Evasion and Helplessness

[warrior80]

So just a quick question for you guys as I am curious as to how others use evasion and the effects of helplessness.

In our campaign we were all stuck in a small jail cell on a ship that was part of an armada, minus one guy. (We had gotten picked up by a Royal Navy and locked up accordingly.) That one guy was on the main "battleship" and managed to impersonate the Admiral and order the ship to fire all of its cannons at the back of the ship we were currently locked away on. He directed the fire towards the rear of the ship and as such he obliterated the ship, over 120 pts of cannon ball damage with a 10 foot radius of shrapnel damage for each cannon ball. All in all it was a complete party wipe, minus one, our monk.

The cannon fire was a reflex save for half damage but since our monk had evasion and made all 4 saves he lived. My question is would evasion apply in a situation like this? My gut tells me that he should be treated as helpless in this situation as he is trapped in a 10x10 cell with a barrage of cannonballs obliterating the place.

What do you guys think and how would you rule it? Do you consider helpless to mean that you have to be unconscious or bound? Or are you like me and feel that a situation that allows for no escape, like bombing a jail cell, would render evasion unusable?

[NotAnAardvark]

Evasion has nothing to do with escaping in the first place.

Helplessness is a specific condition implying unconsciousness or otherwise being rendered unable to defend yourself. If a guard walked into the cell could he CdG the monk because the monk can't do anything? No.

He's not helpless, just in a very small space.

[tyckspoon]

If you can move, you can Evade. It's one of the abilities that most obviously highlights the fact that Extraordinary abilities are not restricted to physics - they're non-magical, but that doesn't mean they're 'mundane' or limited to realistic results. (You've heard the 'Roguespace' joke? That's based on the fact that you can still Evasion-dodge something like a Fireball that completely fills the 20x20 spherical room that you're standing in the center of.)

[Captainspork]

I feel like this is a situation where the rules imply one thing, where common sense implies another. How does one evade something the obliterates everything around him, exactly?

Personally, I'd probably rule against it as a DM...but...it's a very grey area. I mean, how does one evade a fireball without moving from their original spot?

Edit: the above post was written while I was posting. Funny that we both went to the same logic

[Perturbulent]

My DM rules that evasion allows minimum damage from a successful reflex save (or half if it happens to be less) if the creature doesn't have cover or something of the like which means it physically can't escape to prevent issues of I got hit with a fireball in the closet but took no damage.

[Lord Vukodlak]

The monk jumped out of the cell just as the wall exploded,(splinters from cannon fire hitting ships didn't really hurt people much Mythbusters test this). Its his class feature and its a **** move to look for ways to take it away from him when none exist.

[Hiro Protagonest]

My DM rules that evasion allows minimum damage from a successful reflex save (or half if it happens to be less) if the creature doesn't have cover or something of the like which means it physically can't escape to prevent issues of I got hit with a fireball in the closet but took no damage.

Does he also require the wizard to set aside time to go fill up on bat poo to fling around?

[AlanBruce]

This makes for an awesome cinematic scenario.

The cell explodes in a ball of fire, wood, iron, and shrapnel.

Your comrades barely have a chance to react as the explosion engulfs them and some barely have time to utter a word which, under the din of cannon fire, can only be guessed as "help!"

However, your training takes precedence over panic. As much as you'd like to save them now, you have confidence that you'll be able to do so later.

Now, you must escape.

Time slows down to a crawl as you analyze the broken chunks of wood coming at you, differentiating the most lethal ones from the tiniest splinters.

Using what little remains of the four walls, you use them to hop around your jail cell as this one collapses, swatting away the debris with hand and foot until a final explosion destroys any standing surface.

Leaping up into the air, you can see behind the remains of your jail cell and can only guess the grisly fate your friends have suffered.

You can also see the ship responsible, a few yards away as your eyes turn to the red ocean below, ablaze with the light of canon fire.

All it takes is a few laps, but you should be able to reach the other ship unseen.

And then... may the gods help those onboard.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Seriously? One of the few situations where a monk can actually do something cool and you want to take it away from him?

For the question: The rules are clear. I see no need to nerf the ability; it is in no way overpowered, it does exactly what it says it does.
You're a hero in a fantasy land of magic and monsters. You get to be awesome every now and then.


My DM rules that evasion allows minimum damage from a successful reflex save (or half if it happens to be less) if the creature doesn't have cover or something of the like which means it physically can't escape to prevent issues of I got hit with a fireball in the closet but took no damage.

If you have cover you don't even need to save against most direct damage area effects. This is just nerfing an ability that, while nice, is certainly not a gamebreaker and tends to be on weaker classes anyway.
This ruling reeks of "mundanes can't have nice things" to me.

[Person_Man]

+1 to NotAnAardvark's comment.

Helplessness is defined in the rules. There's no reason to nerf a player needlessly.

[warrior80]

First off, I am not trying to take anything away from him, I am trying to figure out how others apply the rules in such situations.

Second, even if my group decided to apply the rule that evasion didn't work he would still live through that encounter since its already happened and we wouldn't go back and kill his character.

Third, I am not the DM/GM and was only asking for others clarification. There is no need to get hostile or act like I am taking a child's favorite toy from him.

Fourth, that cinematic write up was awesome. :smallsmile: It is replies like this that make it possible to fuse the common sense and rules more clearly.

I'm sorry if asking a specific question about a feat that rubbed so many of you the wrong way. I thought these forums were meant for discussion of the rules and specifics of the game.

[BowStreetRunner]

I'm sorry if asking a specific question about a feat that rubbed so many of you the wrong way. I thought these forums were meant for discussion of the rules and specifics of the game.

I don't think your post rubbed anyone the wrong way. Really, it seems to me that some of the more impassioned replies were directed more at the earlier replies than at you.

[TuggyNE]

For what it's worth, if you wish to have an Evasion that is not so brain-bustingly counterintuitive, it would probably work better to allow the character to move up to their speed as an immediate action when in the area of a spell; Improved Evasion would then allow them to, say, move up to their speed as a free action that can be taken off turn up to Dex mod times/round.