bludgeoning damage to a creature, attack rolls against that creature are made with advantage until the start of your next turn.
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
What happens when your 7'10" goliath drops prone? They would be occupying "two" spaces as a medium creature. I am not saying whether or not they control the potential 5x10 space thus preventing hostiles from moving through it but the rules don't actually cover that situation at all. Such as if they only control one space 5x5, which 5x5 space do they control or do they control both while prone? If only one which one, the top half or the bottom half or does the player pick?
More importantly what about flying? There has to be vertical space and vertical space control and vertical space occupancy, otherwise when something starts flying how would you determine where the flying creature can travel. A hostile creature can not pass through an occupied space and out in the open world this isn't a problem for flying, just fly higher, but dungeons have limited height and thus it matters. Then there is melee attacks to consider. Your goliath could attack something flying 10 feet up but your gnome couldn't without a reach weapon or jumping, at least in my opinion since there is no actual rule about vertical space even though flying is covered directly before the ruling on space. Perhaps your vertical occupied space stop at the creatures height, or is it 5 foot increments, or even better 2 1/2 foot increments since that is the smallest increment of space a creature can occupy.
The rules don't specify what is vertical space but it must exist because the world is 3 dimensions, you can't always operate functionally without vertical space occupancy.
I am on the side of it being RAW to move something vertically if no direction is specified because vertical occupancy must exist, therefore vertical unoccupied space must also exist.
Three dimensions exist, but it isn't space. Space is the area you control, based on your size. When the feat moves you into an unoccupied space, it changes the area you control and an area you previously controlled is no longer controlled by you. It's big enough for a Small or Medium creature to move in and control without squeezing into a smaller space. And every Small and Medium creature controls a 5x5 space, regardless of whether they're prone, standing upright, or even jumping. That's the RAW.
Area, by definition, is always just two dimensions: length and width. If you want to know how high your character can reach, multiply their height by 1.5. But that isn't a second, or even third, space. It can't be because that isn't area. You're now working in volume.
Verticality exists, and it does so ambiguously. It's an exception to the general rules about movement. And any interpretation which does not rely on clearly expressed rules is, by definition, not RAW. So, since this is a RAW forum, the idea of forcibly moving targets vertically into another space is homebrew.
In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed. You can use as much or as little of your speed as you like on your turn, following the rules here.
Your movement can include jumping, climbing, and swimming. These different modes of movement can be combined with walking, or they can constitute your entire move. However you're moving, you deduct the distance of each part of your move from your speed until it is used up or until you are done moving.
The “Special Types of Movement” section in chapter 8 gives the particulars for jumping, climbing, and swimming.
There are then sections on:
Breaking Up Your Move ...
Difficult Terrain ...
Being Prone ...
Moving around other creatures ...
Flying Movement
Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell.
Creature Size
Each creature takes up a different amount of space. The Size Categories table shows how much space a creature of a particular size controls in combat. Objects sometimes use the same size categories.
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
A creature can squeeze through a space that is large enough for a creature one size smaller than it. Thus, a Large creature can squeeze through a passage that's only 5 feet wide. While squeezing through a space, a creature must spend 1 extra foot for every foot it moves there, and it has disadvantage on attack rolls and Dexterity saving throws. Attack rolls against the creature have advantage while it's in the smaller space.
VARIANT: PLAYING ON A GRID
If you play out a combat using a square grid and miniatures or other tokens, follow these rules.
Squares. Each square on the grid represents 5 feet.
Speed. Rather than moving foot by foot, move square by square on the grid. This means you use your speed in 5-foot segments. This is particularly easy if you translate your speed into squares by dividing the speed by 5. For example, a speed of 30 feet translates into a speed of 6 squares.
If you use a grid often, consider writing your speed in squares on your character sheet.
Entering a Square. To enter a square, you must have at least 1 square of movement left, even if the square is diagonally adjacent to the square you’re in. (The rule for diagonal movement sacrifices realism for the sake of smooth play. The Dungeon Master’s Guide provides guidance on using a more realistic approach.)
If a square costs extra movement, as a square of difficult terrain does, you must have enough movement left to pay for entering it. For example, you must have at least 2 squares of movement left to enter a square of difficult terrain.
Corners. Diagonal movement can’t cross the corner of a wall, large tree, or other terrain feature that fills its space.
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.
as indicated as appearing from p192 >>. Any references to "space" will have been from earlier texts on that page.
RAW speaks of space in relation to area and, on that basis, a creature with an ability to fly or float in air or swim or otherwise move in a fluid, dependent on any possible ceiling height or substance depth, may adopt a vertical position in that space. In the context of creatures that aren't flying or swimming beneath a liquid surface, there is a clear definition given for space. Further adjudication may be necessary when dealing with creatures that fly or swim.
The citations you’ve mentioned are about a creatures space. It details the place that a creature takes up based on its size. It references space yes, but that is t the only reference to space.
AREAS OF EFFECT Spells such as burning hands and cone ofcold cover an area, allowing them to affect multiple creatures at once. A spell's description specifies its area of effect, which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has a point of origin, a location from which the spell's energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you position its point of origin. Typically, a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object. A spell's effect expands in straight lines from the point of origin. If no unblocked straight line extends from the point of origin to a location within the area of effect, that location isn't included in the spell's area. To block one of these imaginary lines, an obstruction must provide total cover, as explained in chapter 9.
A Strength check can model any attempt to lift, push, pull, or break something, to force your body through a space, or to otherwise apply brute force to a situation.
Every foot of movement in difficult terrain costs 1 extra foot. This rule is true even if multiple things in a space count as difficult terrain.
If an effect moves your mount against its will while you're on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the mount, landing prone in a space within 5 feet of it.
If your mount is knocked prone, you can use your reaction to dismount it as it falls and land on your feet. Otherwise, you are dismounted and fall prone in a space within 5 feet it.
You’re trying to say that because the space paragraph under creature size is the only reference in the book that mentions space and so space only exists in relation to creatures is wrong. everything in the game makes use of space. Objects take up space and even limit space of creatures which is described within the squeezing mechanics. There are a few spells that require their effects to be cast on an unoccupied space. These too can be placed anywhere horizontally or vertically so long as their descriptions don’t apply further restrictions.
The citations you’ve mentioned are about a creatures space. ...
In regard to mention, the citations include those from PHb p192 so, along with Jounichi1983, that's on you. I just went as far as to include the actual content.
You are practiced in the art of crushing your enemies, granting you the following benefits:
Increase your Strength or Constitution by 1, to a maximum of 20.
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space, provided the target is no more than one size larger than you.
When you score a critical hit that deals bludgeoning damage to a creature, attack rolls against that creature are made with advantage until the start of your next turn.
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
There is gravity everywhere and yet, in 5e, it manages to continue on as exerting a consistent level of force before it suddenly blinks out.
It's amazing how people can argue fiercely about RAW up to the point where it indicates that any physical feat enabled, medium-sized creature, can't hit a horse sized creature to a height of 5 ft with a slap or a stick. And now you want to argue physics based logic?
Three dimensions exist, but it isn't space. Space is the area you control, based on your size. When the feat moves you into an unoccupied space, it changes the area you control and an area you previously controlled is no longer controlled by you. It's big enough for a Small or Medium creature to move in and control without squeezing into a smaller space. And every Small and Medium creature controls a 5x5 space, regardless of whether they're prone, standing upright, or even jumping. That's the RAW.
Area, by definition, is always just two dimensions: length and width. If you want to know how high your character can reach, multiply their height by 1.5. But that isn't a second, or even third, space. It can't be because that isn't area. You're now working in volume.
Verticality exists, and it does so ambiguously. It's an exception to the general rules about movement. And any interpretation which does not rely on clearly expressed rules is, by definition, not RAW. So, since this is a RAW forum, the idea of forcibly moving targets vertically into another space is homebrew.
RAW in this case would be "DM discretion" and not "homebrew".
If you improvise an action in combat its not "homebrew" its DM fiat what happens.
To say that all huge creatures exist as a 20ft wide and 5ft tall pancake is pretty silly to me....yet by your "rule" I could not cast fireball anywhere in the sky or even ever target a creature in the 3rd dimension?
Obviously that is not the case so the correct answer here is "Ask your DM" as they will be the final arbiter.
Three dimensions exist, but it isn't space. Space is the area you control, based on your size. When the feat moves you into an unoccupied space, it changes the area you control and an area you previously controlled is no longer controlled by you. It's big enough for a Small or Medium creature to move in and control without squeezing into a smaller space. And every Small and Medium creature controls a 5x5 space, regardless of whether they're prone, standing upright, or even jumping. That's the RAW.
Area, by definition, is always just two dimensions: length and width. If you want to know how high your character can reach, multiply their height by 1.5. But that isn't a second, or even third, space. It can't be because that isn't area. You're now working in volume.
Verticality exists, and it does so ambiguously. It's an exception to the general rules about movement. And any interpretation which does not rely on clearly expressed rules is, by definition, not RAW. So, since this is a RAW forum, the idea of forcibly moving targets vertically into another space is homebrew.
RAW in this case would be "DM discretion" and not "homebrew".
If you improvise an action in combat its not "homebrew" its DM fiat what happens.
To say that all huge creatures exist as a 20ft wide and 5ft tall pancake is pretty silly to me....yet by your "rule" I could not cast fireball anywhere in the sky or even ever target a creature in the 3rd dimension?
Obviously that is not the case so the correct answer here is "Ask your DM" as they will be the final arbiter.
A creature's space, in 5e, is an area. It's the area in which the creature exists. Nothing is mentioned about height.
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
Three dimensions exist, but it isn't space. Space is the area you control, based on your size. When the feat moves you into an unoccupied space, it changes the area you control and an area you previously controlled is no longer controlled by you. It's big enough for a Small or Medium creature to move in and control without squeezing into a smaller space. And every Small and Medium creature controls a 5x5 space, regardless of whether they're prone, standing upright, or even jumping. That's the RAW.
Area, by definition, is always just two dimensions: length and width. If you want to know how high your character can reach, multiply their height by 1.5. But that isn't a second, or even third, space. It can't be because that isn't area. You're now working in volume.
Verticality exists, and it does so ambiguously. It's an exception to the general rules about movement. And any interpretation which does not rely on clearly expressed rules is, by definition, not RAW. So, since this is a RAW forum, the idea of forcibly moving targets vertically into another space is homebrew.
The Dev doesn't share your view on space dimension. When Jeremy was asked about vertical movement during Open Hand, he didn't say you can't occupy vertical space by the rules but the opposite.
@Vo1kain Can the knock back granted by open hands flurry of blows be used to push the target vertically?
@JeremyECrawfordPushing someone away requires the whole move to be away from you. A diagonal push works. Vertical doesn't.
@ShadowRadiance vertical is away but most dnd games kinda ignore it for simplicity. I'd rule sure you can push up if you're prone
@JeremyECrawford Vertical is only away if the creature is on top of you.
@JeremyECrawford If your target is above you, however, you can push them vertically. The point is this: you must push away.
Vertical space is also common in adventure design. For exemple, adventures often have rooms with balcony at a certain height, like Axeholm hall in Dragon of Icespire Peak for exemple. While the map appears in 2D, a creature can be on the balcony 20 feet above one on the floor right below it.
Vertical distance, at least, is an issue with buildings with windows and stairs, with slopes, with underground tunnels and with pools of liquid. There are regular disparities between different floor levels.
Spider climb mentions "the ability to move up, down, and across vertical surfaces".
Maybe I'm not making myself clear, but I have a feeling you aren't paying attention. The quoted exchange on Open Hand Technique has nothing to do with how Crusher works. The former allows for pushing 15 feet away, and Crawford rightly says that straight up vertically would work if the target were directly above. That's not the case here; especially when the feat only allows for moving the target 5 feet into an unoccupied space. Contrary to whatever colloquial understanding you might have, these are not the same.
Vertical space is also common in adventure design. For exemple, adventures often have rooms with balcony at a certain height, like Axeholm hall in Dragon of Icespire Peak for exemple. While the map appears in 2D, a creature can be on the balcony 20 feet above one on the floor right below it.
Yes, we know verticality is common in adventure design. This is also next to meaningless to this discussion. When discussing whether or not you can move a creature 5 feet into unto an unoccupied space, either straight vertically or diagonally upward, we need to know where one space ends and another begins. Space, as it is defined in the PHB, does not have a stated ceiling. In fact, none of the 5E books talk about this. The closest we get is an illustration on creature sizes, found on page 248 of the DMG. Spaces also don't have an expressed floor, but creatures have to stand somewhere. So as what height does a space end? Eight feet, like a standard house? Fifteen feet, like in the Axeholm? Thirty feet, like the first two floors in Castle Ravenloft? Is it wherever the physical ceiling happens to be, or could there be multiple spaces before you reach a physical ceiling? Do different creatures, despite controlling and occupying the same horizontal space, occupy and control different a vertical space? Are their respective spaces inherently unequal? And what about outdoors where there is no physical ceiling?
The rules do not tell us how to adjudicate verticality. It doesn't matter if characters are airborne, underwater, or floating in a vacuum. The simply rules do not exist, so we have to make them up. That is, objectively, house rules territory because no two DMs need to run it the same way. For example, if a character has Spider Climb (the feature or spell), does that mean all walls and ceilings need to have grid squares if the floor does? It might help in running the encounter, but the DM is under no obligation. So, any and all discussions about whether you can use the feat to move someone up and diagonally because "space" do not belong in a RAW forum. Because space is only defined by the horizontal, not the vertical. I have been saying this since, I think, at least page 8. That's about where I came into this discussion.
You still want to use Crusher to knock someone up 5 feet diagonally and onto a ledge? Sure, let's explore that. Realistically, they might land prone. But D&D isn't a physics simulator. Elephants can long jump up to 22 feet and high jump up to 9 feet when they can't jump at all on Earth. And the amount of damage characters take from falling is reached linearly and not on a proper curve, but I digress. According to the rules, the character you just forcibly moved 5 feet on a diagonal upward would land on their feet because nothing else happened to make them land [condition]prone[/condition. And if you knock them up 5 feet and they fall 5 feet, they land on their feet because they took no fall damage.
And I think the real head-scratcher here is why some people, such as yourself, are so adamant that a target creature can be moved in this way? What's the endgame? Is it's superfluous, in which case you can just walk away because there's no mechanical impact? Or are you trying to argue in favor of, in no uncertain terms, cheese that has no basis in the rules as written or in reality? I don't get it.
Do what you want at your table, and take it out of the RAW forum. It doesn't belong here.
Maybe I'm not making myself clear, but I have a feeling you aren't paying attention. The quoted exchange on Open Hand Technique has nothing to do with how Crusher works. The former allows for pushing 15 feet away, and Crawford rightly says that straight up vertically would work if the target were directly above. That's not the case here; especially when the feat only allows for moving the target 5 feet into an unoccupied space. Contrary to whatever colloquial understanding you might have, these are not the same.
Vertical space is also common in adventure design. For exemple, adventures often have rooms with balcony at a certain height, like Axeholm hall in Dragon of Icespire Peak for exemple. While the map appears in 2D, a creature can be on the balcony 20 feet above one on the floor right below it.
Yes, we know verticality is common in adventure design. This is also next to meaningless to this discussion. When discussing whether or not you can move a creature 5 feet into unto an unoccupied space, either straight vertically or diagonally upward, we need to know where one space ends and another begins. Space, as it is defined in the PHB, does not have a stated ceiling. In fact, none of the 5E books talk about this. The closest we get is an illustration on creature sizes, found on page 248 of the DMG. Spaces also don't have an expressed floor, but creatures have to stand somewhere. So as what height does a space end? Eight feet, like a standard house? Fifteen feet, like in the Axeholm? Thirty feet, like the first two floors in Castle Ravenloft? Is it wherever the physical ceiling happens to be, or could there be multiple spaces before you reach a physical ceiling? Do different creatures, despite controlling and occupying the same horizontal space, occupy and control different a vertical space? Are their respective spaces inherently unequal? And what about outdoors where there is no physical ceiling?
The rules do not tell us how to adjudicate verticality. It doesn't matter if characters are airborne, underwater, or floating in a vacuum. The simply rules do not exist, so we have to make them up. That is, objectively, house rules territory because no two DMs need to run it the same way. For example, if a character has Spider Climb (the feature or spell), does that mean all walls and ceilings need to have grid squares if the floor does? It might help in running the encounter, but the DM is under no obligation. So, any and all discussions about whether you can use the feat to move someone up and diagonally because "space" do not belong in a RAW forum. Because space is only defined by the horizontal, not the vertical. I have been saying this since, I think, at least page 8. That's about where I came into this discussion.
You still want to use Crusher to knock someone up 5 feet diagonally and onto a ledge? Sure, let's explore that. Realistically, they might land prone. But D&D isn't a physics simulator. Elephants can long jump up to 22 feet and high jump up to 9 feet when they can't jump at all on Earth. And the amount of damage characters take from falling is reached linearly and not on a proper curve, but I digress. According to the rules, the character you just forcibly moved 5 feet on a diagonal upward would land on their feet because nothing else happened to make them land [condition]prone[/condition. And if you knock them up 5 feet and they fall 5 feet, they land on their feet because they took no fall damage.
And I think the real head-scratcher here is why some people, such as yourself, are so adamant that a target creature can be moved in this way? What's the endgame? Is it's superfluous, in which case you can just walk away because there's no mechanical impact? Or are you trying to argue in favor of, in no uncertain terms, cheese that has no basis in the rules as written or in reality? I don't get it.
Do what you want at your table, and take it out of the RAW forum. It doesn't belong here.
Its clearly intended that 3D spaces are a thing....it creates WAY more issues if you only allow things to exist on a 2D scape. Exactly what "Space" would a hovering beholder take then? The same as it would if it was 20ft from the ground or 1ft? Your "RAW" definition would say that a beholder 5ft away horizontially would be targetable to a paladin even if it was also vertically 30ft away...which is obviously silly.
Crusher and Open Hand are the exact same scenario you just don't seem to like that the RAW answer isnt what you thought it was. A creature always has to occupy a space regardless of how it is moved and it has to move to a space that it is capable to move to.
As for the rationale behind it....its just flavor or an understanding of how 3D spaces work which is obviously a desire for any party as the world exists in 3D and to deny that in DnD is pretty silly.
Whether you describe it as them stumbling, or a shockwave, or as a hulking smash, or telekinesis, or get super silly with it and describe pink butterflies descending and manhandling them... they move 5' when you hit em with a bludgeoning attack.
If you are not trying to convince anyone other than your own DM, why are you posting here?
No idea what you're talking about. Two things.
This is a rules forum, not a 'guess posters motivation' forum. Please stick to discussing the rules.
I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. If someone posts something incorrect, I correct it. They can figure out how they're incorrect or not on their own. I only care about correcting the spread of misinformation.
If you are not willing to discuss this with anyone other than your DM, why are you posting here? This is an open discussion.
Again, no idea what you're on about, but stick to discussing the rule instead of trying to make it personal? Cool.
And this is indeed a rules discussion and we are indeed discussing rules here.
Are you?
Rules need not discuss merely the letter of RAW but RAI as well and also whether RAW or even whether any given bit of RAW or even RAI makes sense.
If you need advice on descriptive narration this isn't the best forum. Dungeon Master Only is a better forum for what you're looking for. And, if you're convinced it needs to be changed, over at Homebrew & House Rules they can help you come up with solutions.
Stumbling: forward, in the direction of the person who just struck you with such a mighty blow? On their turn? Makes no sense, not even when compared with other RAW. And you are talking about it knocking someone upwards into the air. That would definitely not be 'stumbling.'
Shockwave: Again, what, it someone creates a shockwave behind the person knocking them forward? Makes no sense.
Hulking smash? Same problem.
Telekinesis? Butterflies? Even worse problem since it in no way bears any connection to a blunt attack.
No specific narrative flourish needs to be used even at all. The creature moves 5', into an unoccupied space. How you rectify that is entirely up to you. Good Luck!
Just pointing out Rav is extremely correct, and the issue isn't limited to knocking someone straight up. You could use a Bludgeoning weapon with Reach (e.g. a Glaive using PAM, or a Whip using a Genielock [Dao]'s ability add Bludgeoning to anything) to Crusher someone from 10' away from you to 5' away from you, and there's no question the maneuver is legal. It's not relevant in any way to the rules analysis whether or not you can come up with a "cool story" or "internal logic". That's simply not how 5E works - rules don't rely on anyone's understanding of why they work, or on anyone's specific flavor for how they work. Rules do what they say they do, and if we can come up with an explanation, great. If we can't - e.g. the new Drakewarden's drake that can fly while carrying any small enough rider except for if the rider is their own Drakewarden, in which case it can't fly until level 15 - then the rule is the rule anyway.
You have yet to explain how one narrates any kind of 'cool story' with Crusher knocking someone back towards you.
Even magic has internal logic. You have provided precisely none.
I can generate an infinite number of ways Crusher could work, but none of them are relevant to understanding its RAW, and hence none of them are relevant to this forum. For example, I could have a Genielock [Dao] flavor the feat as their Patron literally telling them how to bend spacetime to their will, so when they Bludgeon someone, a spontaneous gravity well appears - thanks to the Dao's powers - and pulls the target into the target space. Is this cool? I don't know. Does it matter for interpreting the RAW? Definitely not. I could do the same thing with a Druid and say that they know how to manipulate air, water, and earth - the media a target creature is generally in - provided they use a Bludgeoning attack as a carrier, so the target creature is generally pushed into position by said media (e.g. if this is done underwater, a spontaneous pressure differential appears in the surrounding water, and the target is forced to move due to the same physics that causes a champagne bottle to audibly pop when you open it). This is equally irrelevant to the RAW.
"Extremely correct," really?
Yeah.
Those side cases you mention are side cases and even then, a glave does not allow you to flank someone you are fighting alone. Reach does not allow you to hit them from the opposite facing to you. Even trying to whip someone in such a manner is neither RAW, nor RAI.
D&D 5e doesn't use facing rules. You don't hit them from the front. Nor the side. Nor the back. You just hit them. There is no facing.
If this is another thing you'd like to homebrew, again, Homebrew and House Rules is the forum for you!
There may be some DM's who go with RAW is RAW is RAW, common sense and even RAI are irrelevant, but personally I strongly suspect that is a tougher sell than the two of you are claiming it to be. Again, though, this is is a rules discussion forum, not merely a RAW discussion forum. RAI is not Homebrew. Perhaps a Mod can correct me on that if I am wrong, but it seems to me that this is the place to discuss it.
Knowing what RAW is, and, deciding how to rule something, are two different topics. Related topics, sure, but different. It is ok to discuss RAW and also not be talking about how you'd personally rule it. Most of us can make his distinction. Again, if you want to rule something against RAW that is called Homebrew and there is a forum for that here on dndbeyond where people are happy to help you.
Or even to discuss whether RAW makes sense or not.
Well it makes perfect sense, is unambiguous, and is crystal clear. There is no doubt how this ability works. They move 5' into an unoccupied space. You simply don't like what the RAW is. You'd rather it be something else.
At any rate, we are talking about Crusher generally, not Crusher in conjunction with hypothetical blunt reach attacks, particularly such attacks only achievable by a specific subclass of a specific subclass of a specific class.
And yes, if the person with Crusher is using a spell attack that could indeed be directed to hit someone in the back (Catapult, for example), then sure, it could knock the target towards the caster. What I am saying is that, RAI, the intent is clearly to move the target away from the direction of attack, as confirmed by that Crawford interview.
You can't hit someone in the back. There is no facing in D&D 5e. You do remain welcome to discuss ways to homebrew such a facing system. But, again, this is the wrong forum for it.
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just pointing out Rav is extremely correct, and the issue isn't limited to knocking someone straight up. You could use a Bludgeoning weapon with Reach (e.g. a Glaive using PAM, or a Whip using a Genielock [Dao]'s ability add Bludgeoning to anything) to Crusher someone from 10' away from you to 5' away from you, and there's no question the maneuver is legal. It's not relevant in any way to the rules analysis whether or not you can come up with a "cool story" or "internal logic". That's simply not how 5E works - rules don't rely on anyone's understanding of why they work, or on anyone's specific flavor for how they work. Rules do what they say they do, and if we can come up with an explanation, great. If we can't - e.g. the new Drakewarden's drake that can fly while carrying any small enough rider except for if the rider is their own Drakewarden, in which case it can't fly until level 15 - then the rule is the rule anyway.
I can generate an infinite number of ways Crusher could work, but none of them are relevant to understanding its RAW, and hence none of them are relevant to this forum. For example, I could have a Genielock [Dao] flavor the feat as their Patron literally telling them how to bend spacetime to their will, so when they Bludgeon someone, a spontaneous gravity well appears - thanks to the Dao's powers - and pulls the target into the target space. Is this cool? I don't know. Does it matter for interpreting the RAW? Definitely not. I could do the same thing with a Druid and say that they know how to manipulate air, water, and earth - the media a target creature is generally in - provided they use a Bludgeoning attack as a carrier, so the target creature is generally pushed into position by said media (e.g. if this is done underwater, a spontaneous pressure differential appears in the surrounding water, and the target is forced to move due to the same physics that causes a champagne bottle to audibly pop when you open it). This is equally irrelevant to the RAW.
Are we really going to keep doing this dance? The only stipulation is they're knocked 5 feet into an unoccupied space. Because each space is a 5 foot square. You can't knock them straight up 5 feet into that hypothetical space because that space doesn't exist. This is because spaces don't have a height; unless you're trying to impose them. And diagonals are utterly pointless because (A) spaces don't have a height and (B) there's no functional point if they're just going to "fall" back down another 5 feet onto the ground.
Which means now you're just trying to cheese this because a ledge might be only 5 feet lower or there's a strange AoE that's just above everyone else's heads but somehow doesn't affect anyone. Seriously, if we're going to even pretend to entertain the Sickening Radiance in the sky example then we have to clearly define height for spaces. And these heights, RAW, do not exist. Which means engaging in homebrew. And this is a RAW forum, so it's a moot point.
So what should they be? five-foot cubes? 125 cubic feet of volume? What does this mean for characters taller than the "space" like Dragonborn and Goliaths?
And we all know you can't add something the feat doesn't include (i.e. silence is not consent).
So, please, explain your position. Because I'd love for this to make even an inkling of sense.
First off your wrong about spaces and squares. Playing on a grid is actually a variant to the rules when talking about space, even if it is a widely accepted and used way to play.
players hand book page 192 has more information about this.
an unoccupied space is anywhere that isn't occupied my creatures or objects that take up space.
space is everywhere. Up down left right.. all around. Hell space is even below the character, it’s just that the space below a character is usually occupied by the ground or w/e creatures might be standing on.
to say that there is no space above a character is just wrong no matter how you attempt to describe it.
especially in a game that is clearly designed to have 3 dimensions and effects. Cones are just triangles in your game? Cubes are just squares? Cylinders and spheres are just shitty circles? What do you even do as a caster? The 2d world you seem to be heavily advocating for sounds horrible to me.
what do you do when creatures fly? What’s the point of flying if the space you’re trying to travel in “hypothetically doesn’t exist”?
I already talked about that pages ago. [REDACTED]
Yes, Playing on a Grid is an optional rule. The rules also clearly define what Space is. Space is a function of creature size, is tied to a controlled area, and only relevant on the horizontal plane. Space, as a game mechanic, does not have rules for operating in three dimensions.
Which is why I'm saying you're trying to pass off homebrew as RAW. And you are objectively incorrect for doing so. To be clear, I don't care what you do at your own table. But there is a distinct and noticeable difference between the two. Just as there is a distinct and noticeable difference between a 2'9" halfling and a 7'10" goliath. Both are medium creatures and both control the same space. You could knock the smallest halfling 5 feet up into the air and they still couldn't match the height of the tallest goliath. Oh, they'd be close, but they wouldn't leave the space. So that automatically disqualifies vertical movement; even if it were expressly allowed by clearly defining the vertical dimensions of a Space.
So, you're not knocking them up into a Space. And if you move them diagonally, then they're just 5 feet off the ground one unoccupied 5-foot Space over. Mechanically, it's no different than just pushing them straight into the Space. You're just unnecessarily complicating things for yourself.
The feat lets you move them horizontally one 5-foot space over. And only if there is a lack of solid ground or some other hazard does it matter.
P.S.
[REDACTED] It's fine if you want to homebrew verticality into how you interpret spaces. But that then becomes a hill to die on. To move a target 5 feet vertically, or even just diagonally into another space, you must cap spaces at 5 feet high. And, I say again, you now have playable character races which fit into and control more than one space.
If you want to embrace that degree of head-scratching, then fine. You go do you. But that's not RAW, and this is a RAW forum.
You are in a forum with a range of contributors.
You do not dictate what people say or call to have said.
Of course, it can be storytime (>> >> ) for anyone with a supportive/informative narrative they're able to share.
Crusher:
You are practiced in the art of crushing your enemies, granting you the following benefits:
Space
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
What happens when your 7'10" goliath drops prone? They would be occupying "two" spaces as a medium creature. I am not saying whether or not they control the potential 5x10 space thus preventing hostiles from moving through it but the rules don't actually cover that situation at all. Such as if they only control one space 5x5, which 5x5 space do they control or do they control both while prone? If only one which one, the top half or the bottom half or does the player pick?
More importantly what about flying? There has to be vertical space and vertical space control and vertical space occupancy, otherwise when something starts flying how would you determine where the flying creature can travel. A hostile creature can not pass through an occupied space and out in the open world this isn't a problem for flying, just fly higher, but dungeons have limited height and thus it matters. Then there is melee attacks to consider. Your goliath could attack something flying 10 feet up but your gnome couldn't without a reach weapon or jumping, at least in my opinion since there is no actual rule about vertical space even though flying is covered directly before the ruling on space. Perhaps your vertical occupied space stop at the creatures height, or is it 5 foot increments, or even better 2 1/2 foot increments since that is the smallest increment of space a creature can occupy.
The rules don't specify what is vertical space but it must exist because the world is 3 dimensions, you can't always operate functionally without vertical space occupancy.
I am on the side of it being RAW to move something vertically if no direction is specified because vertical occupancy must exist, therefore vertical unoccupied space must also exist.
Three dimensions exist, but it isn't space. Space is the area you control, based on your size. When the feat moves you into an unoccupied space, it changes the area you control and an area you previously controlled is no longer controlled by you. It's big enough for a Small or Medium creature to move in and control without squeezing into a smaller space. And every Small and Medium creature controls a 5x5 space, regardless of whether they're prone, standing upright, or even jumping. That's the RAW.
Area, by definition, is always just two dimensions: length and width. If you want to know how high your character can reach, multiply their height by 1.5. But that isn't a second, or even third, space. It can't be because that isn't area. You're now working in volume.
Verticality exists, and it does so ambiguously. It's an exception to the general rules about movement. And any interpretation which does not rely on clearly expressed rules is, by definition, not RAW. So, since this is a RAW forum, the idea of forcibly moving targets vertically into another space is homebrew.
The relevant text, as found in the chapter on Combat in the PHb, covers the topic of:
Movement and Position
In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed. You can use as much or as little of your speed as you like on your turn, following the rules here.
Your movement can include jumping, climbing, and swimming. These different modes of movement can be combined with walking, or they can constitute your entire move. However you're moving, you deduct the distance of each part of your move from your speed until it is used up or until you are done moving.
The “Special Types of Movement” section in chapter 8 gives the particulars for jumping, climbing, and swimming.
There are then sections on:
Breaking Up Your Move ...
Difficult Terrain ...
Being Prone ...
Moving around other creatures ...
Flying Movement
Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell.
Creature Size
Each creature takes up a different amount of space. The Size Categories table shows how much space a creature of a particular size controls in combat. Objects sometimes use the same size categories.
Size Categories
Space
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
Squeezing into a Smaller Space
A creature can squeeze through a space that is large enough for a creature one size smaller than it. Thus, a Large creature can squeeze through a passage that's only 5 feet wide. While squeezing through a space, a creature must spend 1 extra foot for every foot it moves there, and it has disadvantage on attack rolls and Dexterity saving throws. Attack rolls against the creature have advantage while it's in the smaller space.
Then follows the section on:
Actions in Combat
as indicated as appearing from p192 >>.
Any references to "space" will have been from earlier texts on that page.
RAW speaks of space in relation to area and, on that basis, a creature with an ability to fly or float in air or swim or otherwise move in a fluid, dependent on any possible ceiling height or substance depth, may adopt a vertical position in that space.
In the context of creatures that aren't flying or swimming beneath a liquid surface, there is a clear definition given for space.
Further adjudication may be necessary when dealing with creatures that fly or swim.
The citations you’ve mentioned are about a creatures space. It details the place that a creature takes up based on its size. It references space yes, but that is t the only reference to space.
AREAS OF EFFECT
Spells such as burning hands and cone ofcold cover an area, allowing them to affect multiple creatures at once.
A spell's description specifies its area of effect,
which typically has one of five different shapes: cone, cube, cylinder, line, or sphere. Every area of effect has
a point of origin, a location from which the spell's energy erupts. The rules for each shape specify how you
position its point of origin. Typically,
a point of origin is a point in space, but some spells have an area whose origin is a creature or an object.
A spell's effect expands in straight lines from the point of origin. If no unblocked straight line extends from the point of origin to a location within the area of effect, that location isn't included in the spell's area. To block one of these imaginary lines, an obstruction must provide total cover, as explained in chapter 9.
A Strength check can model any attempt to lift, push, pull, or break something, to force your body through a space, or to otherwise apply brute force to a situation.
Every foot of movement in difficult terrain costs 1 extra foot. This rule is true even if multiple things in a space count as difficult terrain.
If an effect moves your mount against its will while you're on it, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or fall off the mount, landing prone in a space within 5 feet of it.
If your mount is knocked prone, you can use your reaction to dismount it as it falls and land on your feet. Otherwise, you are dismounted and fall prone in a space within 5 feet it.
You’re trying to say that because the space paragraph under creature size is the only reference in the book that mentions space and so space only exists in relation to creatures is wrong. everything in the game makes use of space. Objects take up space and even limit space of creatures which is described within the squeezing mechanics. There are a few spells that require their effects to be cast on an unoccupied space. These too can be placed anywhere horizontally or vertically so long as their descriptions don’t apply further restrictions.
there is space everywhere.
In regard to mention, the citations include those from PHb p192 so, along with Jounichi1983, that's on you.
I just went as far as to include the actual content.
The central issues are again presented here:
There is gravity everywhere and yet, in 5e, it manages to continue on as exerting a consistent level of force before it suddenly blinks out.
It's amazing how people can argue fiercely about RAW up to the point where it indicates that any physical feat enabled, medium-sized creature, can't hit a horse sized creature to a height of 5 ft with a slap or a stick. And now you want to argue physics based logic?
RAW in this case would be "DM discretion" and not "homebrew".
If you improvise an action in combat its not "homebrew" its DM fiat what happens.
To say that all huge creatures exist as a 20ft wide and 5ft tall pancake is pretty silly to me....yet by your "rule" I could not cast fireball anywhere in the sky or even ever target a creature in the 3rd dimension?
Obviously that is not the case so the correct answer here is "Ask your DM" as they will be the final arbiter.
A creature's space, in 5e, is an area. It's the area in which the creature exists. Nothing is mentioned about height.
Here's the RAW text again for your consideration.
Space
A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. A typical Medium creature isn't 5 feet wide, for example, but it does control a space that wide. If a Medium hobgoblin stands in a 5‐foot-wide doorway, other creatures can't get through unless the hobgoblin lets them.
A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively. For that reason, there's a limit to the number of creatures that can surround another creature in combat. Assuming Medium combatants, eight creatures can fit in a 5-foot radius around another one.
Because larger creatures take up more space, fewer of them can surround a creature. If four Large creatures crowd around a Medium or smaller one, there's little room for anyone else. In contrast, as many as twenty Medium creatures can surround a Gargantuan one.
The Dev doesn't share your view on space dimension. When Jeremy was asked about vertical movement during Open Hand, he didn't say you can't occupy vertical space by the rules but the opposite.
Vertical space is also common in adventure design. For exemple, adventures often have rooms with balcony at a certain height, like Axeholm hall in Dragon of Icespire Peak for exemple. While the map appears in 2D, a creature can be on the balcony 20 feet above one on the floor right below it.
Vertical distance, at least, is an issue with buildings with windows and stairs, with slopes, with underground tunnels and with pools of liquid. There are regular disparities between different floor levels.
Spider climb mentions "the ability to move up, down, and across vertical surfaces".
Climbing, jumping and swimming are covered in chapter 8 of the PHb. Issues of speed and distance are mentioned.
Yes, we know verticality is common in adventure design. This is also next to meaningless to this discussion. When discussing whether or not you can move a creature 5 feet into unto an unoccupied space, either straight vertically or diagonally upward, we need to know where one space ends and another begins. Space, as it is defined in the PHB, does not have a stated ceiling. In fact, none of the 5E books talk about this. The closest we get is an illustration on creature sizes, found on page 248 of the DMG. Spaces also don't have an expressed floor, but creatures have to stand somewhere. So as what height does a space end? Eight feet, like a standard house? Fifteen feet, like in the Axeholm? Thirty feet, like the first two floors in Castle Ravenloft? Is it wherever the physical ceiling happens to be, or could there be multiple spaces before you reach a physical ceiling? Do different creatures, despite controlling and occupying the same horizontal space, occupy and control different a vertical space? Are their respective spaces inherently unequal? And what about outdoors where there is no physical ceiling?
The rules do not tell us how to adjudicate verticality. It doesn't matter if characters are airborne, underwater, or floating in a vacuum. The simply rules do not exist, so we have to make them up. That is, objectively, house rules territory because no two DMs need to run it the same way. For example, if a character has Spider Climb (the feature or spell), does that mean all walls and ceilings need to have grid squares if the floor does? It might help in running the encounter, but the DM is under no obligation. So, any and all discussions about whether you can use the feat to move someone up and diagonally because "space" do not belong in a RAW forum. Because space is only defined by the horizontal, not the vertical. I have been saying this since, I think, at least page 8. That's about where I came into this discussion.
You still want to use Crusher to knock someone up 5 feet diagonally and onto a ledge? Sure, let's explore that. Realistically, they might land prone. But D&D isn't a physics simulator. Elephants can long jump up to 22 feet and high jump up to 9 feet when they can't jump at all on Earth. And the amount of damage characters take from falling is reached linearly and not on a proper curve, but I digress. According to the rules, the character you just forcibly moved 5 feet on a diagonal upward would land on their feet because nothing else happened to make them land [condition]prone[/condition. And if you knock them up 5 feet and they fall 5 feet, they land on their feet because they took no fall damage.
And I think the real head-scratcher here is why some people, such as yourself, are so adamant that a target creature can be moved in this way? What's the endgame? Is it's superfluous, in which case you can just walk away because there's no mechanical impact? Or are you trying to argue in favor of, in no uncertain terms, cheese that has no basis in the rules as written or in reality? I don't get it.
Do what you want at your table, and take it out of the RAW forum. It doesn't belong here.
Its clearly intended that 3D spaces are a thing....it creates WAY more issues if you only allow things to exist on a 2D scape. Exactly what "Space" would a hovering beholder take then? The same as it would if it was 20ft from the ground or 1ft? Your "RAW" definition would say that a beholder 5ft away horizontially would be targetable to a paladin even if it was also vertically 30ft away...which is obviously silly.
Crusher and Open Hand are the exact same scenario you just don't seem to like that the RAW answer isnt what you thought it was. A creature always has to occupy a space regardless of how it is moved and it has to move to a space that it is capable to move to.
As for the rationale behind it....its just flavor or an understanding of how 3D spaces work which is obviously a desire for any party as the world exists in 3D and to deny that in DnD is pretty silly.
No idea what you're talking about. Two things.
Again, no idea what you're on about, but stick to discussing the rule instead of trying to make it personal? Cool.
Are you?
If you need advice on descriptive narration this isn't the best forum. Dungeon Master Only is a better forum for what you're looking for. And, if you're convinced it needs to be changed, over at Homebrew & House Rules they can help you come up with solutions.
No specific narrative flourish needs to be used even at all. The creature moves 5', into an unoccupied space. How you rectify that is entirely up to you. Good Luck!
Yeah.
D&D 5e doesn't use facing rules. You don't hit them from the front. Nor the side. Nor the back. You just hit them. There is no facing.
If this is another thing you'd like to homebrew, again, Homebrew and House Rules is the forum for you!
Knowing what RAW is, and, deciding how to rule something, are two different topics. Related topics, sure, but different. It is ok to discuss RAW and also not be talking about how you'd personally rule it. Most of us can make his distinction. Again, if you want to rule something against RAW that is called Homebrew and there is a forum for that here on dndbeyond where people are happy to help you.
Well it makes perfect sense, is unambiguous, and is crystal clear. There is no doubt how this ability works. They move 5' into an unoccupied space. You simply don't like what the RAW is. You'd rather it be something else.
You can't hit someone in the back. There is no facing in D&D 5e. You do remain welcome to discuss ways to homebrew such a facing system. But, again, this is the wrong forum for 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.