Hazardous Terrain and Big Creatures

[Ravingdork]

All this talk of late about kineticists, impulses, and hazardous terrain got me wondering:

If a plus-sized character or creature is forced to move through hazardous terrain, do they take damage for EACH square, or for each set of squares?

Take the following diagram for example:

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ ⬛ = Wall
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ ⬜ = Open Space
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛ ♒ = Hazardous terrain
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛ Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️ = Large Monster
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

If each square of hazardous terrain does 2 damage, and the monster were to cross the room, would it take 6 points of damage for entering 6 squares, as follows?

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ #️⃣ = Damage Taken
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒5️⃣6️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒3️⃣4️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒1️⃣2️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

Or would they be treated like a Medium creature, and take only 3 points of damage as shown below? (That is, their large space does not make them more susceptible, just like every single other area of effect in the game.)

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ #️⃣ = Damage Taken
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒3️⃣3️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒2️⃣2️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒1️⃣1️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

Which do you think, and why?

If it helps, some specific examples of instances in which this might come into play are a kineticist's Jagged Berms impulse or Scorching Column impulse.

[shroudb]

The common language of Hazardous terrain is

Quote:

A creature takes X damage each time it moves into one of these squares.

So if it enters multiple squares, it stands to reason to take multiple instances of damage, since damage is per square.

Using the numbers of your 1st diagram I'd say that:
First 5ft of movement it enters squares 1,2 so it takes 4 damage.
Next 5ft of movement he enters squares 3,4 (he was already on squares 1,2 so it didn't "move into them") so another 4 damage.
Next 5 he enters 5,6, leaves 1,2 and continues to be in 3,4. So another 4.
After that point, he only exits squares and doesn't move into new ones

Total 12 damage. (assuming each square = 2 damage)

[Ravingdork]

shroudb wrote:

The common language of Hazardous terrain is

Quote:

A creature takes X damage each time it moves into one of these squares.

So if it enters multiple squares, it stands to reason to take multiple instances of damage, since damage is per square.

That's what I was thinking too, but doesn't it seem kind of odd that it doesn't behave like every other effect in the game?

[shroudb]

Ravingdork wrote:

shroudb wrote:

The common language of Hazardous terrain is

Quote:

A creature takes X damage each time it moves into one of these squares.

So if it enters multiple squares, it stands to reason to take multiple instances of damage, since damage is per square.

That's what I was thinking too, but doesn't it seem kind of odd that it doesn't behave like every other effect in the game?

Not really imo.

If you spread 10 caltrops per square and each deals 1 damage, the large creature just stepped on 20 of them.

[Jared Walter 356]

shroudb wrote:

The common language of Hazardous terrain is

Quote:

A creature takes X damage each time it moves into one of these squares.

personally, I run it the other way. Each time they move [into one or more of these squares] they take damage. Just like I would with difficult terrain, they suffer the penalty for moving only once per move regardless of the number of squares they move into.

[Claxon]

I would say that it should probably be run as each "set" of square the character moves into. So I guess like your second example. Otherwise the effect is disproportionately effective against large or larger things, unlike anything else in the game. If larger creatures got more HP just for being large then I would agree that they should take more damage. But large creatures don't innately get more con/HP than a medium creature. And so it would be unbalanced (IMO) to have them take more damage from a similar effect.

However, as it is written I can understand why someone might think it's example 1, and I don't really have any evidence to say it's not example 1 just based on the rules as written. It's simply the overall structure of the game that leads me to conclude that it shouldn't be run that way.

Otherwise, area of effect spells should deal more damage for taking up multiple squares.

I would have honestly preferred the rules around this be written a bit different where you take (more) damage (than currently written) for entering or staying in the effect each round, but not have it be dependent on squares.

[breithauptclan]

shroudb wrote:

The common language of Hazardous terrain is

Quote:

A creature takes X damage each time it moves into one of these squares.

Not sure where you are getting that quote from.

The rules for Hazardous Terrain are not very specific.

The rules for Coral Eruption and Rose's Thorns are dramatically different than what you mentioned.

Going from the wording "A creature takes X damage each time it moves into one of these squares" I would rule that the trigger for taking the damage is the movement. Each time you move, if you move into at least one square of hazardous terrain, then you take the hazardous terrain damage once.

But with the wording of:

Coral Eruption wrote:

A creature that moves through the area takes 3 piercing damage for every square of that area it moves into.

Rose's Thorns wrote:

A creature that moves through the area takes 5 piercing damage for every square of that area it moves into.

That is much more clear that you take damage for every square moved into.

What is less clear is whether you take damage again from moving through a square that you are already in.

So going from here:
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛

to here:
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛

would be two instances of hazardous terrain damage.

But I am not sure if moving from here:
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛

to here:
⬛♒♒♒♒♒Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛

is two instances of damage or four.

I would rule that it is two more instances of damage because the trigger is moving 'into' the squares. The creature is only moving into two new squares of hazardous terrain in this scenario.

And no, this doesn't address any balance concerns about whether we should run hazardous terrain this way or not. That is just my interpretation of what the rules actually say.

It does seem a bit imbalanced that a Giant Instinct Barbarian has to take between 2 and 4 times as much damage for moving through hazardous terrain than more normal sized player characters do. Same with Animal Companions. And Eidolons.

[Claxon]

breithauptclan wrote:

It does seem a bit imbalanced that a Giant Instinct Barbarian has to take between 2 and 4 times as much damage for moving through hazardous terrain than more normal sized player characters do. Same with Animal Companions. And Eidolons.

Yeah, that's something people need to consider. This wouldn't necessarily be a 1 way relationship with PCs affecting monsters. You could run into an NPC kineticist and see your (or your ally's) animal companion, Giant Instinct barbarian, etc be disproportionately affected too.

In my opinion, it's bad game design if it is actually determined to be per square instead of per "set" of squares.

[eboats]

Ravingdork wrote:

All this talk of late about kineticists, impulses, and hazardous terrain got me wondering:

If a plus-sized character or creature is forced to move through hazardous terrain, do they take damage for EACH square, or for each set of squares?

Take the following diagram for example:

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ ⬛ = Wall
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ ⬜ = Open Space
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛ ♒ = Hazardous terrain
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛ Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️ = Large Monster
⬛♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

If each square of hazardous terrain does 2 damage, and the monster were to cross the room, would it take 6 points of damage for entering 6 squares, as follows?

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ #️⃣ = Damage Taken
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒5️⃣6️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒3️⃣4️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒1️⃣2️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

Or would they be treated like a Medium creature, and take only 3 points of damage as shown below? (That is, their large space does not make them more susceptible, just like every single other area of effect in the game.)

⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛ #️⃣ = Damage Taken
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️Ⓜ️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️️⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒3️⃣3️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒2️⃣2️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛♒♒♒♒♒1️⃣1️⃣♒♒♒♒♒⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜⬛
⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛⬜⬜⬛⬛

Which do you think, and why?

If it helps, some specific examples of instances in which this might come into play are a kineticist's Jagged Berms impulse or Scorching Column impulse.

Large creatures occupy all 4 squares. Using Jagged Berms and Scorching Column as the example, the Large creature would move through 6 squares and take damage from all 6 squares.