Step Up out of a flank

[Akari Sayuri "Tiger Lily"]

So had a bit of a weird call made in a game over the weekend by a GM; while I disagreed, I don't like to argue at the table and let it slide at the time (even though it almost got me killed in the following round), but I'm trying to sort out for future reference whether it is a legal maneuver.

This Line Intentionally Left Blank so that Seoni doesn't mess up the below figures :)

So we started out like this (O is ally, # enemy, _ empty space)

___
O#_
_O_

I then moved like this, into flank:
_O_
_#_
_O_

And here is where it got weird. The enemy had Step Up. The GM interpreted my movement as qualifying for 5 foot step away, and then took a 5 foot step out of the flank as such:

_O#
___
_O_

This seems like an extremely odd interpretation of Step Up to me. I always interpreted it as requiring that the enemy move such that they are farther from you than they started, and you move to follow - not as a license to dance around every time someone took a 5 foot step in your vicinity. Which of these interpretations would you say is correct?

[Pink Dragon]

Page 135 Core Rules

Step Up (Combat)
You can close the distance when a foe tries to move away.
Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: Whenever an adjacent foe attempts to take a 5-foot step away from you, you may also make a 5-foot step as an immediate action so long as you end up adjacent to the foe that triggered this ability. If you take this step, you cannot take a 5-foot step during your next turn. If you take an action to move during your next turn, subtract 5 feet from your total movement.

Step up is a 5-foot step that can be taken only once before your next turn, and then you don't get a 5-foot step in the next turn.

[DinosaursOnIce]

I would say the "away" part of the description definitely suggests that Step Up should only trigger if the distance between you and an enemy increases after the movement. Otherwise Step Up and Strike becomes pretty crazy (not that being overpowered is something that in and of itself should determine a rule).

Though it is probably arguable because of the vague nature of "away". Technically there is a definition of away (when used as an adverb) which would make sense from what they ruled "aside; to another place;".

Though I really don't think that is what the intent of the feat is and that definition doesn't make sense in the context of the sentence.

[Claxon]

The question boils down to, does "away" in this case include the movement you made.

Flanking does not actually factor into this question at all.

[Byronus]

Tricky.

I've always understood that Step-Up was designed to counter opponents you threaten who disengage from you with a 5-foot Step, typically into a square you don't threaten. I never even considered the possibility of using Step-Up to avoid being flanked.

As Claxon said, the "away" part is the problem. You moved away from one threatened square onto another threatened square, but you never moved away from the enemy. You went from being beside them, to being beside them at a different location.

Since Step-Up is used to "close the distance when a foe tries to move away," and there is NO distance to close with your 5-foot Step, I'd say the GM was incorrect.

[Gilfalas]

IMO, based on your example, you did NOT move away. You started adjacent to your enemy. You moved 5 feet and ended adjacent to your enemy. Adjacent is not moving away. In fact you started and ended your move at the same distance on the board from your enemy, 5 feet. You never were farther 'away'.

The feat clearly says if you move away FROM THE ENEMY, not from a square the enemy threatens. If your always adjacent to the enemy you cannot be away from it.