Which seems reasonable to me. After all if you are standing in fire and make a step - you will get burned more, because you just stepped onto a burning surface again. Similar with poison-acid kind of a surface.
What you're basically suggesting is that lifting your foot off a burning surface and setting it back down on the same burning surface should cause *more* damage than just leaving your foot glued to the burning surface and not moving it.
That makes no sense. Why should it cause more damage?
If a burning surface does 30 damage per turn:
1) Standing on it for 2 turns should cause 60 damage total.
2) Spending 2 turns walking 20 steps out of it should also cause 60 damage total. Instead, what's happening is you're taking 30x20+60 = good luck with that damage.
Depends. A burning surface in stasis is statically exposed. If you move the surface, if there are hidden areas to which were not exposed, then they would then be exposed upon movement, increasing the burn affected area due to the movement.
So, If I am crouched in a ball and covering as much as possible, I am exposing less area to the fire, but when I open up and move though it, I expose more areas which increases my burn area. This is a physics experiment. Ball a wad of paper tightly and see how fast it burns, but open it up, allowing maximum exposure to the surface, and it burns much faster.
It isn't perfect, but the idea that moving increasing your burn damage isn't unreasonable. Now why running would be more damage than walking, well... that one is debatable.
