# 5' step out of difficult terrain?

### Rules Questions

 1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

 9 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

If this has been answered, my search-fu is failing me ...

If you step into difficult terrain, the movement cost is 10', and thus it is clear you cannot take a 5' step.

However, if you are currently IN difficult terrain, but stepping onto normal terrain (which in normal movement costs 5'), can that be a 5' step? Or does currently being in difficult terrain make it impossible?

 1 person marked this as a favorite.

You pay the cost moving into squares, so if you're at the edge of difficult terrain and stepping into normal you can 5 foot step. Note the bolded INTO under the difficult terrain entry.

PRD wrote:

Difficult Terrain: Difficult terrain, such as heavy undergrowth, broken ground, or steep stairs, hampers movement. Each square of difficult terrain counts as 2 squares of movement. Each diagonal move into a difficult terrain square counts as 3 squares. You can't run or charge across difficult terrain.

--School of Vrock

As far as my reading of this line in Movement;
When movement is hampered, each square moved into usually counts as two squares, effectively reducing the distance that a character can cover in a move.

It says moved into, so you should be able to five foot step out to normal terrain. This is hardly definitive though.

 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

I can see this going either way.

On the one hand, there is the phrase cited by King of Vrock, which suggests that the square you move into, and only the square you move into determines the difficulty of the terrain.

On the other hand, the very next sentence states that "If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain, you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow."

This, for a medium sized creature implies that if the creature occupies a square with difficult terrain, his movement is encumbered. This makes sense. If you are assumed to be in the middle of the square you occupy, moving from normal terrain to difficult terrain and moving from difficult terrain to normal terrain both involve moving through half a square of difficult and half a square of normal terrain.

This begs the question, what does it mean to move "through" a square? is it entering and exiting the square or is it enough to exit the square?

Take these 3 scenarios:

1) on difficult terrain square (double movement cost) with normal terrain adjacent
2) in a greased square ("A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check") with normal, non-greased terrain adjacent
3) in a webbed square ("The entire area of the web is considered difficult terrain. Anyone moving through the webs must make a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check as part of their move action") with normal, non-greased terrain adjacent.

Can you 5-foot step/move without penalty onto the normal terrain in each of these situations without encumbrance?

Well, I have always gone with King of Vrock's quote that it matters if the square you are moving to is difficult terrain.

For Web, it also implies it is the square you are moving to that matters.

Web wrote:
Anyone moving through the webs must make a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check as part of their move action, with a DC equal to the spell's DC. Creatures that fail lose their movement and become grappled in the first square of webbing that they enter.

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

If difficult terrain is in any part of your movement, you can't do a 5 foot step.

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
If difficult terrain is in any part of your movement, you can't do a 5 foot step.

The rules suggest only squares you are moving into would prevent this.

Jaerun wrote:

"If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain, you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow."

I read this as only applicable to large (or larger) creatures. A medium creature only ever occupies one square at a time. A large creature occupies more than one at a time, and in such a situation you apply the worst modifier. Or rather a large creature when it moves 5' will be moving into 4 separate squares, apply the worst modifier of those 4 squares the creature will be occupying.

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
blackbloodtroll wrote:
LazarX wrote:
If difficult terrain is in any part of your movement, you can't do a 5 foot step.
The rules suggest only squares you are moving into would prevent this.

I notice that when people say rules "suggest", that suggestions tend to lean towards the answer they want to hear.

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
LazarX wrote:
If difficult terrain is in any part of your movement, you can't do a 5 foot step.
The rules suggest only squares you are moving into would prevent this.
I notice that when people say rules "suggest", that suggestions tend to lean towards the answer they want to hear.

I am not sure how to take that.

Whatever you are implying, it seems very unkind.

Not sure why you would go this way in this conversation.

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Here's the basic rule.

If there is ANY impedence in your motion, you can't take a 5 foot step.

You are starting in impeded terrain, so that counts.

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I could see it otherwise, and others too.

In every game I have played in, we have done so, and I don't find the fact that we all read it that way to be so blatantly incorrect.

LazarX wrote:

Here's the basic rule.

If there is ANY impedence in your motion, you can't take a 5 foot step.

You are starting in impeded terrain, so that counts.

If the terrain looks like this

ABCD

And B is difficult terrain and ACD are all normal terrain.

The player is at A, how much movement must he expend to get to D? 20' right? If he starts at B though how much movement must he spend? 10' right (even though he started in difficult terrain)? In the second scenario was his movement slowed or hampered at all by the difficult terrain? If not, why can't he take the 5' step?

If you want to reverse the scenario and say you are impeded moving out of it, then can he take a 5' step from A to B?

If his movement is impeded going both in and out then you are doubling the cost of movement if his movement happens to end in the rough terrain spot. For example, lets say the player moves 20' to get to A, then spends his last 10 to move into B. Next movement he wants to get to D and must spend 10 getting out of B, plus 10 more to get to D. This is clearly not correct as A to D normally cost 20, but now because he stopped in B his next movement from B to D also costs 20? You need to charge the extra movement cost either moving into or out of the terrain, but not both. Whichever one you don't impede allows the 5' step because you are not impeded.

You only count movement for the squares you enter. For a large creature, in a straight line, that would be the two squares he enters, whichever is worse. I have never seen anyone count the terrain when moving OUT of a square until this thread.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Komoda wrote:
You only count movement for the squares you enter. For a large creature, in a straight line, that would be the two squares he enters, whichever is worse. I have never seen anyone count the terrain when moving OUT of a square until this thread.

For a large creature he has entered four squares. If he moved horizontally or vertically two of those are squares he was not previously in. If he moves diagonally three of those squares are new squares. I assume that is what you meant by moving in a straight line, but diagonals can still be straight lines.

The rules don't actually declare it as the leading squares for what counts against his movement though, but that would be a sensible thing to do cause otherwise a single square of rough terrain causes more impediment for a large creature than it does a medium creature. (and really for a gargantuan creature should that 1' high of thick undergrowth actually even be counted rough terrain against it like it would for a medium creature?)

Combat - Terrain and Obstacles - Difficult Terrain wrote:
If you occupy squares with different kinds of terrain[b], you can move only as fast as the most difficult terrain you occupy will allow.

The first line states you're only affected moving [b]into difficult terain. The second line is not as clear as it should be, but I think the bolded text is key: A medium creature cannot occupy 'squares with different kinds of terrain'. It occupies a single 5' square at a time. Even when it is moving from square to square, it still only occupies one square, not half of each.

To me, the second line is intended to apply to large or larger creatures who might occupy multiple squares of different terrain types - and therefore I think the rules state that moving out of a square of difficult terrain is not impeded (and thus allows for a 5' step).

 1 person marked this as a favorite.

My idea is, no, you can't use the 5 feet step, but you can use your move action to go out with no extra speed cost.

People is confusing the rules for calculating the movement cost with the conditions the terrain impose. They are different parts of the same animal.

The speed cost is not the cause of the hampering, it is the other way. So the "within", "into", "through", "across" words in regard of the speed rules are not related to the question.

Then if i'm in difficult terrain:
1) Does it add to the cost of moving out into a normal square? No, it does not.
2) Is the terrain i'm currently on hampering me? Yes, it is.

According to the rules:

Quote:
You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness.

You lose the 5-foot-step in these conditions in a similar fashion when losing the dodge bonus when you cannot use your dexterity bonus or losing some actions during the surprise round.

You cannot 5-foot-step out from difficult terrain, it is hampering your movement, hence, denying you the use of the 5-foot-step.

If your movement speed isn't reduced, how is the terrain you're moving out of hampering you?

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
cablop wrote:

My idea is, no, you can't use the 5 feet step, but you can use your move action to go out with no extra speed cost.

People is confusing the rules for calculating the movement cost with the conditions the terrain impose. They are different parts of the same animal.

The speed cost is not the cause of the hampering, it is the other way. So the "within", "into", "through", "across" words in regard of the speed rules are not related to the question.

Then if i'm in difficult terrain:
1) Does it add to the cost of moving out into a normal square? No, it does not.
2) Is the terrain i'm currently on hampering me? Yes, it is.

According to the rules:

Quote:
You can only take a 5-foot-step if your movement isn't hampered by difficult terrain or darkness.

You lose the 5-foot-step in these conditions in a similar fashion when losing the dodge bonus when you cannot use your dexterity bonus or losing some actions during the surprise round.

You cannot 5-foot-step out from difficult terrain, it is hampering your movement, hence, denying you the use of the 5-foot-step.

While I agree that the space you stand in is indeed hampering you, it does not "hamper your movement" as the quote you used from the CRB words things.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the rules as written seem to suggest that you are only concerned about what square you are moving into.

However, this leads to weird situations where a person can 5ft step out of grease, since they will always be at the edge of grease and can 5ft step out.

I think a better ruling is that the quality of terrain you are in and will occupy affects your movement, but I'm unsure if there is anything in the rules to support it.

The rule that you calculate cost based on the square you're moving into pretty much clarifies when you can do a 5ft step.

Claxon wrote:

I think the rules as written seem to suggest that you are only concerned about what square you are moving into.

However, this leads to weird situations where a person can 5ft step out of grease, since they will always be at the edge of grease and can 5ft step out.

I think a better ruling is that the quality of terrain you are in and will occupy affects your movement, but I'm unsure if there is anything in the rules to support it.

I do agree that it would probably be better if the rules made it so where you began from is what affected your movement. As it would:

- Make the DC boost for jumping out of difficult terrain more consistent.
- Would help with the Grease issue.
- Would better explain certain types of difficult terrains (why is it easier to step out of 2-foot deep mud pool than it is to get into it in the first place?)

But yeah, rules on movement are currently based on where you are moving to.

Claxon wrote:

I think the rules as written seem to suggest that you are only concerned about what square you are moving into.

However, this leads to weird situations where a person can 5ft step out of grease, since they will always be at the edge of grease and can 5ft step out.

Yes, there's "always" 3 squares you can easily step into out of the grease. Except if those squares contain walls, or enemies, or happen to be in between two rogues with an evil gleam in their beady little eyes...

You can (and probably should) include "exit squares" in your choice of where to place a Grease spell.

Ascalaphus wrote:
If your movement speed isn't reduced, how is the terrain you're moving out of hampering you?

1st: It is not the terrain the PC/NPC is moving into, but the terrain she is currently on.

2nd: Movement cost is not the cause of the hampering, is the consequence. Remember p->q is not equal to q->p.

Buuuuut...

Anonymous Warrior wrote:
While I agree that the space you stand in is indeed hampering you, it does not "hamper your movement" as the quote you used from the CRB words things.

That's a better argument. But that interpretation also allows you to escape by normal movement. Remember, the PC/NPC is allowed to perfom the 5-ft-step if she didn't made another movement in the round, meaning she could still have the movement option available. And to walk out grease some squares is much nicer xD I suddenly imagined the PC/NPC walking out a la Struting Leo meme.

Chess Pwn wrote:
The rule that you calculate cost based on the square you're moving into pretty much clarifies when you can do a 5-ft-step.

Nope, this is the problem, the rules of the 5-foot-step are scattered through the Movement and Combat rules.

Buuuuuut...

Realizing you can normally move instead of performing a 5-ft-step... the question simplifies to: Can a PC/NPC just step out from difficult terrain into adjacent normal terrain? Then i change my mind, again, and say 'yes, she can move out of difficult terrain, just by walking away using a move action or the 5-ft-step'.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
Claxon wrote:
I think the rules as written seem to suggest that you are only concerned about what square you are moving into.

I think they unambiguously state that.

Quote:
However, this leads to weird situations where a person can 5ft step out of grease, since they will always be at the edge of grease and can 5ft step out.

Weird? I suppose that depends on context or perspective. The fact that a "5' step" rule even exists is weird. The question is whether the rules ensure that it is applied with consistency. Or, if the rules, both RAW and RAI, create a framework and then something suggests operating outside that framework.

IMO, interpreting the ambiguous language of requiring a Acro check if you move out of the grease is inconsistent with other terrain penalties. I'd need to see another spell that modifies terrain and mandates that moving out of the affected area still triggers the penalties.

Quote:
I think a better ruling is that the quality of terrain you are in and will occupy affects your movement, but I'm unsure if there is anything in the rules to support it.

You're overlooking the obvious. The rules already require that you pay the penalty to enter. So if you end your turn in an affected square, you're now requiring someone to pay the terrain penalties twice. Where as someone who simply moves through the square pays them once.

You either pay the cost going in or coming out, but not both. True, there are some penalties which take a effect if you end your turn in such a square. But then those type of spells/effects specifically call that out.

So this leads us back to the question of what it means when the rules talk about movement "within."

cablop wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
If your movement speed isn't reduced, how is the terrain you're moving out of hampering you?

1st: It is not the terrain the PC/NPC is moving into, but the terrain she is currently on.

2nd: Movement cost is not the cause of the hampering, is the consequence. Remember p->q is not equal to q->p.

You pay the movement cost for terrain you move into, not out of. So if you're stepping out of problematic terrain into normal terrain, and you therefore don't have to pay extra, how are you being hampered?

Ascalaphus wrote:
You pay the movement cost for terrain you move into, not out of. So if you're stepping out of problematic terrain into normal terrain, and you therefore don't have to pay extra, how are you being hampered?

Maybe because your options of where to move are limited by the square you are in now? Or maybe because you cannot perform some acrobatic actions there?

Again and again, it is impossible to demonstrate that to you if you keep thinking that the hampering condition is caused by the cost of moving and not the cost of moving being caused by the hampering condition. You are being hampered there, but you can move to a normal square at no cost.

In a similar fashion, when the sorcerer step out from a square threatened by an orc, does that mean she wasn't under threat? Yes, she was, but moved to a safe square. You cannot say she wasn't in threat because she was going to a safe square in the future.

If a square isn't making it more expensive to move out of it, then how is it hampering your move out of it?

Using propositional logic:

(Hampering -> more cost) AND (NOT more cost) => NOT hampering

If the effects caused by hampering don't occur, then you can't have been hampered because otherwise those effects would have occurred.

Since your movement out of the square wasn't reduced, you know that you weren't hampered moving out of it. Otherwise your movement would have been reduced.

And since you weren't hampered moving out, there is also no reason you could not 5ft step.

Ascalaphus, simple, the square hampers, but it is not hampering your movement out. I don't know why we are arguing about that fine detail when we both agree the PC/NPC can just step out at no cost.

Regarding five foot steps and difficult terrain:

In our games, you only worry about squares you are moving into/through in regards to penalties. So taking a five foot move works only if the square you are entering is 'normal' (and well lit etc etc).

The square you start in is irrelevant, as you aren't moving through it or into it, you calculate penalties based on the square you are moving INTO.

Example: If you start in difficult terrain, but your path ahead is clear, and you want to move thirty feet, you do so.

Your movement isn't hampered in this case, so why should a five foot move be any different?

Until I see something talking about starting squares or similar wording, I'm going to use the rules as they are written.

If you want to argue that your starting square modifies movement, then you are looking at reducing all movement speeds across the board... difficult terrain (double cost) would mean ten feet worth of movement per square. Changing location from one square to an adjacent square (if you treat the starting square as modifying movement) would mean you have to pay 20 feet of movement to alter your location by five feet (ten feet per square).

That is wrong.

N N 959 wrote:
IMO, interpreting the ambiguous language of requiring a Acro check if you move out of the grease is inconsistent with other terrain penalties. I'd need to see another spell that modifies terrain and mandates that moving out of the affected area still triggers the penalties.

How about Wall of Thorns? I'm pretty sure you can't just 5 foot step out of that without penalty. "Any creature within the area of the spell when it is cast takes damage as if it had moved into the wall and is caught inside. In order to escape, it must attempt to push its way free, or it can wait until the spell ends."

Which suggests there are some situations where the square you're leaving is as important as the one you're moving into.

Matthew Downie wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
IMO, interpreting the ambiguous language of requiring a Acro check if you move out of the grease is inconsistent with other terrain penalties. I'd need to see another spell that modifies terrain and mandates that moving out of the affected area still triggers the penalties.

How about Wall of Thorns? I'm pretty sure you can't just 5 foot step out of that without penalty. "Any creature within the area of the spell when it is cast takes damage as if it had moved into the wall and is caught inside. In order to escape, it must attempt to push its way free, or it can wait until the spell ends."

Which suggests there are some situations where the square you're leaving is as important as the one you're moving into.

Sure, if the spell says so, do what the spell says.

Magic does weird stuff. This doesn't change how movement works in any way, it's just an effect that a spell has.

Matthew Downie wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
IMO, interpreting the ambiguous language of requiring a Acro check if you move out of the grease is inconsistent with other terrain penalties. I'd need to see another spell that modifies terrain and mandates that moving out of the affected area still triggers the penalties.

How about Wall of Thorns? I'm pretty sure you can't just 5 foot step out of that without penalty. "Any creature within the area of the spell when it is cast takes damage as if it had moved into the wall and is caught inside. In order to escape, it must attempt to push its way free, or it can wait until the spell ends."

Which suggests there are some situations where the square you're leaving is as important as the one you're moving into.

Excellent. Now, do the words, "in order to escape" appear in the description for Grease?

"Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed."

Meaning creatures that DO move on their turn are required to make the check.

It's poorly written, but this one quoted sentence (IMO) shows that leaving Grease still requires half speed/roll for success.

Again, spells do things differently from normal movement rules.

The spell description needs to be rewritten... It is too ambiguous.

But this is another discussion. Some spells act like difficult terrain but are not difficult terrain.

alexd1976 wrote:

"Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed."

Meaning creatures that DO move on their turn are required to make the check.

It's poorly written, but this one quoted sentence (IMO) shows that leaving Grease still requires half speed/roll for success.

Again, spells do things differently from normal movement rules.

You're quoting out of context.

PRD wrote:
A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failure means it can't move that round (and must then make a Reflex save or fall), while failure by 5 or more means it falls (see the Acrobatics skill for details). Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed.

Taken in context, the "move" is either walking within or through the area of grease. The first time we see the term "move" it is clearly referring back to the walking within or through aspect of moving. The second move is thus referring to the same thing and we know this because the sentence is still talking about the Acro check that was called for when walking within or through the grease.

The first part of the spell description defines the type of movement we are concerned with and there is no other text which suggest we expend the scope. If you don't read this in context, then you can claim scratching your nose triggers the Acro check. After all, it says "creatures who do not move" and scratching your nose is technically moving. Worse, you could claim that failing your Acro check means you are paralyzed, "Failure means it can't move that round..." So how do we avoid the absurd? We read it in context: walking within or through grease.

Is escaping something the same as walking within or through in the context of these spells? I do not believe it is.

a lot of lv1 spells have poor descriptions and wording. I doubt we'll see much of this change to make things clearer, but it would be awesome if it happened.

I think the only reason I'm ok with moving out with no issue is because if we don't it essentially adds an extra 5 foot radius to every single spell that does this.

I think magics got enough going for it, that buffs not really needed.

N N 959 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

"Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed."

Meaning creatures that DO move on their turn are required to make the check.

It's poorly written, but this one quoted sentence (IMO) shows that leaving Grease still requires half speed/roll for success.

Again, spells do things differently from normal movement rules.

You're quoting out of context.

PRD wrote:
A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failure means it can't move that round (and must then make a Reflex save or fall), while failure by 5 or more means it falls (see the Acrobatics skill for details). Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed.

Taken in context, the "move" is either walking within or through the area of grease. The first time we see the term "move" it is clearly referring back to the walking within or through aspect of moving. The second move is thus referring to the same thing and we know this because the sentence is still talking about the Acro check that was called for when walking within or through the grease.

The first part of the spell description defines the type of movement we are concerned with and there is no other text which suggest we expend the scope. If you don't read this in context, then you can claim scratching your nose triggers the Acro check. After all, it says "creatures who do not move" and scratching your nose is technically moving. Worse, you could claim that failing your Acro check means you are paralyzed, "Failure means it can't move that round..." So how do we avoid the absurd? We read it in context: walking within or through grease.

Is escaping something the same as walking within or through in the context of these spells? I do not believe it is.

I'm confused, are you saying that leaving a Grease spell DOESN'T require a check of any sort? Because my quote (despite you saying it is out of context) is from the spell itself, and shows that moving (locomoting, changing squares, however you want to say it) produces a situation that limits your speed/requires a check.

If you don't agree with that, please produce quoted text (as I have) that would support the idea.

If what you are saying is that leaving Grease requires no special effort (you just step out) then the spell is literally useless after the first round in most situations.

Also, even if you read 'moving' as ANY movement, it still kinda makes sense. Go stand on some slick ice and try swinging an axe. Tell me it isn't harder than standing on dry ground.

alexd1976 wrote:

I'm confused, are you saying that leaving a Grease spell DOESN'T require a check of any sort? Because my quote (despite you saying it is out of context) is from the spell itself, and shows that moving (locomoting, changing squares, however you want to say it) produces a situation that limits your speed/requires a check.

If you don't agree with that, please produce quoted text (as I have) that would support the idea.

If what you are saying is that leaving Grease requires no special effort (you just step out) then the spell is literally useless after the first round in most situations.

Also, even if you read 'moving' as ANY movement, it still kinda makes sense. Go stand on some slick ice and try swinging an axe. Tell me it isn't harder than standing on dry ground.

I'm saying that you have to read the entire description when deciding what any one part of it is trying to tell us. You only focused on the third sentence, as if it could stand on its own, but it can't. That sentence literally references the Acrobatic check talked about in the first sentence. That Acro check is required when when is walking in or through grease. So reading for comprehension, we need to assume that the "move" contemplated is consistent with the conditions that triggered the Acro check: walking within grease or through it.

Look, this spell, like many, is written from a set of assumptions. Authors cannot spell out every word or concept in every spell description and feat. In a game with so many rules, the author is relying upon the context in which the game is played to guide the reader. One of those assumptions is that you only pay movement cost when moving into terrain, not out of. If the author intends for the spells to behave differently, then they are explicit about that difference. For example, wall of thorns indicating that an "escape" attempt triggers penalties. Grease does not identify any such restriction.

alex wrote:
If what you are saying is that leaving Grease requires no special effort (you just step out) then the spell is literally useless after the first round in most situations.

A-Dog has tried to make the same argument. Unfortunately it is of no avail in this situation. First, because the fact that a spell is useless after "the first round" is not a a rules violation. If you cast silent image and your target saves, the spell is useless before the first round is even up. Tough, it's a 1st level spell. Second, grease has other applications. So its entirely consistent within the game design framework for a 1st level spell to have limited use, especially if it has expanded utility.

Quote:
Also, even if you read 'moving' as ANY movement, it still kinda makes sense. Go stand on some slick ice and try swinging an axe. Tell me it isn't harder than standing on dry ground.

Whether that's true or not is largely irrelevant. All "difficult terrain" should not cost the same, but it does. While the authors write the rules from our real world paradigm, they frequently and repeatedly introduce rules and mechanics that are contradicted by reality.

Something "kinda" making sense is, for better or for worse, not a basis for how we interpret the rules.

N N 959 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:

I'm confused, are you saying that leaving a Grease spell DOESN'T require a check of any sort? Because my quote (despite you saying it is out of context) is from the spell itself, and shows that moving (locomoting, changing squares, however you want to say it) produces a situation that limits your speed/requires a check.

If you don't agree with that, please produce quoted text (as I have) that would support the idea.

If what you are saying is that leaving Grease requires no special effort (you just step out) then the spell is literally useless after the first round in most situations.

Also, even if you read 'moving' as ANY movement, it still kinda makes sense. Go stand on some slick ice and try swinging an axe. Tell me it isn't harder than standing on dry ground.

I'm saying that you have to read the entire description when deciding what any one part of it is trying to tell us. You only focused on the third sentence, as if it could stand on its own, but it can't. That sentence literally references the Acrobatic check talked about in the first sentence. That Acro check is required when when is walking in or through grease. So reading for comprehension, we need to assume that the "move" contemplated is consistent with the conditions that triggered the Acro check: walking within grease or through it.

Look, this spell, like many, is written from a set of assumptions. Authors cannot spell out every word or concept in every spell description and feat. In a game with so many rules, the author is relying upon the context in which the game is played to guide the reader. One of those assumptions is that you only pay movement cost when moving into terrain, not out of. If the author intends for the spells to behave differently, then they are explicit about that difference. For example, wall of thorns indicating that an "escape" attempt triggers penalties. Grease does not identify any such restriction.

alex wrote:
If what you are saying is
...

You just seem to be disagreeing with whatever I say without actually clearly stating a point of view regarding the OP.

Taking a five foot step from a square that has difficult terrain into a square that doesn't have difficult terrain is allowed.

If you feel otherwise, please feel free to quote the rules you have found that say so.

Grease, as a spell, does not have to follow the normal rules for movement. Spells do what they say, and don't have to conform to the basic movement rules. If the spell says that you have to make a save, then you are obligated to do so. You can't just step out of the effect, because it isn't difficult terrain, it is a spell that has it's own unique rules.

"A grease spell covers a solid surface with a layer of slippery grease. Any creature in the area when the spell is cast must make a successful Reflex save or fall. A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failure means it can't move that round (and must then make a Reflex save or fall), while failure by 5 or more means it falls (see the Acrobatics skill for details). Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed."

Once again, the bolded section is relevant. If you move (even out of the spell) you must make the check. Only by not moving are you immune to it.

Whether or not this includes moving in the sense of swinging swords/spellcasting or just changing squares is debatable. As your GM for clarification.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.
alexd1976 wrote:
You just seem to be disagreeing with whatever I say without actually clearly stating a point of view regarding the OP.

I've explained it. You aren't comprehending it. Such is the nature of forum debates.

^That line is almost quote material.

Regarding the OP, for what it's worth (not much), I'll also side with N N and some other posters on this.

In hopes of moving the discussion forward, maybe I'll link here the other recent thread with the same subject, just so that we avoid running mirrored threads with recycled arguments:

Actually, why not also link the other one from the same subject, but started couple of days earlier:

alexd1976 wrote:

"A grease spell covers a solid surface with a layer of slippery grease. Any creature in the area when the spell is cast must make a successful Reflex save or fall. A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check. Failure means it can't move that round (and must then make a Reflex save or fall), while failure by 5 or more means it falls (see the Acrobatics skill for details). Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check and are not considered flat-footed."

Once again, the bolded section is relevant. If you move (even out of the spell) you must make the check. Only by not moving are you immune to it.

Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make this check

Okay so what is this saying. if they don't move they don't need to "make this check". Which check is this check? Well it would be the check talked about in the previously.
"A creature can walk within or through the area of grease at half normal speed with a DC 10 Acrobatics check."
So if you walk within or through the area you need to make an acrobatics check. so this acrobatics check is "this check"
so lets place this back into the other sentence.
Creatures that do not move on their turn do not need to make the acrobatics check to walk within or through the area of grease at half speed. So if you stand in grease you don't need to make a check.
So, "once again the bolded section is relevant", if you move out of the spell you don't need to make a check. since there's not a check for moving out of grease.

N N 959 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
You just seem to be disagreeing with whatever I say without actually clearly stating a point of view regarding the OP.
I've explained it. You aren't comprehending it. Such is the nature of forum debates.

Now you're calling me stupid. Nice.

I'm not calling you anything. I'm making a statement about the state of the discussion.

 2 people marked this as a favorite.
alexd1976 wrote:
N N 959 wrote:
alexd1976 wrote:
You just seem to be disagreeing with whatever I say without actually clearly stating a point of view regarding the OP.
I've explained it. You aren't comprehending it. Such is the nature of forum debates.
Now you're calling me stupid. Nice.

If you explain back to them their argument in a way that shows you understand the WHY they have that argument then it's clear you comprehend what they are trying to say.

On the other hand if you say, "You're making no sense and are just getting in my way to get in my way." That sentence is easily interpreted to mean that you don't understand what they are trying to say, or you didn't comprehend it.

He statement is just saying that he feels he's answered your question already and you responded with, "you're just getting in my way for fun", and that this often happens.

Step back from trying to locate the exact place where the rules specify whether you consider the penalties for terrain on entering or leaving the terrain and consider how you count out moves across a map.

This is what bbangerter was trying to explain above. Let me take a stab at it.

Your character is on the map and the five foot wide hallway extends before him. Not counting the square the PC is in, it has 10 squares of normal terrain (in a straight line) then a square of difficult terrain, followed by more normal terrain.

How do you count out 30 feet of movement?

5, 10, (then moving into the difficult terrain) 20, since each square of difficult terrain counts as 2 squares of normal movement. From there you count 25, 30.

Does anybody instead count it 5, 10, 15, 25, 30? No one I've ever played with does it that way and I've been playing for decades.

That should settle it. You pay the cost of difficult terrain when you enter the square, not when you leave it.

You could say that any terrain effect only affects you on leaving the square, but suppose you have a square with a trap door? If you end your move on the trap door, does the GM wait for the trap to spring when you leave the square? You trigger a trap when you move into the square with the trap.

What if you are 20 feet from the edge of a cliff. Do you move into the square beyond the edge of the cliff and expect you can stand in that square, because you only go off the cliff when you exit the square? No. You fall when you enter the square with no ground underneath it. This is so obvious, it should not have to be stated.

So to be consistent with this standard way of dealing with movement, you must recognize that you've paid the cost for difficult terrain on entering the square. You do not need to pay the cost again on exiting it.

 1 person marked this as a favorite.

The discussion you are trying to help has been dead for a year and a half.

 1 to 50 of 66 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>