Reposition combat maneuver and intrinsically dangerous space

[Pizza Lord]

Reposition wrote:

A reposition attempts to force a foe to move to a different position in relation to your location without doing any harm. ... You cannot use this maneuver to move a foe into a space that is intrinsically dangerous, such as a pit or wall of fire.

I was looking over the Reposition combat maneuver and I wanted some thoughts on what would count as intrinsically dangerous for purposes of causing the maneuver to fail.

Clearly moving a foe out into thin air such as over a pit or cliff is one. It also says wall of fire is another, but does this mean positioning the target where it would actually pass through a wall of fire or does it include the areas where the heat emanates to and deals fire damage?

I would probably say it only includes the wall's actual location and would consider the emanation of heat to not count as making the square itself dangerous, only the environment or area. Otherwise you couldn't reposition a creature if they were on the Negative Material plane or something where every square is considered dangerous. Also it would mean casting wall of fire suddenly creates a 100-foot long, 20-foot wide strip of anti-reposition? Even if your target was immune to fire?

Could you also reposition a target to a safe square by moving them past an open space, such as beating their CMD by 15 or more and moving them over a 10 foot pit or space and setting them on the other side (taking no damage) or possibly placing them on top of a pillar-like area that would require a 10-foot jump to leap to or from?

Does an area with caltrops in it count as intrinsically dangerous? How about grease? What about an area that contains a pit-trap that would open when a creature moves onto it, but neither the repositioner or the target knows about the trap? What if it a bridge but in bad repair? Say it's illusory and can't hold any weight but neither you or the target know that. Are you told that your reposition just fails for some unknown reason? If it's a bridge that can support up to 200-lbs of weight before collapsing is that intrinsically dangerous? What about 500-lbs? 10,000-lbs? At what point isn't it dangerous or does it only count as dangerous after you look at the target and total up their gear?
Do you say, "Reposition maneuver passed. Okay, you move him one square left, he weighs 190-pounds okay. Oh wait, he's got on chainmail and has a greatsword so he's over 200-pounds and (checks that the section of floor would collapse at that point). Nevermind, you just fail. For some reason you don't know."
Do you let them take back where they were going to put the target?
"Do you want to set him in another square?" "There? (checks) No, fails. There? No. There? Okay, end of your turn."

Does the target need to realize the square it's being moved to is dangerous? For instance, you are standing on a shoreline in ankle-deep water fighting a creature that takes damage from salt water. Obviously it's chosen to take the damage while fighting you, but suddenly because any square around it deals damage to it (and only it specifically) do it suddenly gain reposition immunity?

Of course, that could mean if you fighting an elemental of each type (earth, air, fire, and water), you could actually reposition any of them except the fire elemental into otherwise normal square other than it has 2-3 inches of water in it. Fair enough I suppose, but if that's the logic then theoretically you can reposition a creature out into thin air assuming that the square isn't dangerous to them (they can fly, they have feather fall, can levitate, etc.) That doesn't seem to be the intended measurement for intrinsically dangerous however, which means a reposition into a wall of fire should fail even if it isn't actually dangerous at all to the target (fire subtype, immunity, already passed an SR against that spell, etc.) Just trying to narrow down as much acceptable uses as I can before they become issues.

I would probably lean towards saying that if the target is already in a dangerous area, then moving them is fair game. For instance, you can't reposition them into an incendiary cloud but if they were already standing in the area, then you can move them around in it just fine.

Does intrinsically dangerous only apply to physical danger and damage? For instance, is a stinking cloud intrinsically dangerous? Is being moved into the area of a mind fog or an ongoing effect like a harpy or bard's song?

[James Risner]

Ask your GM

This is identical to the "make attack" to break invisibility. So if your GM thinks it's dangerous then it is.

[dragonhunterq]

My take:
'Intrinsically dangerous' doesn't appear to require knowledge on the part of the mover or the movee. You just don't move a target onto an illegal square.

Although I agree with you in how I would play it, I'm inclined to disagree with you about moving a target within a dangerous area, from a strict rules perspective. The danger of a square is not relative to the danger you are in where you are, it either is or it isn't intrinsically dangerous to your target.

Dangerous is more all-encomapssing than just damaging. If it requires (or has the potential to require) them to make a saving throw, imposes (or has the potential to impose) a negative condition, or involves them taking damage (or potentially taking damage) it is an intrinsically dangerous square. If it requires them to take an action or use a resource to avoid one of the aforementioned it is intrinsically dangerous.
This does mean that you can reposition one creature into a square you couldn't reposition a second creature.

Added the 'potentially's' as I don't believe you could move them into an area where an effect happens 'at the beginning of their turn' or 'if they end their turn...', but it would have to be immediate, as in on their very next turn. If an effect would occur after they remained in a square for 3 rounds, I would say that is not 'intrinsic' enough.

[Pizza Lord]

Thanks for the input, dragonhunterq.

So we can obviously assume moving an opponent into a threatened square is fine, that is not intrinsically dangerous (even though they won't provoke AoO, unless you have Greater Reposition.) The mere existence of Greater Reposition and the discussion about AoO from Repositioning makes that clear.

We can then assume that a square's intrinsic danger does not take into account the presence of nearby creatures or their effects. I would say by the rules you could Reposition a foe into the area of a swarm, for instance. The square isn't dangerous and they would take no damage, and the swarm can't hurt them unless they end their movement still with the target in their space (this is the same as placing a target next to another creature that could choose whether it was going to attack them or not on its next turn.) I don't think the fact that the target has to make a save versus Swarm Distraction at the start of their turn negates it. Though I wouldn't allow moving a target into green slime, I don't think that's the same as if there happens to be a mummy nearby and its Aura of Despair just reaches a certain location. Only if a creature has a power or effect that makes a target square actually dangerous, such as turning the ground into acid or lava, rather than just having an effect like distraction, weakness, etc. should a square be considered illegal. But again... there are some situations that could go either way.

I am trying to gauge what a reasonable view would be. Are you saying a wall of fire is basically a 100-foot by 20-foot strip of anti-reposition zone? It now locks down a character's ability to use their feats and maneuvers because it emanates 1d4 fire damage 20 feet away? Or would you say only the actual location of the fire should do that? I mean, if there were a fight around a campsite, I can agree you can't reposition a foe into the campfire, but I don't see disallowing moving them around it or near it, just because standing next to the fire is still hot and can burn you.

Can you Reposition a target into an antimagic field? What if they have no spell effects up? What if they aren't a caster? Are a caster? Is not being covered in magic a 'negative condition' or just a normal condition?

Are orcs immune to Repositioning while outside in the sunlight because they have Light Sensitivity and that's a negative effect? They're just completely immune to it while it's daylight, even if they're already suffering the effects of being dazzled when you encounter them because every square is intrinsically illuminated by sunlight? Have to wait until dark to move them 5 feet?

If your target is already in an intrinsically dangerous square, such as in the middle of an incendiary cloud is it now illegal to use your feats and combat maneuvers even though moving him to any square you reach would still be in the cloud's area and not really make any difference at all?