Again, opportunity attacks have special rules (which PAM, by not mentioning at all, leaves intact). "You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction."
If a fighter moves their reach over a creature, they haven't provoked an opportunity attack. The target has to enter the fighter's reach. Again, enter (in the D&D rules) is limited to "go into", and specifically distinct from "be enveloped by."
Again, opportunity attacks have special rules (which PAM, by not mentioning at all, leaves intact). "You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction."
If a fighter moves their reach over a creature, they haven't provoked an opportunity attack. The target has to enter the fighter's reach. Again, enter (in the D&D rules) is limited to "go into", and specifically distinct from "be enveloped by."
I hear what you're saying but when a PAM fighter closes in on a target it sure sounds like they've entered his reach to me.
Got anything to point to that shows this?
Would love to see that black and white "in the D&D rules" text you're saying exists that tells us how to answer specifically this question.
Sounds... again... to me, a lot like you're saying Enters is essentially synonymous with "moves into" you're just not, you know, saying that, for reasons.
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.
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.
Entering does not require "movement" as in walking, swimming, climbing, crawling, or jumping. Again, there is nothing in either English or the rules that indicates this at all. are you saying that whirlwind would not cause damage if you teleport into it? This is wrong. Black and white whirlwind draws out the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space.
Entering does not require "movement" as in walking, swimming, climbing, crawling, or jumping. Again, there is nothing in either English or the rules that indicates this at all. are you saying that whirlwind would not cause damage if you teleport into it? This is wrong. Black and white whirlwind draws out the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space.
This is two points.
1. Yes, "enters" requires their movement. It obviously does, because if it didn't PAM could just walk up to people to trigger and OA.
2. Teleportation isn't movement. instead it is the magic of being at a place and then not being there, and instead somewhere else. There is no movement between these points whatsoever. None. You just stop existing at point A, and start existing at point B. Rules for teleport uses words: vanish and appear. Not: leaves and enters. At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters. Just isn't true RAW, different terms, different interactions.
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.
Entering does not require "movement" as in walking, swimming, climbing, crawling, or jumping. Again, there is nothing in either English or the rules that indicates this at all. are you saying that whirlwind would not cause damage if you teleport into it? This is wrong. Black and white whirlwind draws out the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space.
This is two points.
1. Yes, "enters" requires their movement. It obviously does, because if it didn't PAM could just walk up to people to trigger and OA.
2. Teleportation isn't movement. instead it is the magic of being at a place and then not being there, and instead somewhere else. There is no movement between these points whatsoever. None. You just stop existing at point A, and start existing at point B. Rules for teleport uses words: vanish and appear. Not: leaves and enters. At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters. Just isn't true RAW, different terms, different interactions.
Polearm Mastery says 'enter' not 'move' and has no 'except teleportation' clause.
It doesn't need one, because the 'except teleportation' clause is baked into the rules for opportunity attacks. PAM (or PaM, if you prefer) just creates another way for an opportunity attack to happen. It doesn't completely re-write the rules for opportunity attacks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Entering requires going into, according to the rules, but does not require you use any of the rules described in "movement" or "movement and position" sections of the rules.
It isn't rocket science. You are taking a rule for OAs and trying to extend it to all areas. OAs have specific exceptions that you seem to think are general. Until you correct this misunderstanding, you are wasting everyone's time.
If something appears within an area it didn't enter that area it simply started to exist within that area. Just so, when something vanishes from an area it hasn't left that area it simply stopped existing within the area.
Unless yall argue that Blink causes you to repeatedly suffer Opportunity Attacks? If that is your stance it's a wild one.
Blink doesn't provoke when you move out of a space because you do so without using your movement, action, or reaction to do so. But when you Blink in and out, you are difinitly entering/leaving a space/square you return or vanish from.
It still happens on your turn, by way of a spell you initiated. If that does not count on that basis, then neither does misty step, since you cast it on yourself too.
It doesn't matter it happen on your turn or someone else, OA only care if something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction. Blinking is an action to cast, but blinking at the end of each of your turns is not done with any of it.
Mysty Step and other teleport don't provoke because it's teleportation, even if it uses movement, action, or reaction to do so.
Right, but we are talking about the specific context of Polearm Mastery, which inexplicably is abbreviated as if it is three words rather than two...
Polearm Mastery says 'enter' not 'move' and has no 'except teleportation' clause.
OA aren't provoked by teleport as a general rule. For a game element to actually trigger an OA from teleport, it would have to specifically say so.
Entering does not require "movement" as in walking, swimming, climbing, crawling, or jumping. Again, there is nothing in either English or the rules that indicates this at all. are you saying that whirlwind would not cause damage if you teleport into it? This is wrong. Black and white whirlwind draws out the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space.
This is two points.
1. Yes, "enters" requires their movement. It obviously does, because if it didn't PAM could just walk up to people to trigger and OA.
2. Teleportation isn't movement. instead it is the magic of being at a place and then not being there, and instead somewhere else. There is no movement between these points whatsoever. None. You just stop existing at point A, and start existing at point B. Rules for teleport uses words: vanish and appear. Not: leaves and enters. At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters. Just isn't true RAW, different terms, different interactions.
1. Assumption.
2. Another assumption.
Result: Homebrew.
Assumptions are not automatically false. You need to do more than simply say 'assumption' to counter an argument.
Fair game to disagree with any given assumption or conclusion, of course.
They entered it, because the space is now occupied. Similarly, a space you vanish from is now unoccupied because you left it.
So when the PAM moves closer to his target, his target entered his reach because they're now occupying it?
Obviously these aren't true but if you can't say why you know they're not true you won't understand this topic. Why are these not true?
Answer: Because it is the target's move (movement) that can provoke and when PAM says "enters" that means "move into".
Most effect triggering off you entering in it don't when it's the opposite. Whirlwind is a rare exception as it specifically note it.
Yes but why? How do you know if someone is entering or if they're not entering while somehow now being in it?
If the PAM guy walks up to you, you're for sure now in his reach area, right? When did you enter it?
You're saying you weren't in his reach but then now are, but never entered 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.
Assumptions are not automatically false. You need to do more than simply say 'assumption' to counter an argument.
I'd suggest that in a discussion of rules, the burden is on the person making the "assumption" to back up their position with specific text from the rules to support it.
Pointing out that something is an "assumption" is short form for "citation needed".
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Entering does not require "movement" as in walking, swimming, climbing, crawling, or jumping. Again, there is nothing in either English or the rules that indicates this at all. are you saying that whirlwind would not cause damage if you teleport into it? This is wrong. Black and white whirlwind draws out the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space.
This is two points.
1. Yes, "enters" requires their movement. It obviously does, because if it didn't PAM could just walk up to people to trigger and OA.
2. Teleportation isn't movement. instead it is the magic of being at a place and then not being there, and instead somewhere else. There is no movement between these points whatsoever. None. You just stop existing at point A, and start existing at point B. Rules for teleport uses words: vanish and appear. Not: leaves and enters. At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters. Just isn't true RAW, different terms, different interactions.
1. Assumption.
2. Another assumption.
Result: Homebrew.
Assumptions are not automatically false. You need to do more than simply say 'assumption' to counter an argument.
Fair game to disagree with any given assumption or conclusion, of course.
Ok.
1. False assumption.
2. False assumption.
1. Okay, if my assumption was false you're saying: PAM guy can just walk up to people and OA them now that they've entered his reach. because i was saying that doesn't happen, which you're saying is false. Neat.
2. Oh I'm sorry to have made the "false assumption" that "At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters." Care to quote where you showed this to be the case? I must have missed 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.
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.
Fish. I still was under the assumption that we were talking about rules.
1. Remember OAs have their own rules (such as excluding teleportation and all forced movement), and creatures entering areas (as shown in black and white) is distinct from areas entering creatures spaces (entering is one way). Combine these and your non sequitur fails.
2. You haven't proved that entering requires movement other than asserting it. It is a TERRIBLE assertion. On this point again you are wrong. Entering does not require movement in English or in the rules. Again, I have proved it by showing the lack of evidence of a rule or English definition requiring movement, especially a mechanically defined movement mode other than teleportation, to be used to "enter" an area.
I really dislike the disingenuous argumentation where I have to start at square 1 every time I make a statement because you seemingly forget all the relevant rules and points in the meantime. I think I'm done here.
I really dislike the disingenuous argumentation where I have to start at square 1 every time I make a statement because you seemingly forget all the relevant rules and points in the meantime. I think I'm done here.
I presented my arguments as to why I feel that is too open a definition of 'entered' but they were ignored.
I wouldn't say they were deliberately ignored, it was just well-trodden ground before you entered (ahem) the thread.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Fish. I still was under the assumption that we were talking about rules.
1. Remember OAs have their own rules (such as excluding teleportation and all forced movement), and creatures entering areas (as shown in black and white) is distinct from areas entering creatures spaces (entering is one way). Combine these and your non sequitur fail.
2. You haven't proved that entering requires movement other than asserting it. It is a TERRIBLE assertion. On this point again you are wrong. Entering does not require movement in English or in the rules. Again, I have proved it by showing the lack of evidence of a rule or English definition requiring movement, especially a mechanically defined movement mode other than teleportation, to be used to "enter" an area.
I really dislike thedisingenuous argumentationwhere I have to start at square 1 every time I make a statement because you seemingly forget all the relevant rules and points in the meantime. I think I'm done here.
It isn't.
I've represented my point of view pretty genuinely. I've stated it time and time again, despite repeatedly being misrepresented.
Anywho:
1. I have no idea what you mean when you say "entering is one way" that seems like an assertion without citation. I say Entering requires movement. You say entering is one way. Unless that's the same thing. No? What else could you possibly mean? One way... movement.
2. "Again, I have proved it by showing the lack of evidence of a rule or English definition requiring movement," What? No one has proven this or anything like it. Merriam-Websters----> "Enters" definition: To go in. "Go" definition: to move on a course.
Done and done. Enters means "To [move on a course] in."
That's all she wrote.
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.
Again, opportunity attacks have special rules (which PAM, by not mentioning at all, leaves intact). "You also don't provoke an opportunity attack when you teleport or when someone or something moves you without using your movement, action, or reaction."
If a fighter moves their reach over a creature, they haven't provoked an opportunity attack. The target has to enter the fighter's reach. Again, enter (in the D&D rules) is limited to "go into", and specifically distinct from "be enveloped by."
They entered it, because the space is now occupied. Similarly, a space you vanish from is now unoccupied because you left it.
I hear what you're saying but when a PAM fighter closes in on a target it sure sounds like they've entered his reach to me.
Got anything to point to that shows this?
Would love to see that black and white "in the D&D rules" text you're saying exists that tells us how to answer specifically this question.
Sounds... again... to me, a lot like you're saying Enters is essentially synonymous with "moves into" you're just not, you know, saying that, for reasons.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
So when the PAM moves closer to his target, his target entered his reach because they're now occupying it?
Obviously these aren't true but if you can't say why you know they're not true you won't understand this topic. Why are these not true?
Answer: Because it is the target's move (movement) that can provoke and when PAM says "enters" that means "move into".
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.
Entering does not require "movement" as in walking, swimming, climbing, crawling, or jumping. Again, there is nothing in either English or the rules that indicates this at all. are you saying that whirlwind would not cause damage if you teleport into it? This is wrong. Black and white whirlwind draws out the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space.
This is two points.
1. Yes, "enters" requires their movement. It obviously does, because if it didn't PAM could just walk up to people to trigger and OA.
2. Teleportation isn't movement. instead it is the magic of being at a place and then not being there, and instead somewhere else. There is no movement between these points whatsoever. None. You just stop existing at point A, and start existing at point B. Rules for teleport uses words: vanish and appear. Not: leaves and enters. At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters. Just isn't true RAW, different terms, different interactions.
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.
Most effect triggering off you entering in it don't when it's the opposite. Whirlwind is a rare exception as it specifically note it.
1. Assumption.
2. Another assumption.
Result: Homebrew.
It doesn't need one, because the 'except teleportation' clause is baked into the rules for opportunity attacks. PAM (or PaM, if you prefer) just creates another way for an opportunity attack to happen. It doesn't completely re-write the rules for opportunity attacks.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Entering requires going into, according to the rules, but does not require you use any of the rules described in "movement" or "movement and position" sections of the rules.
It isn't rocket science. You are taking a rule for OAs and trying to extend it to all areas. OAs have specific exceptions that you seem to think are general. Until you correct this misunderstanding, you are wasting everyone's time.
OA aren't provoked by teleport as a general rule. For a game element to actually trigger an OA from teleport, it would have to specifically say so.
Ok.
1. False assumption.
2. False assumption.
Yes but why? How do you know if someone is entering or if they're not entering while somehow now being in it?
If the PAM guy walks up to you, you're for sure now in his reach area, right? When did you enter it?
You're saying you weren't in his reach but then now are, but never entered 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.
I'd suggest that in a discussion of rules, the burden is on the person making the "assumption" to back up their position with specific text from the rules to support it.
Pointing out that something is an "assumption" is short form for "citation needed".
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
1. Okay, if my assumption was false you're saying: PAM guy can just walk up to people and OA them now that they've entered his reach. because i was saying that doesn't happen, which you're saying is false. Neat.
2. Oh I'm sorry to have made the "false assumption" that "At no time has anyone shown anything that vanish = leaves or appears = enters." Care to quote where you showed this to be the case? I must have missed 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.
I still wanna know! One way what?
...and, how do you know it is one way!? Where is the citation!?
Warning: Citation needed. False Assumption detected. Citation needed.
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.
Fish. I still was under the assumption that we were talking about rules.
1. Remember OAs have their own rules (such as excluding teleportation and all forced movement), and creatures entering areas (as shown in black and white) is distinct from areas entering creatures spaces (entering is one way). Combine these and your non sequitur fails.
2. You haven't proved that entering requires movement other than asserting it. It is a TERRIBLE assertion. On this point again you are wrong. Entering does not require movement in English or in the rules. Again, I have proved it by showing the lack of evidence of a rule or English definition requiring movement, especially a mechanically defined movement mode other than teleportation, to be used to "enter" an area.
I really dislike the disingenuous argumentation where I have to start at square 1 every time I make a statement because you seemingly forget all the relevant rules and points in the meantime. I think I'm done here.
Fish. I've provided black and white the distinction between a creature entering an area and an area entering a creature's space again and again in this thread. It is objectively provable that entering is one way in the rules. Even SAC has an entry on it.
Again, this is at best disingenuous argumentation at this point. And no matter what the problem is, it isn't worth trying to correct you.
I wouldn't say they were deliberately ignored, it was just well-trodden ground before you entered (ahem) the thread.
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
It isn't.
I've represented my point of view pretty genuinely. I've stated it time and time again, despite repeatedly being misrepresented.
Anywho:
1. I have no idea what you mean when you say "entering is one way" that seems like an assertion without citation. I say Entering requires movement. You say entering is one way. Unless that's the same thing. No? What else could you possibly mean? One way... movement.
2. "Again, I have proved it by showing the lack of evidence of a rule or English definition requiring movement," What? No one has proven this or anything like it. Merriam-Websters----> "Enters" definition: To go in. "Go" definition: to move on a course.
Done and done. Enters means "To [move on a course] in."
That's all she wrote.
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.