GM told me this weekend that my monk couldn't Shove an enemy off the top of the castle battlements because he would hit the low wall.
When I looked it up though, I couldn't find any rules about obstacles or hazards interfering with the Shove. Am I missing anything?
It seems to me that, with such a ruling, no one could ever push someone off of the battlements.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rules you're looking for are "forced movement" (CRB 475). Specifically:
"If forced movement would move you into a space you can’t occupy—because objects are in the way or because you lack the movement type needed to reach it, for example—you stop moving in the last space you can occupy."
This is still somewhat open to interpretation, though I would definitely argue you could push someone over a low wall. If the wall is low enough that you could climb over it with a step, you definitely don't lack the movement type needed to reach it. If the wall is reaches your waist or higher it would presumably block a shove.
The rule goes on to state:
"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."
So the rules confirm the DM has the final say, which is true in all ambiguous situations. However both the fact that you can push off a ledge and difficult terrain support the idea that you can push someone over a short wall. It's how I would play it at my table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would apply a circumstance penalty to your check, depending on the height of the low wall.
|
I know it is always dangerous to invoke Physics in this forum. But it might actually provide some guidance.
If you shove you best apply a force at the centre of mass. If you trip you apply it off centre.
You shove someone off the battlements if you apply the force higher then the top of the battlements. In this case the shove becomes a trip.
You shove someone against the battlement if you apply force lower as the top of the battlement.
So as a rule of thump - if the creature you shove is more then double the height of the battlement you would shove him over, if he is below double the height of the battlement you would shove him against the battlement.
So a medium creature likely would be shoved over a battlement <2 feet but against a battlement >3 feet.
Using 1st edition weight and height (couldn't find that table in a pinch) these would be the battlement heights that prevent a pushover for an average height character:
Human Male: 2 ft 11 1/2 inch
Human Female: 2 ft 8 inch
Dwarf male: 2 ft 1 inch
Dwarf female: 2 ft
Gnome male: 1 ft 7 1/2 inch
Gnome female: 1 ft 6 1/2 inch
Half Elf male: 2 ft 11 1/2 inch
Half elf female: 2 ft 10 1/2 inch
Half orc male: 2 ft 11 1/2 inch
Half orc female: 2 ft 9 1/2 inch
Halfling male: 1 ft 6 1/2 inch
Halfling female: 1 ft 5 1/1 inch
So 2 ft height is enough for the normal small humanoid to prevent them being pushed over, 3 feet is enough to prevent the normal medium humanoid to be pushed over.
Now here is the problem in a real game: the gm likely hasn't defined the actual height of the battlement. Generating the above table was fun - but nothing you do during a game to keep the game flow. And a good chance is to rule 2 1/2 feet for height of the battlement and 5 feet height of a medium creature - which is in this case exactly the border - so a GM has all the right to make a call either way.
Unfortunately my castle next door currently is only open weekends - so I can't do a real world measurement of battlement heights. These might also be not representative as they are battlements for cannons - while battlements for archers are likely higher.
Center of mass might work best for an inanimate object w/ perfect friction, but vs. a humanoid, you want to get underneath their center of mass w/ some momentum upward to destabilize them.
So imagine two football linemen near that wall. If one successfully shoves the other back into the wall, the wall would be of immense aid to the one resisting. Yet the wall wouldn't make it impossible for a dominant player to knock the other atop it, and then perhaps over it if they're driving forward.
So yeah, circumstance penalty or maybe a degree of success if hard-nosed. However it goes, this is a medieval fantasy game, so of course you should be able to knock enemies off the battlements!!! (At least peons.)
AS others have said, it is up to the GM and dependent on the height of the foe and height of the battlement.
If you were pushing a 3ft tall halfling at a battlement that was 3ft+ tall (built for humans) it is reasonable for the GM to say "nope" or "not without a critical success"
|
|
As I tried to explain via the physics example - it depends on relative height of both the wall and the creature.
Below half height - shove should work.
Above half height - technically it shouldn't - unless it becomes a combination of trip and shove. A critical allows you to shove 10 feet - or a critical trip also adds bludgeoning damage. As such a possible way could be - critical will also allow to shove over a battlement up to the height of the creature.
This isn't RAW - but would be a simple way how to get a consistent ruling that makes approx. sense.
I'd be totally fine with grab an edge. That's what it's for, and it is incredibly cinematic as it creates the moral conundrum of stamping fingers versus pulling him up.
I'd also be fine with the GM changing the variables for better or worse based on the creature's size relative to the wall (though its helpful if the reasoning is explained).
Say it were a halfling, I could see one GM ruling that it's harder because he is as tall as the wall, while another GM rules that it is easier because small creatures have a lot less mass and thus can be thrown over much more easily.
Lots of good thoughts here on how to adjudicate it. I would probably give my player a choice-- they can attempt the shove as normal but the creature gets a bonus to its fortitude DC based on how high the wall is, or requiring them to Grab the enemy first-- basically representing grabbing someone and lifting them over the edge as two actions.
Ravingdork's monk could be well served by moving to the enemy, grabbing them, then flurrying to finish the round, then shove them next round. The nice thing about the maneuver system being as streamlined as it is is that it is very easy to house rule contextual actions that aren't in the rules. A favorite of mine is I let people make athletics checks against the reflex DC of large+ creatures to see if they can latch onto the thing and ride them.
As a GM, I'd allow it but give a free Grab an Edge check immediately at the top of the battlement. Success means they catch themselves before going over and no fall damage. I could also see ruling that depending on size, the battlement requires a Critical Success to shove someone over, Success simply shoves them back from you and they stop against the edge of the battlements. The difference between the options would depend on construction, size etc. Humans fighting on the battlements designed for giants are going to be harder to throw over the wall. Goblin construction, easier to throw over.
As a GM, I'd allow it but give a free Grab an Edge check immediately at the top of the battlement. Success means they catch themselves before going over and no fall damage. I could also see ruling that depending on size, the battlement requires a Critical Success to shove someone over, Success simply shoves them back from you and they stop against the edge of the battlements. The difference between the options would depend on construction, size etc. Humans fighting on the battlements designed for giants are going to be harder to throw over the wall. Goblin construction, easier to throw over.
I meant to say in my previous post, the target should get a Grab Edge reaction regardless of the wall. It is a standard rule.
Yeah, allowing players to shove bad guys off battlements is definitely the more fun ruling, and so the right one, imo.
Yeah, it continually amazes me how many obstacles some GMs will throw up in the way of fun for little to no gain. If not handled properly, it will crush creativity and leave a campaign full of nothing more interesting than Strides and Strikes.
That was one thing I loved about D&D 4E -- it had very clear and fun to apply rules for defenestrating enemies.
|
Considering that battlements are intended to provide cover for a large part of a medium creature's body, they're not all that low. At least not the ones in our local fortress, they come up to about half of my chest.
I think this might be a good place to say that you would need a critical success on a shove to push someone through regardless.
Yeah, allowing players to shove bad guys off battlements is definitely the more fun ruling, and so the right one, imo.Yeah, it continually amazes me how many obstacles some GMs will throw up in the way of fun for little to no gain. If not handled properly, it will crush creativity and leave a campaign full of nothing more interesting than Strides and Strikes.
Not everyone likes a game like that, please don't start with the bad wrong fun discussions.
This said, this is why it is important to always have a discussion with players before a game starts to set expectation on tone.