The Restrained is mechanically different from Grappled. While both set speed to 0, one implies something is preventing you from dodging out of the way of objects or effects (disadvantage on dex saves, disadvantage on attacks made by, advantage on attacks against) while the other implies being put into a clinch or someone has grabbed an appendage preventing you from leaving your 5 foot space, that you occupy.
Nowhere in the item's (Cloak of Displacement) description does it say that the user's speed has anything to do with function. The ability to move is a function regarding the creature being in combat and controlling it's 5-foot space. I might suggest that the ability to move about your 5-foot space still exists, even if Grappled. The inability to move about your space might be the cause of the disadvantage on dex saves and attack rolls that are provided by the Restrained
Movement and Position- In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
Space - A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. <snip> A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively.
I would point out that the wording is vague enough that the DM may need to provide a ruling on this one. The definition of "unable to move." is easily contested as it applies to not having a movement speed.
You can move while grappled or restrained. You cannot move while paralyzed, petrified, stunned, or unconscious because those conditions tell you that you cannot move. I am not aware of any rule that says you cannot move when your speed is 0.
Surely we would not say that someone using steady aim would be incapable of casting an attack spell that involved somatic components, right?
Really, the only issue I have with what you said involves dodging because the dodge action says you cannot do it while your speed is 0 so that would apply to the grappled condition and the restrained condition.
Steady Aim should not stop the Skirmisher feature either (movement as a reaction).
Why? Skirmisher let you move up to half your speed as a reaction, so if your speed is 0, you would be unable to move this way.
Because Steady Aim only affects your speed until the end of your turn. Once your turn is done, your speed is not 0 anymore, so you can move with a reaction on someone else's turn.
Oh yeah they can't even interact since is taking place on the rogue's turn, and the other on the enemy's turn
You still have a case where the enemy uses its Reaction on your turn, but otherwise I agree that the restriction imposed by Steady Aim ends with your turn.
I am not aware of any rule that says you cannot move when your speed is 0.
The point is that the "otherwise unable to move" clause in the cloak's description is ambiguous. Terms like movement and position are well defined, but "move" is one of those words in 5e that is used to mean different things in different contexts. Furthermore, even the examples of what turns off the cloak are not consistent. You can still move freely when incapacitated, at least in several senses of the word "move."
If you want to talk about what grappled and restrained imply, that's fine and totally relevant to a ruling based on RAI, but it's not fair to rely on that for one interpretation and demand something spelled out exactly in RAW for the opposing one.
For me, I fall on the deactivation side of the ambiguous wording for two reasons -
Verisimilitude - someone carefully aiming is too focused to dodge oncoming attacks
Balance - Steady Aim grants a powerful benefit and is intended to have strong drawbacks to match
At any rate, since it's only scoped to your turn anyway, it's not going to come up that often so I'd be fine going with either ruling if it were me.
As myself and others have said, when your speed is set to 0, that means you are unable to move.
No it doesn't. I have a Rogue right now that can move while at speed 0.
Just speaking as one human being to another, this is not really an effective way to communicate your position. It comes off as "I know I'm right and I know why I'm right, but explaining it to you isn't worth my time."
The overall result is that you haven't really furthered your argument at all, but rather only potentially shifted the debate to something more emotional and adversarial rather than focusing on the subject at hand.
I don't think this was your intention and there could be all kinds of reasons why you couldn't elaborate at the moment. I personally am not offended. I just wanted to let you know how it comes off because so much is lost in communication over the internet and what we intend to say is not always what is heard.
If you want to talk about what grappled and restrained imply, that's fine and totally relevant to a ruling based on RAI, but it's not fair to rely on that for one interpretation and demand something spelled out exactly in RAW for the opposing one.
Not sure if this reply was meant for me, but when I refer to the difference between the grappled condition and the stunned condition, it is to draw the distinction between a situation in which your speed is 0 and a situation where cannot move, thereby showing how they are not identical, although they can overlap.
The cloak of displacement calls out incapacitated, restrained or unable to move.
The cloak specifically doesn't mention the grappled condition and it could have done so. All the other conditions which could cause this reference incapacitated - stunned, paralysed, petrified, unconscious. They also all explicitly state that the creature can not move - not that its speed is set to zero.
Since the cloak did NOT mention the grappled condition - then as a DM, I'd rule that setting speed to zero is not the same as being unable to move. Having a speed of zero means that you can not leave your location, you can still move your arms. etc
On the other hand, the dodge action ends if your speed falls to zero.
The situation is ambiguous enough to be a DM call but given the descriptions of the conditions that prevent the cloak from working and the fact that being grappled isn't explicitly listed, I would interpret that to mean that having a speed of 0 is not intended to be sufficient to shut down the cloak, only being actually "unable to move" would prevent it from working ... but that is just my take on it. :)
Bait & Switch says "When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement..."
Bait & Switch says "When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement..."
So it cannot be used if your speed is zero.
The Fighter must spend 5 feet of movement, not the creature switching place with it.
The Restrained is mechanically different from Grappled. While both set speed to 0, one implies something is preventing you from dodging out of the way of objects or effects (disadvantage on dex saves, disadvantage on attacks made by, advantage on attacks against) while the other implies being put into a clinch or someone has grabbed an appendage preventing you from leaving your 5 foot space, that you occupy.
Nowhere in the item's (Cloak of Displacement) description does it say that the user's speed has anything to do with function. The ability to move is a function regarding the creature being in combat and controlling it's 5-foot space. I might suggest that the ability to move about your 5-foot space still exists, even if Grappled. The inability to move about your space might be the cause of the disadvantage on dex saves and attack rolls that are provided by the Restrained
Movement and Position- In combat, characters and monsters are in constant motion, often using movement and position to gain the upper hand.
Space - A creature's space is the area in feet that it effectively controls in combat, not an expression of its physical dimensions. <snip> A creature's space also reflects the area it needs to fight effectively.
I would point out that the wording is vague enough that the DM may need to provide a ruling on this one. The definition of "unable to move." is easily contested as it applies to not having a movement speed.
You can move while grappled or restrained. You cannot move while paralyzed, petrified, stunned, or unconscious because those conditions tell you that you cannot move. I am not aware of any rule that says you cannot move when your speed is 0.
Surely we would not say that someone using steady aim would be incapable of casting an attack spell that involved somatic components, right?
Really, the only issue I have with what you said involves dodging because the dodge action says you cannot do it while your speed is 0 so that would apply to the grappled condition and the restrained condition.
Fundamentaly, I don't disagree with your overall take. But there might need to be some further clarification here.
Oddly, I don't mention the dodge action in my post. It seems that you have implied that dodging and moving about your 5-foot space is the equivalent of such. You have the ability to make a Dexterity Save without moving to a different space - the analog to dodging and moving about your 5-foot space, IMHO.
Additionally the point to my post is: RAW, the cloak description has no constraint or requirement based on movement speed. Only the *ability to move*. The *ability to move* is lost when you are Paralyzed, Petrified, Stunned or Unconscious because the condition states as much. The *ability to move* is hindered enough by the Restrained condition to suspend the function of the item. I might suggest that this is due to the Restrained condition granting disadvantage to Dex Saves, advantage on attacks against you, and disadvantage on attacks you make, because it's hard for you to move in such a condition. The same might be said of the Incapacitated condition, but YMMV. You'll also note that I put small emphasis on the ability to move, not movement speed.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
This topic has really taken off and everyone has raised a lot of good points. Something I feel I should have made clear in my original reply is that queueing off of movement speed being forced to 0 is my interpretation of the rules and definitely not Rules as Written.
As TexasDevin and others have pointed out being unable to move and having your speed forced to 0 are separate mechanical effects. From the text of Cloak of Displacement "This property is suppressed while you are Incapacitated, Restrained, or otherwise unable to move." I was taking the phrase ". . . or otherwise unable to move." as a catch all so that the designers wouldn't have to list out verbatim all qualifying conditions. However it could be they were intending to refer to the conditions Paralyzed, Petrified, Stunned, and Unconscious that all explicitly state that you can't move. I feel Scatterbraind did a much better job expressing my thoughts on this than I originally did.
Somewhat off topic I find it really curious that the Incapacitated condition does nothing to prevent you from moving. I wonder if there is any effect that causes the Incapacitated condition without also causing the Paralyzed, Petrified, Stunned, or Unconscious condition. To me it seems like the Incapacitated condition exists as a mechanical definition to be re-used in other conditions that actually get used by spells and the like. Every condition that references the Incapacitated condition also explicitly states that the creature can't move, so it is curious this wasn't included in the Incapacitated condition itself.
You can indeed move while incapacitated, and I believe this is an intended feature of the condition. That being said, it is pretty rare to be incapacitated without also being subjected to an accompanying condition and often times, that accompanying condition will prevent you from moving, or reduce you to a crawl.
You can indeed move while incapacitated, and I believe this is an intended feature of the condition. That being said, it is pretty rare to be incapacitated without also being subjected to an accompanying condition and often times, that accompanying condition will prevent you from moving, or reduce you to a crawl.
Now that you mention it, isn't it weird that Cloak of Displacement specifically calls out this condition? From the way it's worded one would think it's considered one of the things that make you "unable to move", yet at the same time that condition doesn't actually prevent you from moving. Doesn't even hinder it in any way - you can move your full speed if you're only incapacitated, since movement and actions/reactions are two separate things.
I assume (dangerously I know), that they were using incapacitated as kind of a shorthand for all those other conditions Fang listed. Since they all include incapacitated, they all stop the cloak. 5e takes a very modular approach to conditions, and I think this was trying to leverage that utility without really considering that incapacitated on its own doesn't really make sense in this context.
It is a good point that all four of those more advanced conditions explicitly say you can't move. That's consistent enough to make "can't move" a concrete term, I think. So I think the argument that Steady Aim would not prevent the cloak from working is the stronger one (but I personally would still rule the other way for the totally subjective reasons I listed above).
My take on Incapacitated is the notion that the ability to act is hindered to the point of being ineffective at much of what your normal capacity for acting allows. Your only remaining faculty is to attempt to use your movement speed to whatever end you choose, but the ability to act in any meaningful way has been overridden by trauma or magical effect. The analogy that I think of is a boxer or MMA practitioner that has been nearly knocked unconscious while still standing and the only act that they take is to attempt to break contact and cover in the hopes the bell rings to save them from being pummeled again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
I am not aware of any rule that says you cannot move when your speed is 0.
There's no rule that says it in so many words, but it's a natural consequence of the rules for movement.
On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed.
Alright, so the rules say you can move a distance up to your speed. If your speed is zero, you can move... zero. Being able to move zero is equivalent to being unable to 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.
Again, however you're moving, you subtract what you've moved from your speed until it's used up. There is no amount of movement you can subtract from zero, except zero.
To satisfy my own curiosity there are spells that cause the Incapacitated condition on its own and some of those don't explicitly say you are unable to move.
From the PHB: Tasha's Hideous Laughter - You fall prone and are unable to stand up but can otherwise move. Banishing Smite - The target is Incapacitated to prevent them from teleporting out of the demi-plane. Symbol - The pain symbol causes the Incapacitated condition without any riders so the affected targets still have full access to their movement.
So I feel this strengthens the argument that a Cloak of Displacement would cease to function during a turn the player used the Steady Aim feature. Cloak of Displacement ceases to work while the player is Incapacitated, even if they still have full access to their movement.
To satisfy my own curiosity there are spells that cause the Incapacitated condition on its own and some of those don't explicitly say you are unable to move.
From the PHB: Tasha's Hideous Laughter - You fall prone and are unable to stand up but can otherwise move. Banishing Smite - The target is Incapacitated to prevent them from teleporting out of the demi-plane. Symbol - The pain symbol causes the Incapacitated condition without any riders so the affected targets still have full access to their movement.
So I feel this strengthens the argument that a Cloak of Displacement would cease to function during a turn the player used the Steady Aim feature. Cloak of Displacement ceases to work while the player is Incapacitated, even if they still have full access to their movement.
I feel like it is actually the opposite. Steady Aim does not give you the Incapacitated condition, which is specifically called out by the Cloak of Displacement. So the fact that someone has or does not have movement/speed is irrelevant to the CoD.
Because you can be free to move as you wish (or are forced) and the Cloak will cease to function, speed doesn't seem to factor in at all.
If the player were Grappled would the Cloak of Displacement cease to function or would it still work?
While you can move when using your speed, the opposite is not true. (you can't move when not using your speed)
There's instance where you can move without using your speed. Ex. move X feet, up to half your speed, swap place, teleporting etc
Some specific examples would be helpful, especially of your first case.
I'm not aware off the top of my head of any feature that says "move X feet." The harengon's jump is close, but you can't use it if your speed is 0.
"Up to half your speed" is nothing if your speed is 0, so in that case, having a speed of zero means you can't move.
In the case of Bait & Switch, the target doesn't move. They are moved. It's similar to being shoved. Even if they can't move for some reason, the feature still works (unless they're incapacitated, because that's explicitly called out by the feature's text).
Teleportation isn't movement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Care to elaborate on the interaction?
You can move while grappled or restrained. You cannot move while paralyzed, petrified, stunned, or unconscious because those conditions tell you that you cannot move. I am not aware of any rule that says you cannot move when your speed is 0.
Surely we would not say that someone using steady aim would be incapable of casting an attack spell that involved somatic components, right?
Really, the only issue I have with what you said involves dodging because the dodge action says you cannot do it while your speed is 0 so that would apply to the grappled condition and the restrained condition.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
You still have a case where the enemy uses its Reaction on your turn, but otherwise I agree that the restriction imposed by Steady Aim ends with your turn.
The point is that the "otherwise unable to move" clause in the cloak's description is ambiguous. Terms like movement and position are well defined, but "move" is one of those words in 5e that is used to mean different things in different contexts. Furthermore, even the examples of what turns off the cloak are not consistent. You can still move freely when incapacitated, at least in several senses of the word "move."
If you want to talk about what grappled and restrained imply, that's fine and totally relevant to a ruling based on RAI, but it's not fair to rely on that for one interpretation and demand something spelled out exactly in RAW for the opposing one.
For me, I fall on the deactivation side of the ambiguous wording for two reasons -
At any rate, since it's only scoped to your turn anyway, it's not going to come up that often so I'd be fine going with either ruling if it were me.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Just speaking as one human being to another, this is not really an effective way to communicate your position. It comes off as "I know I'm right and I know why I'm right, but explaining it to you isn't worth my time."
The overall result is that you haven't really furthered your argument at all, but rather only potentially shifted the debate to something more emotional and adversarial rather than focusing on the subject at hand.
I don't think this was your intention and there could be all kinds of reasons why you couldn't elaborate at the moment. I personally am not offended. I just wanted to let you know how it comes off because so much is lost in communication over the internet and what we intend to say is not always what is heard.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Not sure if this reply was meant for me, but when I refer to the difference between the grappled condition and the stunned condition, it is to draw the distinction between a situation in which your speed is 0 and a situation where cannot move, thereby showing how they are not identical, although they can overlap.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
The cloak of displacement calls out incapacitated, restrained or unable to move.
The cloak specifically doesn't mention the grappled condition and it could have done so. All the other conditions which could cause this reference incapacitated - stunned, paralysed, petrified, unconscious. They also all explicitly state that the creature can not move - not that its speed is set to zero.
Since the cloak did NOT mention the grappled condition - then as a DM, I'd rule that setting speed to zero is not the same as being unable to move. Having a speed of zero means that you can not leave your location, you can still move your arms. etc
On the other hand, the dodge action ends if your speed falls to zero.
The situation is ambiguous enough to be a DM call but given the descriptions of the conditions that prevent the cloak from working and the fact that being grappled isn't explicitly listed, I would interpret that to mean that having a speed of 0 is not intended to be sufficient to shut down the cloak, only being actually "unable to move" would prevent it from working ... but that is just my take on it. :)
Slight correction:
Bait & Switch says "When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement..."
So it cannot be used if your speed is zero.
The Fighter must spend 5 feet of movement, not the creature switching place with it.
Fundamentaly, I don't disagree with your overall take. But there might need to be some further clarification here.
Oddly, I don't mention the dodge action in my post. It seems that you have implied that dodging and moving about your 5-foot space is the equivalent of such. You have the ability to make a Dexterity Save without moving to a different space - the analog to dodging and moving about your 5-foot space, IMHO.
Additionally the point to my post is: RAW, the cloak description has no constraint or requirement based on movement speed. Only the *ability to move*. The *ability to move* is lost when you are Paralyzed, Petrified, Stunned or Unconscious because the condition states as much. The *ability to move* is hindered enough by the Restrained condition to suspend the function of the item. I might suggest that this is due to the Restrained condition granting disadvantage to Dex Saves, advantage on attacks against you, and disadvantage on attacks you make, because it's hard for you to move in such a condition. The same might be said of the Incapacitated condition, but YMMV. You'll also note that I put small emphasis on the ability to move, not movement speed.
Edit: Grammar and accuracy
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
And this distinction is what it all comes down to for me.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
This topic has really taken off and everyone has raised a lot of good points. Something I feel I should have made clear in my original reply is that queueing off of movement speed being forced to 0 is my interpretation of the rules and definitely not Rules as Written.
As TexasDevin and others have pointed out being unable to move and having your speed forced to 0 are separate mechanical effects. From the text of Cloak of Displacement "This property is suppressed while you are Incapacitated, Restrained, or otherwise unable to move." I was taking the phrase ". . . or otherwise unable to move." as a catch all so that the designers wouldn't have to list out verbatim all qualifying conditions. However it could be they were intending to refer to the conditions Paralyzed, Petrified, Stunned, and Unconscious that all explicitly state that you can't move. I feel Scatterbraind did a much better job expressing my thoughts on this than I originally did.
Somewhat off topic I find it really curious that the Incapacitated condition does nothing to prevent you from moving. I wonder if there is any effect that causes the Incapacitated condition without also causing the Paralyzed, Petrified, Stunned, or Unconscious condition. To me it seems like the Incapacitated condition exists as a mechanical definition to be re-used in other conditions that actually get used by spells and the like. Every condition that references the Incapacitated condition also explicitly states that the creature can't move, so it is curious this wasn't included in the Incapacitated condition itself.
You can indeed move while incapacitated, and I believe this is an intended feature of the condition. That being said, it is pretty rare to be incapacitated without also being subjected to an accompanying condition and often times, that accompanying condition will prevent you from moving, or reduce you to a crawl.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Now that you mention it, isn't it weird that Cloak of Displacement specifically calls out this condition? From the way it's worded one would think it's considered one of the things that make you "unable to move", yet at the same time that condition doesn't actually prevent you from moving. Doesn't even hinder it in any way - you can move your full speed if you're only incapacitated, since movement and actions/reactions are two separate things.
I don't understand this discrepancy.
I assume (dangerously I know), that they were using incapacitated as kind of a shorthand for all those other conditions Fang listed. Since they all include incapacitated, they all stop the cloak. 5e takes a very modular approach to conditions, and I think this was trying to leverage that utility without really considering that incapacitated on its own doesn't really make sense in this context.
It is a good point that all four of those more advanced conditions explicitly say you can't move. That's consistent enough to make "can't move" a concrete term, I think. So I think the argument that Steady Aim would not prevent the cloak from working is the stronger one (but I personally would still rule the other way for the totally subjective reasons I listed above).
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
My take on Incapacitated is the notion that the ability to act is hindered to the point of being ineffective at much of what your normal capacity for acting allows. Your only remaining faculty is to attempt to use your movement speed to whatever end you choose, but the ability to act in any meaningful way has been overridden by trauma or magical effect. The analogy that I think of is a boxer or MMA practitioner that has been nearly knocked unconscious while still standing and the only act that they take is to attempt to break contact and cover in the hopes the bell rings to save them from being pummeled again.
“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime.” - Mark Twain - Innocents Abroad
There's no rule that says it in so many words, but it's a natural consequence of the rules for movement.
Alright, so the rules say you can move a distance up to your speed. If your speed is zero, you can move... zero. Being able to move zero is equivalent to being unable to move.
Again, however you're moving, you subtract what you've moved from your speed until it's used up. There is no amount of movement you can subtract from zero, except zero.
To satisfy my own curiosity there are spells that cause the Incapacitated condition on its own and some of those don't explicitly say you are unable to move.
From the PHB:
Tasha's Hideous Laughter - You fall prone and are unable to stand up but can otherwise move.
Banishing Smite - The target is Incapacitated to prevent them from teleporting out of the demi-plane.
Symbol - The pain symbol causes the Incapacitated condition without any riders so the affected targets still have full access to their movement.
From Fizban's:
Nathair's Mischief - One of the possible effects causes the Incapacitated condition and forces the affected targets to move in a random direction.
Raulothim's Psychic Lance - Like the pain Symbol this also simply causes the Incapacitated condition and nothing else.
So I feel this strengthens the argument that a Cloak of Displacement would cease to function during a turn the player used the Steady Aim feature. Cloak of Displacement ceases to work while the player is Incapacitated, even if they still have full access to their movement.
If the player were Grappled would the Cloak of Displacement cease to function or would it still work?
While you can move when using your speed, the opposite is not true. (you can't move when not using your speed)
There's instance where you can move without using your speed. Ex. move X feet, up to half your speed, swap place, teleporting etc
Some specific examples would be helpful, especially of your first case.
I'm not aware off the top of my head of any feature that says "move X feet." The harengon's jump is close, but you can't use it if your speed is 0.
"Up to half your speed" is nothing if your speed is 0, so in that case, having a speed of zero means you can't move.
In the case of Bait & Switch, the target doesn't move. They are moved. It's similar to being shoved. Even if they can't move for some reason, the feature still works (unless they're incapacitated, because that's explicitly called out by the feature's text).
Teleportation isn't movement.