Does anybody know of a ruling on whether it's kosher for a Medium creature to move into and end its turn in the space of a prone or unconscious creature in combat? The general rule for conscious creatures seems to be "no", but I think it would be an oversight for an unconscious creature.
As DxJxC stated, the rules dont distinguish between conscious, prone, and unconscious creatures, so RAW, one creature cannot occupy the same space as another creature of about the same size (up to 1 size larger or smaller).
Now, obviously it should be possible if they are unconscious, or friendly and prone, so the lack of such options in the rules is likely to keep them simpler.
Personally, I would agree with DxJxC, and say that as long as a creature is not willing or able to negatively impact the creature in question, then they can occupy the same space if the stationary creature is prone.
Thematically, I think you can have it both ways. If you are dedicated to battle grid movement and you are in a super narrow hallway with an unconscious person preventing you from getting by (which i hope we can all agree is a fairly edge case scenario), then I'm sure someone at the table can come up with a narrative reason to make it happen.
I would be less inclined to allow it over an actively conscious but prone character. Otherwise, I might just consider it difficult terrain over a truly incapacitated character.
Of course, there are likely to be exceptions. It could get complicated (as 5e streamlining leaves a lot of room for getting specific when desired).
For example in an exchange between a person and a creature: If someone successfully performed or deceived to appear to be "incapacitated" and a creature traveled onto the person's occupying area, I might grant an attack of opportunity with advantage to the person if the creature stopped in the same space or without advantage but not disadvantage to the person at the point when the creature moved out of the space in the same move when the creature entered and did not stop on the space—only one chance of AoO depending on how the creature moved. If the "incapacitated" person chose not to react when the creature stopped in the same space, I might grant a non-advantage but not disadvantaged AoO to the person when the creature moved out of the occupied space but not if the person used an AoO with the creature in the same space. I would likely consider any use of an AoO as ending the deception, too. Also if the "incapacitated" person chose not to react with the creature stopped in the same space, I might grant advantage to the person on the next standard attack during the person's turn if the creature is still there. I might grant advantage to the creature on a passive perception against the deception or performance at the moment when the creature entered or stopped on the space occupied by the "incapacitated" person. I probably would have attacks against the "incapacitated" person would follow normal attacks-against-prone rules, regardless. Same would go for prone-attacks by the person against anything not occupying the same space during the turn.
I think that 5e doesn't want to deal with all that for the purpose of keeping it accessible, but it doesn't prevent you from filling in the gaps unless you're going RAW.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I would allow it, but would consider it difficult terrain to move in out or through. All other rules of being adjacent to a prone character still applies.
If you are defending the fallen, i might allow a cover bonus to AC as well. But you have to spend an action to do it...or maybe a bonus action.
As has been said, by the book you can't, and, as as others have said, I like to relax on that a bit in certain situations.
I allow a character to walk through another creature's space and attack (sometimes granting advantage because I use flanking). I generally don't allow a creature to end it's turn on another creature's spot. However, if the player can give me a reasonable explanation, I may be persuaded to let them on a case by case basis.
Thanks everybody. I suppose I'd normally make a house rule to allow ending a turn in the space of an unconscious creature (whether perceived or not). The main reason I brought up the rules was that I'm working on a monster and subclass ability that allows a creature to move into the space of an unconscious ally as a reaction to that ally being downed, basically reinforcing a battle line. This seems to be illegal by RAW,.
Thanks everybody. I suppose I'd normally make a house rule to allow ending a turn in the space of an unconscious creature (whether perceived or not). The main reason I brought up the rules was that I'm working on a monster and subclass ability that allows a creature to move into the space of an unconscious ally as a reaction to that ally being downed, basically reinforcing a battle line. This seems to be illegal by RAW,.
That's different though. A lot of things are illegal by RAW, but that's the whole point of class features: to allow something that normally shouldn't be possible.
If you want to create a "defender" archetype that's able to step into a space occupied by a downed ally to protect them, that would be perfectly fine. There are 0 issues with this.
Followup - here's the monster ability I'm toying with. I still don't like the wording.
Seal the Breach. When an allied creature the ___ can see that is within 15 feet of it is reduced to 0 hit points, it can use its reaction to move up to half its speed towards the space that the creature occupied.
I would start the sentence with "When an allied creature within 15ft of the blabla is reduced to 0" to make it slightly less wordy.
Otherwise, I believe it works as worded, but I don't really see the point ? Is it a "phalanx don't let them pass" kind of thing ? I thought maybe the reaction would be used to protect the downed ally ?
I would start the sentence with "When an allied creature within 15ft of the blabla is reduced to 0" to make it slightly less wordy.
Otherwise, I believe it works as worded, but I don't really see the point ? Is it a "phalanx don't let them pass" kind of thing ? I thought maybe the reaction would be used to protect the downed ally ?
Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, it's designed to make it hard for other creatures to pass. The creature in question is meant to defend underground/mountainous communities by bottlenecking invaders. The reaction could, in principle, be used to defend a PC, but AFAIK most monsters/NPCs die outright when dropped to 0.
Edit: Idk why I'm being so vague--it's a gnome NPC.
Does anybody know of a ruling on whether it's kosher for a Medium creature to move into and end its turn in the space of a prone or unconscious creature in combat? The general rule for conscious creatures seems to be "no", but I think it would be an oversight for an unconscious creature.
I dont think the rules allow it as long as they are still alive. (As a DM, I would house rule over that).
As DxJxC stated, the rules dont distinguish between conscious, prone, and unconscious creatures, so RAW, one creature cannot occupy the same space as another creature of about the same size (up to 1 size larger or smaller).
Now, obviously it should be possible if they are unconscious, or friendly and prone, so the lack of such options in the rules is likely to keep them simpler.
Personally, I would agree with DxJxC, and say that as long as a creature is not willing or able to negatively impact the creature in question, then they can occupy the same space if the stationary creature is prone.
Thematically, I think you can have it both ways. If you are dedicated to battle grid movement and you are in a super narrow hallway with an unconscious person preventing you from getting by (which i hope we can all agree is a fairly edge case scenario), then I'm sure someone at the table can come up with a narrative reason to make it happen.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I would be less inclined to allow it over an actively conscious but prone character. Otherwise, I might just consider it difficult terrain over a truly incapacitated character.
Of course, there are likely to be exceptions. It could get complicated (as 5e streamlining leaves a lot of room for getting specific when desired).
For example in an exchange between a person and a creature: If someone successfully performed or deceived to appear to be "incapacitated" and a creature traveled onto the person's occupying area, I might grant an attack of opportunity with advantage to the person if the creature stopped in the same space or without advantage but not disadvantage to the person at the point when the creature moved out of the space in the same move when the creature entered and did not stop on the space—only one chance of AoO depending on how the creature moved. If the "incapacitated" person chose not to react when the creature stopped in the same space, I might grant a non-advantage but not disadvantaged AoO to the person when the creature moved out of the occupied space but not if the person used an AoO with the creature in the same space. I would likely consider any use of an AoO as ending the deception, too. Also if the "incapacitated" person chose not to react with the creature stopped in the same space, I might grant advantage to the person on the next standard attack during the person's turn if the creature is still there. I might grant advantage to the creature on a passive perception against the deception or performance at the moment when the creature entered or stopped on the space occupied by the "incapacitated" person. I probably would have attacks against the "incapacitated" person would follow normal attacks-against-prone rules, regardless. Same would go for prone-attacks by the person against anything not occupying the same space during the turn.
I think that 5e doesn't want to deal with all that for the purpose of keeping it accessible, but it doesn't prevent you from filling in the gaps unless you're going RAW.
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
I would allow it, but would consider it difficult terrain to move in out or through. All other rules of being adjacent to a prone character still applies.
If you are defending the fallen, i might allow a cover bonus to AC as well. But you have to spend an action to do it...or maybe a bonus action.
As has been said, by the book you can't, and, as as others have said, I like to relax on that a bit in certain situations.
I allow a character to walk through another creature's space and attack (sometimes granting advantage because I use flanking). I generally don't allow a creature to end it's turn on another creature's spot. However, if the player can give me a reasonable explanation, I may be persuaded to let them on a case by case basis.
We all have to make compromises in the name of keeping a game enjoyable.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Thanks everybody. I suppose I'd normally make a house rule to allow ending a turn in the space of an unconscious creature (whether perceived or not). The main reason I brought up the rules was that I'm working on a monster and subclass ability that allows a creature to move into the space of an unconscious ally as a reaction to that ally being downed, basically reinforcing a battle line. This seems to be illegal by RAW,.
That's different though. A lot of things are illegal by RAW, but that's the whole point of class features: to allow something that normally shouldn't be possible.
If you want to create a "defender" archetype that's able to step into a space occupied by a downed ally to protect them, that would be perfectly fine. There are 0 issues with this.
It's a case of "specific trumps general".
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
Followup - here's the monster ability I'm toying with. I still don't like the wording.
What do you all think?
I would start the sentence with "When an allied creature within 15ft of the blabla is reduced to 0" to make it slightly less wordy.
Otherwise, I believe it works as worded, but I don't really see the point ? Is it a "phalanx don't let them pass" kind of thing ? I thought maybe the reaction would be used to protect the downed ally ?
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!
Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, it's designed to make it hard for other creatures to pass. The creature in question is meant to defend underground/mountainous communities by bottlenecking invaders. The reaction could, in principle, be used to defend a PC, but AFAIK most monsters/NPCs die outright when dropped to 0.
Edit: Idk why I'm being so vague--it's a gnome NPC.
Then I believe the ability as worded should fulfill its purpose. Also, cool idea, which should make for some nice visuals!
Click to learn to put cool-looking tooltips in your messages!