Booming Blade + Standing up from prone = Trigger?

[RulesJD]

Booming Blade secondary triggers when the target "willingly moves". If a prone enemy has been struck by BB and then stands up, does that trigger?

Standing up from prone uses 1/2 your movement, ergo it seems to be part of movement. If your speed is zero and you're prone, you can't stand up.

Mechanically, it definitely would seem to trigger. With that said, it seems a bit strong and synergies with things like Shield Master way, way too well.

[Desamir]

According to Jeremy Crawford, standing up from prone does not trigger Booming Blade (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/11/09/booming-blade-stand-up/).

[Malifice]

According to Jeremy Crawford, standing up from prone does not trigger Booming Blade (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/11/09/booming-blade-stand-up/).

Intresting. I would have ruled the other way.

[brainface]

Well, it seems obvious it's intended to discourage opponents from moving away from you, not to be an easy source of high damage.

(Also, clearly not all "movement" triggers it, in that your opponent can try to stab you, breath, do jumping jacks and so on.)

[Malifice]

Well, it seems obvious it's intended to discourage opponents from moving away from you, not to be an easy source of high damage.

(Also, clearly not all "movement" triggers it, in that your opponent can try to stab you, breath, do jumping jacks and so on.)

Good point re the last sentence.

[JakOfAllTirades]

Seriously? The fact that standing up "uses half your movement" in no way implies that it actually means you've moved anywhere. It just reduces the amount of movement left to you in that turn after you've stood up. You're quite obviously still in the same square, and if you tried to use this rule to claim otherwise, (Hey, the book says standing up uses half my movement, so I can stand up 15' from where I fell down!) you'd get called out for being an idiot, a rules lawyer, or both.

That's not how it works.

[RulesJD]

According to Jeremy Crawford, standing up from prone does not trigger Booming Blade (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/11/09/booming-blade-stand-up/).

Gracious, that's what I figured but wasn't sure.

[SwordChuck]

If moving = using movement then yeah it should trigger. I think it was an oversight by the dev team and the tweet covers their butts for making a mistake.

[coredump]

I always assumed it would not trigger BB; you are not moving, you are just using some of your movement to stand up.

Glad to see JC clarified it that way.

[RulesJD]

It still works insanely well with Shield Master. BB the target, then shove backwards. Not as useful, but still gets the job done decently.

Alternatively, and more situational, can shove prone the target, BB, then step back. You'll eat an Opp Attack but at disadvantage and the target still has to decide to reengage if no reach.

[obeseboywonder]

It still works insanely well with Shield Master. BB the target, then shove backwards. Not as useful, but still gets the job done decently.

Alternatively, and more situational, can shove prone the target, BB, then step back. You'll eat an Opp Attack but at disadvantage and the target still has to decide to reengage if no reach.

Shield Master's bonus action shove requires the Attack action, not the Cast a Spell action that Booming Blade uses. You would need Action Surge (or maybe Haste?) to use the shove the same turn you use Booming Blade.

On a side not, an Eldritch Knight could use War Magic to shove after Booming Blade, but a regular attack is probably more useful.

[RulesJD]

Shield Master's bonus action shove requires the Attack action, not the Cast a Spell action that Booming Blade uses. You would need Action Surge (or maybe Haste?) to use the shove the same turn you use Booming Blade.

On a side not, an Eldritch Knight could use War Magic to shove after Booming Blade, but a regular attack is probably more useful.

Good catch, thank you. Disappointing.

Just need to find a way to get Lightning damage on a weapon and be a level 6 Tempest Cleric...

[SwordChuck]

Good catch, thank you. Disappointing.

Just need to find a way to get Lightning damage on a weapon and be a level 6 Tempest Cleric...

Do note that you can do the Shove before the Attack action though. The feat was created before the rules about bonus action being able to be taken at any time. I believe it was JC that mentioned this somewhere.

[Theodoxus]

One reason I prefer it on a rogue (swashbuckler is ideal (though requires a feat, MC or starting as a High(half)Elf), but any work). BB, then disengage. Let the fool decide if an extra xD8 is worth moving up to you... of course, it really only works on melee focused opponents, anything with range will shrug and fill you full of arrows or spells...

But then, this is supposed to be a cooperative game, right? Why stack the BB and shieldbash on the same character? Let the Paladin/Fighter/Barbarian bash the guy down, and you BB with advantage and then dance away (letting the P/F/B get the disad OA - this is ideal on a AT rogue, no?)

Honestly, I think the cantrip is OP, and nearly a must have for any rogue...

[SwordChuck]

One reason I prefer it on a rogue (swashbuckler is ideal (though requires a feat, MC or starting as a High(half)Elf), but any work). BB, then disengage. Let the fool decide if an extra xD8 is worth moving up to you... of course, it really only works on melee focused opponents, anything with range will shrug and fill you full of arrows or spells...

But then, this is supposed to be a cooperative game, right? Why stack the BB and shieldbash on the same character? Let the Paladin/Fighter/Barbarian bash the guy down, and you BB with advantage and then dance away (letting the P/F/B get the disad OA - this is ideal on a AT rogue, no?)

Honestly, I think the cantrip is OP, and nearly a must have for any rogue...

You stack your character in such a way as you can do the exact tactic you want. Then, if the other members make a character that has part of your tactic, retrain or have your character's cousin Jazzy Jeff take its place where you aren't as stacked.

Or plan your characters together, not based on class but based on abilities.

[MeeposFire]

If moving = using movement then yeah it should trigger. I think it was an oversight by the dev team and the tweet covers their butts for making a mistake.

I don't think there is actually any statement that specifically says that using up your movement speed without changing position is considered top be moving. Granted the vast majority of the time you do change positions when you use up your movement so it often is the same thing but standing up from prone does not change your position so it would be the exception. Considering that it is clear that a more general reading of movement (such as moving your arms to make an attack) does not set off booming blade extra damage then standing up is more akin to that since your position.

To make your idea plausible I think you need to find an instance in the rules where they specifically say that using movement without actually change your position counts as "movement" and not just a reduction of what movement you could potentially do in the future. Otherwise in this case I think Crawford has a decent leg to stand on.

[SwordChuck]

I don't think there is actually any statement that specifically says that using up your movement speed without changing position is considered top be moving. Granted the vast majority of the time you do change positions when you use up your movement so it often is the same thing but standing up from prone does not change your position so it would be the exception. Considering that it is clear that a more general reading of movement (such as moving your arms to make an attack) does not set off booming blade extra damage then standing up is more akin to that since your position.

To make your idea plausible I think you need to find an instance in the rules where they specifically say that using movement without actually change your position counts as "movement" and not just a reduction of what movement you could potentially do in the future. Otherwise in this case I think Crawford has a decent leg to stand on.

You are changing positions and you are moving. More so than just attacking, casting, or whatever else.

Going from prone to standing isn't staying still. If you stayed still then you would still be in the position that you started in. 5e uses plain English.

I don't really scare either way as I don't use that spell, I just find it interesting that they didn't think of a common martial ability (proning a target) when making this spell and are now covering their butts for a glaring mistake.

If using your movement to move from prone to standing doesn't count, then it shouldn't count if I use my movement to jump or climb vertically. I'm apparently not moving,

Saying that prone to standing isn't moving is getting into fiddly rules territory and I don't play with fiddly rules anymore. They should have made it clear from the beginning and stop going down the 3e/4e trap of bad editing.

[georgie_leech]

You are changing positions and you are moving. More so than just attacking, casting, or whatever else.

Going from prone to standing isn't staying still. If you stayed still then you would still be in the position that you started in. 5e uses plain English.

I don't really scare either way as I don't use that spell, I just find it interesting that they didn't think of a common martial ability (proning a target) when making this spell and are now covering their butts for a glaring mistake.

If using your movement to move from prone to standing doesn't count, then it shouldn't count if I use my movement to jump or climb vertically. I'm apparently not moving,

Saying that prone to standing isn't moving is getting into fiddly rules territory and I don't play with fiddly rules anymore. They should have made it clear from the beginning and stop going down the 3e/4e trap of bad editing.

So to make sure they avoid any instances of unclear wording, they need to use specific language instead of plain English. That way they can keep the plain English instead of using overly fiddly rules.

...K :smallconfused:

[Dalebert]

Good combo with warlocks with repelling blast and druids with thorn whip also. More of course. That's just off the top of my head. Open hand monks have a shove too, right?

[ryan92084]

Good combo with warlocks with repelling blast and druids with thorn whip also. More of course. That's just off the top of my head. Open hand monks have a shove too, right?

IIRC booming blade requires "willing" movement so shove/pull mechanics wouldn't trigger the effect. Dissonant whispers is the only thing I can think of that might force a trigger but that isn't particularly "willing" either. Maybe crown of madness so they could avoid attacking a friend? Barbarians might need to move to not lose rage?

[SwordChuck]

So to make sure they avoid any instances of unclear wording, they need to use specific language instead of plain English. That way they can keep the plain English instead of using overly fiddly rules.

...K :smallconfused:

Plain english can't be specific? What, do we need to all play the pronoun game? That's going to be a lot of sins.

The issue here is that they used plain English and then didn't like what plain English said, after the fact, so they made the tweet. The spell should have been specific in its wording or the term movement should have been more specific to begin with if we are going to pretend that vertical movement (standing up, jumping, or climbing) doesn't trigger the spell.

The spell should have used plain English to begin with. Using your movement is moving, if it ain't then we aren't using plain english anymore. The errata via Twitter is the opposite of plain english, it makes the rules more fiddly.

[Dalebert]

IIRC booming blade requires "willing" movement so shove/pull mechanics wouldn't trigger the effect. Dissonant whispers is the only thing I can think of that might force a trigger but that isn't particularly "willing" either. Maybe crown of madness so they could avoid attacking a friend? Barbarians might need to move to not lose rage?

I don't have the SCAG at my fingertips at the moment but I don't recall reading anything like that in the spell description. It seems very counter-intuitive. You're surrounded by thunder energy and if you pass through it, you are affected by it. Does the energy read your mind and get your consent or move out of the way first?

[SwordChuck]

I don't have the SCAG at my fingertips at the moment but I don't recall reading anything like that in the spell description. It seems very counter-intuitive. You're surrounded by thunder energy and if you pass through it, you are affected by it. Does the energy read your mind and get your consent or move out of the way first?

As a general rule, forced movement doesn't provoke OA and maybe other triggers that are based around a creature moving.

I'll have to look at booming blade again but it may not work with forced movement.

[RulesJD]

Forced movement does NOT trigger BB.

However, if you shove someone 5ft away that has BB on them for that round, they have to make the choice of moving back into melee range on their turn or standing there and not being in range to melee you back.

[Dalebert]

Forced movement does NOT trigger BB.

I stand corrected (see what I did there?), but it still seems weird to me. I was picturing it as energy surrounding their space and preventing them from passing through the energy. Now I don't know how to fluff it.

[SwordChuck]

I stand corrected (see what I did there?), but it still seems weird to me. I was picturing it as energy surrounding their space and preventing them from passing through the energy. Now I don't know how to fluff it.

Lasso of energy type set up. If someone pushes the target the energy can lengthen like a rope or whatever because the energies weren't made to deal with outside forces. But if the target breaks the lasso of energy by moving that is when the magic works?

[georgie_leech]

Plain english can't be specific? What, do we need to all play the pronoun game? That's going to be a lot of sins.

The issue here is that they used plain English and then didn't like what plain English said, after the fact, so they made the tweet. The spell should have been specific in its wording or the term movement should have been more specific to begin with if we are going to pretend that vertical movement (standing up, jumping, or climbing) doesn't trigger the spell.

The spell should have used plain English to begin with. Using your movement is moving, if it ain't then we aren't using plain english anymore. The errata via Twitter is the opposite of plain english, it makes the rules more fiddly.

Or, they mean movement in the sense of changing your relative position. You were adjacent, now you're not; you were in front of me, now you're to the left; you were at the same height, now you've flown upwards. A clean, sensible interpretation that doesn't run into the spell triggering off of doing anything at all because it involves you "moving" or the spell detecting changes in the meta-resource "movement." "Plain English" isn't at all the same as "how you first read it."

EDIT: Consider a mounted target, which uses the mounts movement to move instead of their own. Under your interpretation, they wouldn't trigger Booming Blade because their movement isn't used up, the mount's is. Is that how you want the spell to work?

[SwordChuck]

Or, they mean movement in the sense of changing your relative position. You were adjacent, now you're not; you were in front of me, now you're to the left; you were at the same height, now you've flown upwards. A clean, sensible interpretation that doesn't run into the spell triggering off of doing anything at all because it involves you "moving" or the spell detecting changes in the meta-resource "movement." "Plain English" isn't at all the same as "how you first read it."

EDIT: Consider a mounted target, which uses the mounts movement to move instead of their own. Under your interpretation, they wouldn't trigger Booming Blade because their movement isn't used up, the mount's is. Is that how you want the spell to work?

So moving your body 5' up isn't the same as moving your body 5' horizontal?

No. That makes less than 0 sense.

This can lead to some winky x/y versus z axis fiddly bullcrap rulings. Moving is using your movement, doesn't matter if you are jumping, raising up from prone, or dashing 30'.

They can say they mean whatever they want, but that just means they need to edit their books better so we don't have the 3e/4e issue yet again. Either use plain English or don't but at least be consistent or clear.

It just seems like backpedaling to me. They meant one thing, didn't think it through, then said they meant another thing to try and make the feature balanced (for whatever that is worth in this game).

[Dalebert]

It seems like it should be one or the other but not neither. If it's based on intent to move, getting up from prone should trigger it. If it's based on a significant change in your location, forced movement that takes you out of your square should trigger it. Oh well. It is what it is.

[ryan92084]

It seems like it should be one or the other but not neither. If it's based on intent to move, getting up from prone should trigger it. If it's based on a significant change in your location, forced movement that takes you out of your square should trigger it. Oh well. It is what it is.

I guess it could be electric damage and fluff it as some such about overloading the nerves in their legs/wings and they are hit with crippling pain if those appendages are exerted to perform more than 5ft of movement. The mother of charlie horses.

It'd also make sense as a sort of psychic spell. "The creature is wracked with a crippling fear of moving from this spot. If they choose to overcome this fear and willingly move 5ft or more in any direction they take psychic damage" or similar.

[SwordChuck]

It seems like it should be one or the other but not neither. If it's based on intent to move, getting up from prone should trigger it. If it's based on a significant change in your location, forced movement that takes you out of your square should trigger it. Oh well. It is what it is.

That's 5e for you and why it seems like they are backpedaling.

This is so simular to 3e issues that it's kinda scary.

[MaxWilson]

It seems like it should be one or the other but not neither. If it's based on intent to move, getting up from prone should trigger it. If it's based on a significant change in your location, forced movement that takes you out of your square should trigger it. Oh well. It is what it is.

It is what it is, but of course your own game is what it is too. You don't have to follow rulings from Crawford if you don't want to. Even Crawford says so.


Dealing with those situations is where Sage Advice comes in. This column doesn’t replace a DM’s adjudication. Just as the rules do, the column is meant to give DMs, as well as players, tools for tuning the game according to their tastes. The column should also reveal some perspectives that help you see parts of the game in a new light and that aid you in fine-tuning your D&D experience.

Emphasis added.

So, Sage Advice outright says that if you have a better idea for Booming Blade--and clearly you have at least two--you should use that instead.

[SwordChuck]

It is what it is, but of course your own game is what it is too. You don't have to follow rulings from Crawford if you don't want to. Even Crawford says so.



Emphasis added.

So, Sage Advice outright says that if you have a better idea for Booming Blade--and clearly you have at least two--you should use that instead.

Just because rule 0 is a thing doesn't mean that it should be used as the answer to everything.

Players come to the game with a baseline expectation, that the game runs by the rules, if you are going to throw out the rules anytime you don't agree with them... Well, why are you playing D&D instead of Calvin Ball?

So while rule 0 is an option, it should be the last resort or a temporary fix to a problem.

[JoeJ]

So moving your body 5' up isn't the same as moving your body 5' horizontal?

No. That makes less than 0 sense.

This can lead to some winky x/y versus z axis fiddly bullcrap rulings. Moving is using your movement, doesn't matter if you are jumping, raising up from prone, or dashing 30'.

They can say they mean whatever they want, but that just means they need to edit their books better so we don't have the 3e/4e issue yet again. Either use plain English or don't but at least be consistent or clear.

It just seems like backpedaling to me. They meant one thing, didn't think it through, then said they meant another thing to try and make the feature balanced (for whatever that is worth in this game).

The ruling makes perfect sense. Using your movement is a meta-game concept, not something that happens in-world. For the purposes of the spell, "moving" is changing your location. Standing up doesn't trigger it for the same reason that stabbing the person next to you doesn't; you're still in the same place.

[Dalebert]

But it's neither. It's thunder damage.

[E’Tallitnics]

That's 5e for you and why it seems like they are backpedaling.

This is so simular to 3e issues that it's kinda scary.

They not backpedaling. The OP used the wrong term. I've found that it's very helpful to double check things that people say on forums, as they're frequently wrong or just misunderstood.

In 5e Speed is different from Movement, although they are closely related.

A perfect example of this is the Dash action. When you take it you increase your Speed by an amount equal to your current Speed, including all modifiers. You do not actually Move anywhere however.

The rules for standing up from Prone (PH, p.191) clearly state that it uses half of your Speed. That page also clearly states that while prone your only option to Move is to Crawl.

You only Move when you change location using your own Speed (that's the "…willingly moves…" part), as opposed to being forcibly moved, which never uses your own Speed.

[MaxWilson]

A perfect example of this is the Dash action. When you take it you increase your Speed by an amount equal to your current Speed, including all modifiers. You do not actually Move anywhere however.

That's actually backwards. You gain movement but do not change your speed. Rules quote:


When you take the Dash action, you gain extra movement for your current turn. The increase equals your speed, after applying any modifiers.

Further,


The rules for standing up from Prone (PH, p.191) clearly state that it uses half of your Speed. That page also clearly states that while prone your only option to Move is to Crawl.

You only Move when you change location using your own Speed (that's the "…willingly moves…" part), as opposed to being forcibly moved, which never uses your own Speed.

This is also backwards. Standing up from being prone uses movement (just like moving around does), it doesn't alter your speed. Quote:


Standing up takes more effort; doing so costs an amount of movement equal to half your speed. For example, if your speed is 30 feet, you must spend 15 feet of movement to stand up. You can't stand up if you don't have enough movement left or if your speed is 0.

Implication: if you have 30' movement, and you stand up from being prone, you can Dash for a total of 45' more movement after standing up.

[JackPhoenix]

I stand corrected (see what I did there?), but it still seems weird to me. I was picturing it as energy surrounding their space and preventing them from passing through the energy. Now I don't know how to fluff it.

In that case, it would trigger when the enemy tried to attack someone or someone attacked him in melee. Honestly, BB is just weird, it's got the dissociated mechanic feel from 4e, when the abilites had a mechanical effect, but no reasonable representation in the game world. I can't think of any 5e spell that's got a similar problem. What the **** is booming energy anyway?

[SpawnOfMorbo]

In that case, it would trigger when the enemy tried to attack someone or someone attacked him in melee. Honestly, BB is just weird, it's got the dissociated mechanic feel from 4e, when the abilites had a mechanical effect, but no reasonable representation in the game world. I can't think of any 5e spell that's got a similar problem. What the **** is booming energy anyway?

Boom Tube technology obviously runs on Booming Energy so if you start your search there you may find your answer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boom_tube

No clear explanation except for "stems from the waves of the mind" whatever the hell that means... Psychic energies perhaps?

[Theodoxus]

What the **** is booming energy anyway?

That's been my question too. I even asked if it was known to the target that it would explode if they moved. It's a pretty meta question, but if you've never encountered booming blade before, is it obvious when surrounded by 'shimmering energy' that moving will make it explode? I'm inclined to say 'yes.' Much like Witch Bolt, you should know that moving out of it will cause it to cease... now, WB and BB together? Hmm... damned if you do (1d8+), damned if you don't (1d12) hehe.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

That's been my question too. I even asked if it was known to the target that it would explode if they moved. It's a pretty meta question, but if you've never encountered booming blade before, is it obvious when surrounded by 'shimmering energy' that moving will make it explode? I'm inclined to say 'yes.' Much like Witch Bolt, you should know that moving out of it will cause it to cease... now, WB and BB together? Hmm... damned if you do (1d8+), damned if you don't (1d12) hehe.

Hmm, could be a nice dual PC combo. One chick has booming blade and one dude has witch bolt...

Then have a Strength based Rogue to keep shoving the creature prone so even if they do stand up and then walk away they can only move at half speed...

Warlock, Cleric, Rogue, and I want to say Fighter...

Cleric: Spiritual Weapon + Spirit Guardians + Sacred Flame
Warlock: Witch Bolt + Hex (Strength or Dexterity)
Fighter: Booming Blade (War Magic perhaps)
Rogue: Shove (Athletics Expertise) BA + Attack Action Sneak Attack

Edit: Would take a couple rounds to get the cleric going but hot damn this would be a great team to keep an enemy from moving...

[rlc]

Seriously? The fact that standing up "uses half your movement" in no way implies that it actually means you've moved anywhere. It just reduces the amount of movement left to you in that turn after you've stood up. You're quite obviously still in the same square, and if you tried to use this rule to claim otherwise, (Hey, the book says standing up uses half my movement, so I can stand up 15' from where I fell down!) you'd get called out for being an idiot, a rules lawyer, or both.

That's not how it works.

Well, I mean, if we're being facetious, then crawling 15 feet and standing up is standing up 15 feet from where you fell, so you kind of can.