[3.5] Does teleportation effects count as movement?

[Blu]

As the tittle said, for the purposes of a Scout skirmish, does teleportation effects count as movement?

[Darrin]

As the tittle said, for the purposes of a Scout skirmish, does teleportation effects count as movement?

If you ask Curmudgeon, no.

Everybody else... usually that's a "yes".

[Necroticplague]

No. If teleporting was movement, it would be subject to the restrictions of movement (including hampered movement and obstacles) rules. So unless you want to argue you're restricted by walls and difficult terrain while teleporting, no dice.

[Dingoman]

I knew I felt deja vu when I saw this thread.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?467547-Does-teleportation-count-as-quot-movement-quot

I'd rule yes, teleportation does trigger scout skirmish. The ability specifically says "deals an extra 1d6 points of damage on all attacks she makes during any round in which she moves at least 10 feet." (emphasis mine). It doesn't say "must take a move action of at least 10 feet", simply "moves at least 10 feet".

[heavyfuel]

I share Necroticplague and Curmugeon's (though thinking about it, I haven't seen him in quite a while) idea. You have to actually move (not necessarily using a move action) for it to count as movement.

However, I normally let Scouts use Anklets of Translocation to activate skirmish, only cuz it is a subpar form of activation (requires pretty large wealth investment, basically restricted to 3x per combat, cannot use improved skirmish with only 10 ft of movement)

[KillianHawkeye]

I'd rule yes, teleportation does trigger scout skirmish. The ability specifically says "deals an extra 1d6 points of damage on all attacks she makes during any round in which she moves at least 10 feet." (emphasis mine). It doesn't say "must take a move action of at least 10 feet", simply "moves at least 10 feet".

The argument isn't about what kind of action you're taking, it's about whether appearing in a different location without moving counts as movement. I would say it doesn't, but it really comes down to your definition of movement. You say "I was in one place, now I'm in another, obviously I have moved." I say that movement is defined as "a change in location over time", and so teleportation and similar effects don't count because they are instantaneous.

I would also argue that the Scout's skirmish ability is primarily based on the added force of momentum, which you don't get when you teleport somewhere, so on that basis it still makes sense to not count it. But then I'd also house-rule that mounted skirmishing works, because you're effectively sharing the movement of your mount, but the RAW says otherwise....

Either way, some people think it should count and others don't, and both sides have a certain logic to their arguments. That's really all there is to say about it.

[Bakkan]

I don't know that this has ever been addressed in RAW, and so I allow teleportation to trigger Skirmish for two reasons.

First, the balance issue: Scouts are not particularly powerful classes, and Skirmish progression is far slower than Sneak Attack progression, so since RAW is vague it makes sense to rule in the Scout's favor.

Second, the verisimilitude issue: Since the direction of the Scout's movement does not affect the Skirmish (it applies just as well if you're moving away from the target as toward it), the extra damage cannot be based on an increase in momentum. The most reasonable explanation I know is that the Scout's movement makes it difficult to know where the next attack is coming from and makes the scout more likely to hit an undefended area of the body. If this is the case, then teleportation should actually work even better than normal movement, as an instantaneous change in location is harder to track than a non-instantaneous one.

[FEARtheFOOFY]

The most reasonable explanation I know is that the Scout's movement makes it difficult to know where the next attack is coming from and makes the scout more likely to hit an undefended area of the body. If this is the case, then teleportation should actually work even better than normal movement, as an instantaneous change in location is harder to track than a non-instantaneous one.

I agree fully with Bakkan. I believe that the RAI for the scout's skirmish ability it based upon changing the angle of attack. As long as he moves at least 10ft (20ft in the case of Improved Skirmish for the extras) from the square he started his round in, skirmish should activate. This is of course IMO and my view of RAI. You should talk to your DM and bring up both points of the argument; but remember, DM's ruling is law, and go with what they say.

[Zancloufer]

It's a rule that has no straight RAW angle, but I would say yes teleportation should count for activating the Skirmish.

First and second are the ideas about why Skirmish damage applies and how the scout sucks (see previous posts).

Third it is not easy to use a teleportation effect AND attack in the same round. Anklets of Translocation, others using their standard action, or dipping Sword-sage are the only ways off the top of my head. Not to mention that Skirmish most of the time is limited to one single attack a round, has more weaknesses and less splat support than sneak attack AND is half the bonus damage.

Also on the note about movement being change in location over time: The definition of movement doesn't always mention a change in location over time, just a change in location. Also I doubt that teleportation is truly instantaneous. It might be effectively instantaneous for the sake of D&D rules but trying to apply real life physics to it, besides being a bad idea, will probably reveal some measure of time even if it is only in pico seconds or some other really small denominator of time.

[heavyfuel]

Also I doubt that teleportation is truly instantaneous. It might be effectively instantaneous for the sake of D&D rules but trying to apply real life physics to it, besides being a bad idea, will probably reveal some measure of time even if it is only in pico seconds or some other really small denominator of time.

Back when teleport effects were part of the Transmutation school, I would have agreed with you, but since 3.5 updated them to Conjuration, you are literally conjuring yourself to a different place.

[The Viscount]

The errata for scout seems to open up the teleportation angle a little more actually (bold indicates change).

She deals an extra 1d6 points of damage on all attacks she makes during any round in which she moves at least 10 feet away from where she was at the start of her turn.

I think it was theoretically supposed to also be to prevent people from stepping out of their square and then back, but it makes the language less precise, which to me gives broader support for teleportation. Also from less of a rules perspective, scout already gets Tumble and Flawless Stride, it's already supposed to be easy for a scout to make the necessary movement. The simplest teleport to make use of this (without shadowpouncing) would be dimension hop, but you're going to need to invest to have enough pp for it, so I don't see a problem.

[Blu]

Well, i know that by balance it is fair to give this one to the scouts, since they could really use a little bump.
My doubt in on the RAW part of this.

[Dingoman]

I think the posters trying to make the RAI argument here really need to read the actual text. In the second paragraph of the Skirmish description it says "The extra damage only applies against living creatures that have a discernible anatomy. [...] The scout must be able to see the target well eough to pick out a vital spot and must be able to reach such a spot."

Skirmish damage applies because Scouts are good at SEEING things, and SHOOTING things. If they teleport to a more advantageous location, they should be able to activate Skirmish and do more damage. It has nothing to do with "the added force of momentum".

[Telok]

One amusing loophole in RAW skirmish is that while riding is out, all other movement is in. Chariots, dog sleds, shoves, and grapple-move-release all work.

[Necroticplague]

One amusing loophole in RAW skirmish is that while riding is out, all other movement is in. Chariots, dog sleds, shoves, and grapple-move-release all work.

Except none of those are moving. They're you being moved. You're not actually doing the moving, something else is, and your just dragged along. That's why mounted skirmish wouldn't work even if it wasn't explicitly disallowed, as that's the mount moving, not you. You have to move 10 feet, not be moved 10 feet.

Also, skirmish measures from start of round to present, so things that involve the actions of others won't work unless readied actions are used.

[Deophaun]

"The Spacing Guild and its navigators, who the spice has mutated over 4,000 years, use the orange spice gas, which gives them the ability to fold space. That is, travel to any part of universe without moving."

"Get down. Right on. Get down. I know all we're doing is traveling without moving. Hey, hey. I know all we're doing is traveling without moving. Can't Stop."

Jamiroquai and one of the greatest sci-fi books of all times say "no." I defer to their judgement.

Although Goku makes a convincing counter argument (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMYkopRAA-Q&t=4m44s).

[KillianHawkeye]

Although Goku makes a convincing counter argument (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMYkopRAA-Q&t=4m44s).

As much as I love me some DBZ Abridged, I don't think this qualifies as a counter argument. Unless you're suggesting that Goku is getting bonus Skirmish damage, in which case my retort would be that DBZ is clearly operating on some kind of Attack VS Dodge system wherein surprise negates dodging so hard as to be considered an OP strategy, and that's so totally different from the way D&D works as to be inadmissible in the context of this discussion.

Thanks, though. I'd only watched the new episode twice so far. :smallsmile:

[Deophaun]

As much as I love me some DBZ Abridged, I don't think this qualifies as a counter argument. Unless you're suggesting that Goku is getting bonus Skirmish damage, in which case my retort would be that DBZ is clearly operating on some kind of Attack VS Dodge system wherein surprise negates dodging so hard as to be considered an OP strategy
Where the heck would you get that...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvS6zMThiZU
Oh...

[Dante Daylight]

My wife plays an elven scout/ranger(swift hunter) and i debatet with my dm exactly about this question (i was going to advise her to take 1 level in wizard for abrupt jaunt because she has high int).

In his opinion it would be valid to say skirmish with teleport would be plausible RAI but RAW it doesn't qualify because she is moved but not moving.

He said he would had judged it differently if she wasn't already our best damage dealer at every enemy where she can apply her skirmish with her bow (she has some tricks for extra attacks or swift action movement per day already).

We are all fine with this.

[Crake]

Except none of those are moving. They're you being moved. You're not actually doing the moving, something else is, and your just dragged along. That's why mounted skirmish wouldn't work even if it wasn't explicitly disallowed, as that's the mount moving, not you. You have to move 10 feet, not be moved 10 feet.

Also, skirmish measures from start of round to present, so things that involve the actions of others won't work unless readied actions are used.

The language of skirmish makes no mention of who needs to do the moving, it doesn't say "If the scout moves himself", just "if the scout moves". You could provoke an attack of opportunity, only to be hit by a goliath barbarian with knockback, sending you back 20 feet, and trigger skirmish off that for all it matters.

[ben-zayb]

The skirmish ability
cannot be used while mounted.

And geez, people, displacement =/= movement. You know, because the former just grants a miss chance.

[Necroticplague]

The language of skirmish makes no mention of who needs to do the moving, it doesn't say "If the scout moves himself", just "if the scout moves". You could provoke an attack of opportunity, only to be hit by a goliath barbarian with knockback, sending you back 20 feet, and trigger skirmish off that for all it matters.

Except 'if the scout moves' is active. The scout is actively moving. That's quiete difference from the passive 'when the scout is moved'. In order for all those things to work, it would have to be the latter. Which it isn't.

[Deophaun]

Except 'if the scout moves' is active. The scout is actively moving.
No. Forced movement is still you moving; what provides the motive force is irrelevant. It still provokes attacks of opportunity and it still triggers skirmish. This is why errata was added to prevent skirmish from working while mounted.

Although on that topic, if teleportation counts as movement to trigger skirmish, it would also count as movement to trigger AoOs as well.

[Necroticplague]

No. Forced movement is still you moving; what provides the motive force is irrelevant. It still provokes attacks of opportunity and it still triggers skirmish. This is why errata was added to prevent skirmish from working while mounted.

Although on that topic, if teleportation counts as movement to trigger skirmish, it would also count as movement to trigger AoOs as well.

1. Forced movement in not moving, it's being moved. It's the difference between attacking and being attacked. This argument is like saying that something that triggers when you attack triggers when someone else attacks you.

2. Forced movement doesn't provoke AoO, because only actions provoke.

Provoking an Attack of Opportunity
Two kinds of actions can provoke attacks of opportunity: moving out of a threatened square and performing an action within a threatened square.
So if it's not an action, it doesn't provoke. Being knocked back isn't an action. Ergo....

[Blu]

So far the only quotes i find on the SRD about movement on here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm) and here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm):

A character who moves his or her speed[...]
[...]effectively reducing the distance that a character can cover in a move.


Generally, you can move your speed in a round and still do something (take a move action and a standard action).
If you do nothing but move (that is, if you use both of your actions in a round to move your speed), you can move double your speed.
If you spend the entire round running, you can move quadruple your speed. If you do something that requires a full round you can only take a 5-foot step.

The SRD doesn't define exactly what is considered movement but this quotes associate the act of moving with regular movement speeds, but is still kind of unclear.

[Deophaun]

1. Forced movement in not moving, it's being moved.
BEING MOVED is MOVING. You are making a distinction without a difference.

2. Forced movement doesn't provoke AoO, because only actions provoke.
Well, this is flat out wrong for several reasons.

Number 1: you are adding the word "only" to a quote where it does not exist.
Number 2: an "action" is not game defined. There is no glossary term for it, so if it was "only," so what?
Number 3: The rules for bull rushing say otherwise.

Classic case of splitting a hair to reach a pre-defined conclusion, even though there are multiple instances throughout the game that says the hair is not to be split.

[Dagroth]

The obvious RAI point of Skirmish requiring 10' of movement is to limit it to 1 attack per round. There are a few obvious methods to gain more attacks (Snap Kick, various 2-weapon maneuvers from ToB, Rapid Shot).

One of the more overlooked methods is the Training Dummy of the Master.

A rather expensive item from the Arms & Equipment Manual that requires the user to train with it for a time. After doing so, the user can then make a 10' "adjustment" whenever they could normally make a 5' "adjustment".

Further, the Training Dummy (while obviously intended for Monks) has no clear class restrictions and is not consumed by use. So a party could all go in on buying one, all train with it, and then sell it for the 25%-40% resell rate.

[Necroticplague]

BEING MOVED is MOVING. You are making a distinction without a difference.
No, they are not. Again, that's like saying attacking and being attacked are the same thing. There's a large difference between being the actor, and being the subject. Was Lincoln shooting in a theater, or was he shot in a theater?


Number 1: you are adding the word "only" to a quote where it does not exist.
Because is never says things that aren't actions provoke. If it says kinda of actions provoke, without saying non-actions provoke, the 'only' is appropriate.


Number 2: an "action" is not game defined. There is no glossary term for it, so if it was "only," so what?
Actually, it is, and there is (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_action&alpha=).


Number 3: The rules for bull rushing say otherwise. An exception to the general rule doesn't prove the general rule doesn't exist. That some spells don't provoke AoOs to cast doesn't make all spells not provoke to cast.

[Crake]

2. Forced movement doesn't provoke AoO, because only actions provoke.

Looks like someone's confusing 3.5 with 5e, because in 3.5, yes, forced movement does provoke. Check the bull rush rules:


Note: The defender provokes attacks of opportunity if he is moved. So do you, if you move with him. The two of you do not provoke attacks of opportunity from each other, however.

Knockback functions just like a bull rush except you don't follow your victim.

Also, everything that happens in the game is an action, by the very definition of the word action. Whether you're doing it, it's being done to you, or the environment acts upon you. Just because you weren't the source of the action doesn't mean you don't provoke.

Edit: This does kinda stumble onto the crux of the issue here though: If teleporting is considered moving, then teleporting out of a threatened square should provoke. If you treat teleportation as movement for the purposes of scout skirmish, then you should also have them provoke.

[KillianHawkeye]

I already said that it all comes down to whether you define teleportation as movement. Some do, some don't. Everyone's just arguing in circles now. :smallannoyed::smallsigh:

[Deophaun]

No, they are not. Again, that's like saying attacking and being attacked are the same thing. There's a large difference between being the actor, and being the subject. Was Lincoln shooting in a theater, or was he shot in a theater?
Yes, they are. You're trying to conflate a difference between mover and moved as the difference between moving and being moved. Instead, you are using "move" in a way that no native speaker of the English language uses it. If the signal on a cell phone is moving, does that mean the cell phone grew legs and is roaming the area? Train cars do not move, only the engine does? This camera is not moving (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfxdeRx2fLA)?

Your argument is ridiculous on its face. But hey, you have a pre-determined conclusion to reach, so screw language.

Because is never says things that aren't actions provoke. If it says kinda of actions provoke, without saying non-actions provoke, the 'only' is appropriate.
It says if you move out of a threatened square, you provoke. It now has to EXPLICITLY SAY you do not provoke if you are forced to move. Which it does in the rules for Bull Rushing, where it says you don't provoke from each other. Simply giving another way to provoke doesn't make other ways to provoke null and void.

Actually, it is, and there is (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_action&alpha=).
Great. So forced movement is not an action. And, according to you, there are only two types of actions that provoke. But, since you've now stated that forced movement isn't an action, forced movement provoking does not run counter to it, because forced movement is not a third type of provoking action; it's a provoking non-action. Thus, there is no conflict.

An exception to the general rule doesn't prove the general rule doesn't exist. That some spells don't provoke AoOs to cast doesn't make all spells not provoke to cast.
It's not an exception to the general rule. Your general rule is non-exclusive. Melee weapons deal damage on a hit is a general rule. That does not mean that only melee weapons can deal damage, or that a rule stating ranged weapons deal damage on a hit suddenly makes the melee weapons do nothing.

[Necroticplague]

I'm not arguing the rule is exclusive of that situation*. I'm arguing that it's not inclusive of it.
'It's not excluded, therefore, it's included' is ridiculous on its face. Where does it say humans don't have a D.C. 50 Fort save vs death touch attack?
To go back to your weapon analogy, I would not assume anything does damage unless it says it does. Similarly, I will assume nothing provokes unless it says it does. And that particular rule about moving, that is inclusive of some situations, is not inclusive of forced movement. So, while a forced movement may provoke (as it does in the case of Bull Rush), that requires its own rules, as that section is only about what kinds of actions provoke, not what kinds of things that aren't actions provoke.

*=that would, itself, require explicit language not in the body of rules, to the best of my knowledge.