Cabrien's page

You're getting the correct answer to the question you asked, but you're pushing back against that response. That's the negative response you're getting. You're looking for a rules lawyer-y explanation for something that doesn't need it as it's already covered in the rules.

I'm literally thanking people for their responses, at every step. The only negativity in my responses is me reacting to the negativity and not understanding why I'm getting this kind of response. I think this conversation has run its course. Thank you for everybody that participated.

With the example pointed out, I think that the OP is being rules lawyery to the point that is destructive to the game.

Why would Pushing Gust work any differently than Hydraulic Push? They do nearly the same thing with a different element.

As the OP has a odd fixation on wording over purpose, I would point out the wording in the 'Push' entry in the universal monster rules.

Bestiary wrote:

The monster automatically knocks the target away from the monster. Unless otherwise noted in the ability description, the creature is pushed 5 feet. If the attack was a critical hit, this distance is doubled.

While this could definitely be considered the flavor text part, the wording of "knock(s)(ed) x" does not seem unique to Hydraulic Push.

Also, I would point out that the CRB and other books are notorious for having wording inconsistencies that lead away from intent. My favorite example is the old Stave wording in regard to property runes. It was specifically called out to be allowed. With the errata and now even the SoM, it has been made abundantly clear that property runes on Staves were unintended.

Hinging rulings on word minutia over sensibility is an odd way to play. But, if that is your cup of tea, have at it!

Guys, I'm literally just asking for input and collecting data. Just discussing a rule on a game forum meant to discuss rules. I was curious how other people ran it.

I appreciate people that gave examples. I've never indicated anything about my intent or feeling on the matter. I'm getting a negative response for asking a question on a rules forum.

Cabrien wrote:

Aw3som3-117 wrote:

Cabrien wrote:

Well, again... I appreciate your insight.

'Pushed or pulled' do seem like states that characters (or monsters) can be in and there are specific rules to apply to them when they're in those states. So I'm curious if anybody else has any insight.

My insights are that "In all cases" is pretty clear...

Pushed or pulled could in theory be a key word in some cases, but it doesn't really matter, because we have an absolute statement right afterward. "In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature"

Yes, there's the qualifier "if there's any doubt", but first of all that's a very generic qualifier that can apply to pretty much anything, and secondly, you're asking about it here, soooo... there's doubt. Otherwise there'd be no reason to ask.

This is the GM asking for additional opinions so he's better informed to make that call.

Okay, but that doesn't really change what I'm saying. It sounds like you're looking for a definitive answer as to what counts as "pushed or pulled" while my whole point is that it says pretty clearly that that's decided by the GM. There's nothing I can do to help you make a more informed RAW decision when the RAW is that you should use your own judgement.

Right. You gave your thoughts. I let you know I appreciated those thoughts.

Looking forward to more people's insight.

Cabrien wrote:

Well, again... I appreciate your insight.

'Pushed or pulled' do seem like states that characters (or monsters) can be in and there are specific rules to apply to them when they're in those states. So I'm curious if anybody else has any insight.

My insights are that "In all cases" is pretty clear...

Pushed or pulled could in theory be a key word in some cases, but it doesn't really matter, because we have an absolute statement right afterward. "In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature"

Yes, there's the qualifier "if there's any doubt", but first of all that's a very generic qualifier that can apply to pretty much anything, and secondly, you're asking about it here, soooo... there's doubt. Otherwise there'd be no reason to ask.

This is the GM asking for additional opinions so he's better informed to make that call.

The game lays out for us that only capitalized or otherwise emphasized words are referring to specific game terms defined elsewhere in the book. This means that any non-emphasized words are just words and mean whatever they would normally mean when used in the given context.

That opens the door to the authors not having to be so specific about their wording as to not be able to use synonyms or phrases with the same meaning despite different wording, as is the case with "knocked back 5 feet" and "pushed 5 feet" - both mean the same thing because that's how words work, and we don't need to invent a reason to treat them differently as that's just not the style in which this game is written.

I appreciate the response.

To be fair, if you looks at spells or abilities that deal with hazardous terrain or difficult terrain, those words are not capitalized in the body of the spell either.

Also, the 'Push' creature ability has the requirement of a strike with Push in the damage entry ('Push' is even capitalized in the body.)

I hope it's not coming off that I'm inventing a reason to treat the two words differently. I haven't even shared my thoughts on how I think it should be ruled. I just want to figure out what the intention was when it was designed. If anybody has that insight.

Well, again... I appreciate your insight.

'Pushed or pulled' do seem like states that characters (or monsters) can be in and there are specific rules to apply to them when they're in those states. So I'm curious if anybody else has any insight.

I appreciate your insight, but all too often the keyword does make the difference in a ruling. I did use my discretion (when it came up at the table). Everybody had a great time and we had a lot of laughs. Now I'm getting additional opinions to make sure I'm reasonably confident on how I rule on it in the future.

The Forced Movement rules specifically state that there is a distinction and the spell not having it is what gives me pause.

The Hydraulic Push effect reads:
The target takes 3d6 bludgeoning damage and is knocked back 5 feet

Forced Movement reads:
If you’re pushed or pulled, you can usually be moved through hazardous terrain, pushed off a ledge, or the like. Abilities that reposition you in some other way can’t put you in such dangerous places unless they specify otherwise. In all cases, the GM makes the final call if there’s doubt on where forced movement can move a creature.

For comparison...

Pushing Gust reads:
The target is pushed 5 feet away from you.

Do you think it is the intention that Hydraulic Push doesn't use the 'push' effect (instead uses 'knocked back') or is it an oversight?

Context:
With the Forced Movement rules, it seems that Hydraulic push cannot be used to send an enemy off of a ledge or into a snare, but Pushing Gust can. Just trying to see if that's working as intended.