Can you teleport onto/inside/alongside/underneath..a moving object? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Can you teleport onto/inside/alongside/underneath..a moving object? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
PrinceAzar
05-12-05, 04:37 AM For example, assume i wish to Dimension Door from a ledge, to the top of a carriage being carried by horses across some plains, can I do that?

If I want to teleport inside a moving train, cargo area, can I do that?

Can i specify, alongside the train or underneath the train to grab a handhold and sneak onboard?
Seeker95
05-12-05, 10:37 AM If your DM says yes, then you can.
If your DM says no, then you can't.

I allow it, but I give a penalty of the caster having to use one familiarity category lower than actual for determining failure risks. And I do not allow "viewed once" to succeed for moving destinations.
tarkin
05-12-05, 11:12 AM On this point, I totally agree with Seeker95.
PrinceAzar
05-12-05, 12:33 PM But actual rules only account for static locations?
RaspK FOG
05-12-05, 12:44 PM I will have to disagree; I would actually allow a player to teleport on board a ship or other moving "location" (that is, any vehicle or structure that is pictured in one's mind without any specific backdrop but as a unique form) as long as it can be specifically pictured; "Inside the 2nd first wagon of Orient Express." works fine for me. This seems especially appropriate for Dimention Door.
cannywizard
05-12-05, 12:47 PM If it was a slow moving object, like a ship okay, but for a speeding train, I'd apply penalites
RaspK FOG
05-12-05, 12:50 PM If it was a slow moving object, like a ship okay, but for a speeding train, I'd apply penalitesI'd hardly call ships "slow moving..."

People, I might be the only one seeing it, but tell me honestly: doesn't your negative answer somehow lie deep within the whole theme of the speeding train and the imagery teleporting inside one brings to your mind?
Catra
05-12-05, 03:56 PM Teleport and Dimension Door are two different things. With Teleport, the effect is instantaneous and you immediately move relative to the object's speed. Dimension door, however, creates a static portal that does not move relative to a moving object once it it created; so if you make a dimension door and suddenly the floor falls out, the door doesn't fall with the floor.
Seeker95
05-12-05, 04:03 PM With Teleport, the effect is instantaneous and you immediately move relative to the object's speed.While I agree with this statement, it is an opinion, not a statement of fact.
It is not a supporting argument to prove a point. It is a point that must first be proven.
smrtgmp
05-12-05, 04:32 PM I would allow it if you are familiar with the location you are attemting to reach. In fact, I would allow it even if you werent, you would just have a harder time pinpointing your arival.

After all, the planet you're standing on is in motion, and moving far faster than any train.

If you know what the interior of the train looks like, then I would deninately allow you to telepor into it. Teleporting to the bottom of the train would probably be more difficult, if only becuase you would likely be less familiar with it.
Shatteredtower
05-13-05, 01:02 AM After all, the planet you're standing on is in motion, and moving far faster than any train.

This has long been the critical point for me. Consider: if teleport has to factor in velocity like that, what happens when you use greater teleport to move from a planet circling a sun (if you use that model) to an outer plane (or elemental earth, for that matter)?

I don't have any objections to decreasing success chances for teleporting into or onto moving vehicles, however, because there's the matter of relative velocity. If you're teleporting into a city, it is rarely moving relative to you, whereas a speeding train is a changing location from your perspective.

The rules don't dictate a clear priority for cases like this, as far as I can tell, but it seems reasonable to work with it either way. However, before you do attempt a teleport onto an airship, submarine, or train, ask your DM if there is any difference between attempting this and attempting to teleport down to the pub. I believe that you're entitled to know if this won't work (or if it's less likely to work) before you try it.
smrtgmp
05-13-05, 02:08 AM This has long been the critical point for me. Consider: if teleport has to factor in velocity like that, what happens when you use greater teleport to move from a planet circling a sun (if you use that model) to an outer plane (or elemental earth, for that matter)?The spell would fail Teleport, Greater
Conjuration (Teleportation)
Level: Sor/Wiz 7, Travel 7
This spell functions like teleport, except that there is no range limit and there is no chance you arrive off target. In addition, you need not have seen the destination, but in that case you must have at least a reliable description of the place to which you are teleporting. If you attempt to teleport with insufficient information (or with misleading information), you disappear and simply reappear in your original location. Interplanar travel is not possible.
Note the bolded text. :P

If you're teleporting into a city, it is rarely moving relative to you, whereas a speeding train is a changing location from your perspective.

The rules don't dictate a clear priority for cases like this, as far as I can tell, but it seems reasonable to work with it either way. However, before you do attempt a teleport onto an airship, submarine, or train, ask your DM if there is any difference between attempting this and attempting to teleport down to the pub. I believe that you're entitled to know if this won't work (or if it's less likely to work) before you try it.A very good point.
Shatteredtower
05-13-05, 02:21 AM The spell would fail Note the bolded text. :P

Darn, getting spells crossed across editions in my head again. Sorry about that.
smrtgmp
05-13-05, 02:24 AM Dont apologize. I do that all the time. :) Its kind of inevitable.
Minias
05-13-05, 05:52 AM A silly point of interest ...

If as a DM you rule that you can not teleport between surfaces that are moving a significantly different speeds, and if your campaign world is a globe spinning on its axis then you should limit spellcasters to teleporting only along their current longitude.

A person standing on the equator of an earth-like planet is being spun around the planet's equatorial circumference at much faster speed (> 24,000 miles in 24 hours) than a person standing at a pole (0 miles in 24 hours).

IMC, if you are familiar with the target location and you roll a successful on-target teleport check then the new location's speed relative to yours is irrelevant as the magic will compensate.
Catra
05-13-05, 07:43 AM If an effect is instantaneous, it means it happens immediately, and not three seconds after the caster casts the spell. If you teleport somewhere, in that instant time stops relative to your spell, and suddenly you have a new orientation. Wether you adapt to this orientation quick enough to avoid falling over is up to you.
Seeker95
05-13-05, 09:55 AM If an effect is instantaneous, it means it happens immediately, and not three seconds after the caster casts the spell. If you teleport somewhere, in that instant time stops relative to your spell, and suddenly you have a new orientation.Again, these are opinions offered to give flavor explanation to the specific application of a specific spell mechanic.

I'm not saying the above statements are wrong. Just that neither of these is a rule. The above is an ad hoc explantion of a mechanic. As such, offering it as proof is not very helpful because the proof must be accepted as true before it can be used to support your conclusion. And in this case, there is enough room for abuse if the above is accepted as "the rule" that, while I find myself agreeing with it in theory, I cannot agree with it in mechanics.
Germytech
05-13-05, 12:01 PM Seeker95 is unequivocally correct. There are no rules, nor mechanics and no descriptions of Conjuration (teleport) spells concerning movement or relative movement. The best rules "answer" is:

If your DM says yes, then you can.
If your DM says no, then you can't.

And on that note, I can describe my reasoning, as A DM, for saying yes or no, using dimension door and teleport as examples.

I would say that when one teleports based on "visualizing the area," then that person is transferred according to that area's relative speed. Teleport and greater teleport are based on this principle, as well as dimension door, if you wish.

However, if the caster uses the other method of teleport, mainly, "by stating direction," then the teleport is considered relative not to your destination, but to your origin.

So: if you teleport into a moving train by visualizing the train itself, then you will teleport into the train, remaining still relative to the moving train.

If you teleport into a moving train by stating the direction (is, you see the train in front of you which you have not seen the inside of, and you say, "I dimension door 50 ft. forward, into the train), then you will be promptly thrown against the inside of the train, depending on the relative speed.

My personal ruling anyway. Hope I made sense. ;)
Wandering Wilbur
05-13-05, 05:02 PM "If as a DM you rule that you can not teleport between surfaces that are moving a significantly different speeds, and if your campaign world is a globe spinning on its axis then you should limit spellcasters to teleporting only along their current longitude."

Even that would be inadequate. Teleporting any significant distance would result in your body's acceleration no longer being tangent to the curvature of the Earth. You would literally be smashed into the ground like a bug on a windshield, or flung high into the sky.

And yes, I'm aware it is a fantasy world. But suspension of disbelief can't account for ignoring the laws of physics. Magic exists, but otherwise things must work as you expect them to, for if they did not, an environment even resembling our own could not exist.

So the assertation that it is soley up to the DM is true only in so far that it is always true -- the DM's word is law. But I doubt anyone who has considered the implications of _not_ having the spell account for vector changes and still house-rules it that way knows anything about physics. After all, as a business major I was not the brightest bulb, but even I know better. ;-)

Dimension door, on the other hand, works over such short distances that it would still be viable if it did not account for differences in velocity and acceleration, but the caster might find himself slamming into walls or falling a lot if he isn't careful. Teleporting onto a vehicle moving at 60 miles an hour would be little better than being _struck_ by said vehicle...
mvincent
05-13-05, 05:26 PM I think basically all movement is relative to it's frame of reference, so of course you must be able to teleport to a moving object (train, ship, planet, solar system...). But I'd rule that teleporting to the top of a moving object (train) with parts of the 'frame of reference' rushing past means that you are a bit less familiar with your destination. Better to teleport inside the train.

Teleporting to a known location that is unexpectedly occupied by a moving item could of course be disasterous
Catra
05-13-05, 06:07 PM I was basically trying to use common sense to explain how the mechanic would work. Forgive me :embarrass

It seems to me that if they didn't explain it in the spell, it is either not important or they just never tested it, which seems doubtful to me. I re-read the spell, and it has more to do with the familiarity of the location than what's in it or if it is moving. For instance, in the spell description, it says that a wizard teleporting to his tower or workshop may wind up in another wizard's workshop, if it is similar enough and closer. This means that if you try to teleport onto a moving train, you may end up on another train if it is closer, wether, in my opinion, it is moving or not.

The lack of description on moving objects could also mean that they meant it to be impossible, however. But I think that's silly.

Besides, if a DM doesn't want his players to teleport onto moving objects, he can decide that, for some reason, antimagic field was cast on that room. Oh well.

I think that since a spell is a contract, and not forced to conform to normal laws of physics, you should be able to teleport to moving objects while they are moving. Besides, isn't defying physics what magic is for?
Germytech
05-16-05, 11:56 AM I think the spells make perfect sense when considering movement. The teleport spells specifically state that you teleport to a location that you visualize.

So whether you visualize a location that is moving, on the opposite side of the planet, or whatever, you automatically appear stationary relative to whatever location you teleport to.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
PrinceAzar 05-12-05, 04:37 AM	For example, assume i wish to Dimension Door from a ledge, to the top of a carriage being carried by horses across some plains, can I do that? If I want to teleport inside a moving train, cargo area, can I do that? Can i specify, alongside the train or underneath the train to grab a handhold and sneak onboard?
Seeker95 05-12-05, 10:37 AM	If your DM says yes, then you can. If your DM says no, then you can't. I allow it, but I give a penalty of the caster having to use one familiarity category lower than actual for determining failure risks. And I do not allow "viewed once" to succeed for moving destinations.
tarkin 05-12-05, 11:12 AM	On this point, I totally agree with Seeker95.
PrinceAzar 05-12-05, 12:33 PM	But actual rules only account for static locations?
RaspK FOG 05-12-05, 12:44 PM	I will have to disagree; I would actually allow a player to teleport on board a ship or other moving "location" (that is, any vehicle or structure that is pictured in one's mind without any specific backdrop but as a unique form) as long as it can be specifically pictured; "Inside the 2nd first wagon of Orient Express." works fine for me. This seems especially appropriate for Dimention Door.
cannywizard 05-12-05, 12:47 PM	If it was a slow moving object, like a ship okay, but for a speeding train, I'd apply penalites
RaspK FOG 05-12-05, 12:50 PM	If it was a slow moving object, like a ship okay, but for a speeding train, I'd apply penalitesI'd hardly call ships "slow moving..." People, I might be the only one seeing it, but tell me honestly: doesn't your negative answer somehow lie deep within the whole theme of the speeding train and the imagery teleporting inside one brings to your mind?
Catra 05-12-05, 03:56 PM	Teleport and Dimension Door are two different things. With Teleport, the effect is instantaneous and you immediately move relative to the object's speed. Dimension door, however, creates a static portal that does not move relative to a moving object once it it created; so if you make a dimension door and suddenly the floor falls out, the door doesn't fall with the floor.
Seeker95 05-12-05, 04:03 PM	With Teleport, the effect is instantaneous and you immediately move relative to the object's speed.While I agree with this statement, it is an opinion, not a statement of fact. It is not a supporting argument to prove a point. It is a point that must first be proven.
smrtgmp 05-12-05, 04:32 PM	I would allow it if you are familiar with the location you are attemting to reach. In fact, I would allow it even if you werent, you would just have a harder time pinpointing your arival. After all, the planet you're standing on is in motion, and moving far faster than any train. If you know what the interior of the train looks like, then I would deninately allow you to telepor into it. Teleporting to the bottom of the train would probably be more difficult, if only becuase you would likely be less familiar with it.
Shatteredtower 05-13-05, 01:02 AM	After all, the planet you're standing on is in motion, and moving far faster than any train. This has long been the critical point for me. Consider: if teleport has to factor in velocity like that, what happens when you use greater teleport to move from a planet circling a sun (if you use that model) to an outer plane (or elemental earth, for that matter)? I don't have any objections to decreasing success chances for teleporting into or onto moving vehicles, however, because there's the matter of relative velocity. If you're teleporting into a city, it is rarely moving relative to you, whereas a speeding train is a changing location from your perspective. The rules don't dictate a clear priority for cases like this, as far as I can tell, but it seems reasonable to work with it either way. However, before you do attempt a teleport onto an airship, submarine, or train, ask your DM if there is any difference between attempting this and attempting to teleport down to the pub. I believe that you're entitled to know if this won't work (or if it's less likely to work) before you try it.
smrtgmp 05-13-05, 02:08 AM	This has long been the critical point for me. Consider: if teleport has to factor in velocity like that, what happens when you use greater teleport to move from a planet circling a sun (if you use that model) to an outer plane (or elemental earth, for that matter)?The spell would fail Teleport, Greater Conjuration (Teleportation) Level: Sor/Wiz 7, Travel 7 This spell functions like teleport, except that there is no range limit and there is no chance you arrive off target. In addition, you need not have seen the destination, but in that case you must have at least a reliable description of the place to which you are teleporting. If you attempt to teleport with insufficient information (or with misleading information), you disappear and simply reappear in your original location. Interplanar travel is not possible. Note the bolded text. :P If you're teleporting into a city, it is rarely moving relative to you, whereas a speeding train is a changing location from your perspective. The rules don't dictate a clear priority for cases like this, as far as I can tell, but it seems reasonable to work with it either way. However, before you do attempt a teleport onto an airship, submarine, or train, ask your DM if there is any difference between attempting this and attempting to teleport down to the pub. I believe that you're entitled to know if this won't work (or if it's less likely to work) before you try it.A very good point.
Shatteredtower 05-13-05, 02:21 AM	The spell would fail Note the bolded text. :P Darn, getting spells crossed across editions in my head again. Sorry about that.
smrtgmp 05-13-05, 02:24 AM	Dont apologize. I do that all the time. :) Its kind of inevitable.
Minias 05-13-05, 05:52 AM	A silly point of interest ... If as a DM you rule that you can not teleport between surfaces that are moving a significantly different speeds, and if your campaign world is a globe spinning on its axis then you should limit spellcasters to teleporting only along their current longitude. A person standing on the equator of an earth-like planet is being spun around the planet's equatorial circumference at much faster speed (> 24,000 miles in 24 hours) than a person standing at a pole (0 miles in 24 hours). IMC, if you are familiar with the target location and you roll a successful on-target teleport check then the new location's speed relative to yours is irrelevant as the magic will compensate.
Catra 05-13-05, 07:43 AM	If an effect is instantaneous, it means it happens immediately, and not three seconds after the caster casts the spell. If you teleport somewhere, in that instant time stops relative to your spell, and suddenly you have a new orientation. Wether you adapt to this orientation quick enough to avoid falling over is up to you.
Seeker95 05-13-05, 09:55 AM	If an effect is instantaneous, it means it happens immediately, and not three seconds after the caster casts the spell. If you teleport somewhere, in that instant time stops relative to your spell, and suddenly you have a new orientation.Again, these are opinions offered to give flavor explanation to the specific application of a specific spell mechanic. I'm not saying the above statements are wrong. Just that neither of these is a rule. The above is an ad hoc explantion of a mechanic. As such, offering it as proof is not very helpful because the proof must be accepted as true before it can be used to support your conclusion. And in this case, there is enough room for abuse if the above is accepted as "the rule" that, while I find myself agreeing with it in theory, I cannot agree with it in mechanics.
Germytech 05-13-05, 12:01 PM	Seeker95 is unequivocally correct. There are no rules, nor mechanics and no descriptions of Conjuration (teleport) spells concerning movement or relative movement. The best rules "answer" is: If your DM says yes, then you can. If your DM says no, then you can't. And on that note, I can describe my reasoning, as A DM, for saying yes or no, using dimension door and teleport as examples. I would say that when one teleports based on "visualizing the area," then that person is transferred according to that area's relative speed. Teleport and greater teleport are based on this principle, as well as dimension door, if you wish. However, if the caster uses the other method of teleport, mainly, "by stating direction," then the teleport is considered relative not to your destination, but to your origin. So: if you teleport into a moving train by visualizing the train itself, then you will teleport into the train, remaining still relative to the moving train. If you teleport into a moving train by stating the direction (is, you see the train in front of you which you have not seen the inside of, and you say, "I dimension door 50 ft. forward, into the train), then you will be promptly thrown against the inside of the train, depending on the relative speed. My personal ruling anyway. Hope I made sense. ;)
Wandering Wilbur 05-13-05, 05:02 PM	"If as a DM you rule that you can not teleport between surfaces that are moving a significantly different speeds, and if your campaign world is a globe spinning on its axis then you should limit spellcasters to teleporting only along their current longitude." Even that would be inadequate. Teleporting any significant distance would result in your body's acceleration no longer being tangent to the curvature of the Earth. You would literally be smashed into the ground like a bug on a windshield, or flung high into the sky. And yes, I'm aware it is a fantasy world. But suspension of disbelief can't account for ignoring the laws of physics. Magic exists, but otherwise things must work as you expect them to, for if they did not, an environment even resembling our own could not exist. So the assertation that it is soley up to the DM is true only in so far that it is always true -- the DM's word is law. But I doubt anyone who has considered the implications of _not_ having the spell account for vector changes and still house-rules it that way knows anything about physics. After all, as a business major I was not the brightest bulb, but even I know better. ;-) Dimension door, on the other hand, works over such short distances that it would still be viable if it did not account for differences in velocity and acceleration, but the caster might find himself slamming into walls or falling a lot if he isn't careful. Teleporting onto a vehicle moving at 60 miles an hour would be little better than being _struck_ by said vehicle...
mvincent 05-13-05, 05:26 PM	I think basically all movement is relative to it's frame of reference, so of course you must be able to teleport to a moving object (train, ship, planet, solar system...). But I'd rule that teleporting to the top of a moving object (train) with parts of the 'frame of reference' rushing past means that you are a bit less familiar with your destination. Better to teleport inside the train. Teleporting to a known location that is unexpectedly occupied by a moving item could of course be disasterous
Catra 05-13-05, 06:07 PM	I was basically trying to use common sense to explain how the mechanic would work. Forgive me :embarrass It seems to me that if they didn't explain it in the spell, it is either not important or they just never tested it, which seems doubtful to me. I re-read the spell, and it has more to do with the familiarity of the location than what's in it or if it is moving. For instance, in the spell description, it says that a wizard teleporting to his tower or workshop may wind up in another wizard's workshop, if it is similar enough and closer. This means that if you try to teleport onto a moving train, you may end up on another train if it is closer, wether, in my opinion, it is moving or not. The lack of description on moving objects could also mean that they meant it to be impossible, however. But I think that's silly. Besides, if a DM doesn't want his players to teleport onto moving objects, he can decide that, for some reason, antimagic field was cast on that room. Oh well. I think that since a spell is a contract, and not forced to conform to normal laws of physics, you should be able to teleport to moving objects while they are moving. Besides, isn't defying physics what magic is for?
Germytech 05-16-05, 11:56 AM	I think the spells make perfect sense when considering movement. The teleport spells specifically state that you teleport to a location that you visualize. So whether you visualize a location that is moving, on the opposite side of the planet, or whatever, you automatically appear stationary relative to whatever location you teleport to.