PDA

View Full Version : How valuable is flight?



Talakeal
2013-06-05, 11:52 AM
In my game i recently made a change that requires a character to spend several feats and skill points to make effective use of flight. The party mage complained that the flight spell was no longer worth it as the only real mechanical benefit to flight is a small ac boost for high ground, and thus i had robber her of an "iconic" mage ability which was vital from a flavor perspective.

I tried to argue that flight was a trmendous tactical boost as it allowed you to ignore all melee attacks from lanlocked foes, allowed a character to ignore most terrain and interposing enemies, and to simply bypass a good number of encounters and obstacles, but the player dismissed these as edge cases that would never come up in actual play.

So am i off base here? Is flight not all it is cracked up to be? How or how not?

The Rose Dragon
2013-06-05, 12:07 PM
It is worth two power points per rank. That is the equivalent of a ranged damage effect, ranged move object effect, and a ranged affliction effect. The basic assumption is that most archetypes have a way of dealing with airborne enemies, whether that is their own ranged attacks, thrown objects, or requiring the flier to get close.

At least, that's how it's is in M&M, which is what I'm most familiar with. The answer changes wildly between systems and settings.

CarpeGuitarrem
2013-06-05, 12:15 PM
You're right. AC boosts are the least powerful thing about flight in D&D.

The most powerful is the ability to get from point A to point B irregardless of terrain or obstacles.

TheStranger
2013-06-05, 12:19 PM
Flight is a big deal. Unless all your adventures are indoors, there are tons of reasons to fly; getting over obstacles, getting a high vantage point to scout ahead, getting out of melee range, etc.

That said, I'm curious how you're going about nerfing flight. Once you can move freely in three dimensions, however slowly and clumsily, you can do most of the interesting out of combat things.

Finally, your player isn't necessarily wrong. While I'm usually in favor of hitting spellcasters with a nerf bat, it sounds like she had certain reasonable expectations based on the rules as she knew them. You're never wrong to houserule, but houserules should be explained well in advance and should make the game more fun. If you sprung your houserules on her and made the game less fun, she has some right to be upset.

LibraryOgre
2013-06-05, 12:19 PM
Flight is valuable in inverse proportion to its availability.

Chosen
2013-06-05, 12:21 PM
Depends on the situation honestly. Assuming you are talking about DND then it depends on the area the PCs are in. If you are outside or in an area similar to the mines of Moria from the LoTR movies then flight can be very powerful as it allows you have much superior mobility and also you can basically becomes immune to the standard brute monster such as dire tiger or grey render. However if you are in an area like a standard tunnel with short ceilings (like 6-7 feet) then flight doesn't help you.

Mewtarthio
2013-06-05, 12:28 PM
I tried to argue that flight was a trmendous tactical boost as it allowed you to ignore all melee attacks from lanlocked foes, allowed a character to ignore most terrain and interposing enemies, and to simply bypass a good number of encounters and obstacles, but the player dismissed these as edge cases that would never come up in actual play.

"Edge cases"? Those things are literally the entire point of flight!

Necroticplague
2013-06-05, 12:44 PM
Well, if you yourself are melee, flight is only a little bit useful. After all, even if you're above the enemy, that does little help if you're still wishhin reach. If you have some kind of extended reach or ranged attack of your own, it's a fair bit more useful, allowing you to safely take on melee enemies that can't fly from safety (Until they decide to start throwing things). Also allows you to get a better angle of attack for aiming AOEs or ignoring cover of unfavorable ground conditions, like thick mire and dense rubble.

Outside of combat, it is incredibly useful, rivaling only things like permanent invisibility and etherealness/incorporeality (which combines the last two+phasing through stuff). Ignore pressure plate traps, pits, ground based tripwires, the difficulties of cliffs, mountains, walls, and chasms.

Morty
2013-06-05, 12:45 PM
Yeah. Flight tends to be quite valuable unless everyone has it - precisely because it lets you completely bypass obstacles and stay out of the reach of non-fliers. A chasm? Fly over it. A band of conveniently evil humanoids with pointed sticks? Fly over them. And so on.

TheCountAlucard
2013-06-05, 12:46 PM
Depends on the splat. Lunars can just target a bird with the Sacred Hunt and take its shape, assuming that it doesn't have a flying warform in the first place. Dragon-Blooded can learn Dancing Ember Stride to fly, but it's limited; they have to remain within a fixed distance from a solid surface (meaning, among other things, no flight to cross a river). Solars and Abyssals have flight ceilings on their respective flight Charms. Really the best solutions are in artifacts, either personal-scale or airships, but even they get zapped by the gods for rising higher than a mile.

Tengu_temp
2013-06-05, 12:50 PM
Iconic? Funny, I don't remember Gandalf or Merlin going "up up and away!" and flying off with one hand outstretched forward at any point.

The value of flight is highly dependant on what game you're playing, but since you're talking about skill points and feats, I assume this is DND 3e. And since in that game most heavy hitters fight in melee and flying renders you virtually invincible to their attacks... Yeah.

The Rose Dragon
2013-06-05, 12:51 PM
Depends on the splat. Lunars can just target a bird with the Sacred Hunt and take its shape, assuming that it doesn't have a flying warform in the first place. Dragon-Blooded can learn Dancing Ember Stride to fly, but it's limited; they have to remain within a fixed distance from a solid surface (meaning, among other things, no flight to cross a river). Solars and Abyssals have flight ceilings on their respective flight Charms. Really the best solutions are in artifacts, either personal-scale or airships, but even they get zapped by the gods for rising higher than a mile.

That only answers how you can get flight, not how valuable it is. It is not that easy to counter unlimited flight in Exalted, but there isn't much of it either. It either limits your offensive options and can't keep you out of offensive range too easily without getting your opponents out of your offensive range. Out of combat uses remain valid, but if you are designing obstacles that can be circumvented with a single Athletics Charm, you probably need more flexibility in obstacle design.

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 12:54 PM
Basically i am playing a low magic game and i found that buffs were dominating the game, so i put in a rule that a character could only have a number of buffs equal to their charisma bonus active at any given time, plus you can spend a feat (any number of time) to have an additional buff active.

Then i divided flight into three seperate spells. The first grants the abiity to glide and safe fall infinitely, the second level allows standard flight, and the third allows perfect maneuverability. Each level includes the previous levels, and thus standard flight requires two buff slots and perfect manueverbility three.

Sith_Happens
2013-06-05, 01:05 PM
What level is each of those spells? That's the important part. Incidentally, perfect maneuverability is actually an upgrade from the regular Fly spell (which gives good).

Friv
2013-06-05, 01:18 PM
I tried to argue that flight was a trmendous tactical boost as it allowed you to ignore all melee attacks from lanlocked foes, allowed a character to ignore most terrain and interposing enemies, and to simply bypass a good number of encounters and obstacles, but the player dismissed these as edge cases that would never come up in actual play.

As usual, your player is insane.

But hell, you might as well compromise with them and give them what they say they want. Let them change the first tier from "glide and fall safely" to "levitate safely".

They can safely levitate up to four feet off of the ground, and move at a slight bonus (say 40ft), allowing them to zip over minor obstacles without trouble and ignore difficult terrain, generally keeping the imagery of a flying mage, but still be within swording range and not be able to just ignore major obstacles. They also get the height advantage for free.

The two upgrades work as usual.

Craft (Cheese)
2013-06-05, 01:24 PM
Iconic? Funny, I don't remember Gandalf or Merlin going "up up and away!" and flying off with one hand outstretched forward at any point.

I don't know about you, but when I think "Iconic D&D characters" I think "Order of the Stick." Casters in the comic fly around all the time (the main exceptions being Nale and Durkon).

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 01:28 PM
What level is each of those spells? That's the important part. Incidentally, perfect maneuverability is actually an upgrade from the regular Fly spell (which gives good).

3, 4, and 5

Lord Torath
2013-06-05, 01:51 PM
I'd say your Glide spell is way too high level. Featherfall is a 1st level spell, yes?

Murdock's Feathery Flyer (2E AD&D) is another 1st level spell that lets you glide 5' over for every 1' drop. (for 1 minute per level)

What's the ratio for your Glide Spell?

Edit: I agree with you, though, the being able to fly is incredibly valuable, and is way more valuable out of combat than in it.

TheStranger
2013-06-05, 02:01 PM
3, 4, and 5

I'd drop each of those a level. Your low option is only slightly better than featherfall, and your high option is only slightly better than regular flight. They're already balanced by the buff counter, so I don't think you need to up the spell level as well.

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 03:17 PM
I'd say your Glide spell is way too high level. Featherfall is a 1st level spell, yes?

Murdock's Feathery Flyer (2E AD&D) is another 1st level spell that lets you glide 5' over for every 1' drop. (for 1 minute per level)

What's the ratio for your Glide Spell?

Edit: I agree with you, though, the being able to fly is incredibly valuable, and is way more valuable out of combat than in it.

Well, it is certainly more powerful than feather fall, especially in that it lasts ten minutes per level rather than for a single drop. The only advantage feather fall has is the swift casting time.

The full effects of glide are:
High ground against land locked foes.
Immune to falling damage.
Double vertical jump distance.
Increase horizontal jump distance by a factor of ten.
Ignore flanking from land locked foes.
Can glide a very long distance if starting from an elevated point (exact range is determined by flying skill but will be at least ten times the vertical height and could be up to many miles)

Killer Angel
2013-06-05, 03:21 PM
Yeah. Flight tends to be quite valuable unless everyone has it - .

IN this scenario, I would say it's even more valuable. You don't want to be the only non-flyer, when the rest of the world is flying above you.

Sith_Happens
2013-06-05, 03:30 PM
I'd drop each of those a level. Your low option is only slightly better than featherfall, and your high option is only slightly better than regular flight. They're already balanced by the buff counter, so I don't think you need to up the spell level as well.

That, and at 2nd, 3rd, and 4th they trail nicely into Overland Flight, which is 5th.


As usual, your player is insane.

But hell, you might as well compromise with them and give them what they say they want. Let them change the first tier from "glide and fall safely" to "levitate safely".

They can safely levitate up to four feet off of the ground, and move at a slight bonus (say 40ft), allowing them to zip over minor obstacles without trouble and ignore difficult terrain, generally keeping the imagery of a flying mage, but still be within swording range and not be able to just ignore major obstacles. They also get the height advantage for free.

The two upgrades work as usual.

Halaster's Light Step (PGtF, 2nd level) does almost exactly this. 1 min./level, fly at your base land speed with good maneuverability, but can only move vertically while within 3 ft of a horizontal surface (so you can fly over chasms, but not walls).

Tengu_temp
2013-06-05, 03:34 PM
I don't know about you, but when I think "Iconic D&D characters" I think "Order of the Stick." Casters in the comic fly around all the time (the main exceptions being Nale and Durkon).

Because DND invented wizards, and Order of the Stick invented DND.

Fiery Diamond
2013-06-05, 03:54 PM
Because DND invented wizards, and Order of the Stick invented DND.

You do realize that "iconic" doesn't mean "original," right?

Rhynn
2013-06-05, 04:22 PM
Flight is incredibly valuable. Just the ability to not have to walk around and through things can circumvent entire aventures. (Cf. the old "why didn't they just fly ring into the volcano?" thing, flawed as it is.)

What, exactly, was your party's mage using flight to do? Because IMO you listed all the uses of it and he dismissed them.

(Also, I hate your players, just so you know.)


Flight is valuable in inverse proportion to its availability.

True to a point, but if everyone else can fly then flight is, again, invaluable for any one individual - practically a requirement... flying is awesome if no one else can do it, but not flying is crippling if everyone else can do it.

So it's some kinda off-center parabola of usefulness I guess? :smallconfused:

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 04:39 PM
What, exactly, was your party's mage using flight to do? Because IMO you listed all the uses of it and he dismissed them.



Mostly float above the battlefield shouting "Cower before my ultimate arcane power" and shooting fireballs before being made a pin cushion by archers.

And skipping large sections of travel based adventures by refusing to come within a mile of the earth until arriving at the destination.

Sith_Happens
2013-06-05, 06:42 PM
Mostly float above the battlefield shouting "Cower before my ultimate arcane power" and shooting fireballs before being made a pin cushion by archers.

And skipping large sections of travel based adventures by refusing to come within a mile of the earth until arriving at the destination.

So you're saying that one of your players referred to their standard operating procedure as an "edge case that would never come up in actual play?" That's just... Ugh.:smallsigh:

TuggyNE
2013-06-05, 07:02 PM
So you're saying that one of your players referred to their standard operating procedure as an "edge case that would never come up in actual play?" That's just... Ugh.:smallsigh:

Like Rhynn (and everyone else of sound mind who has ever read any of your threads), I really really have a hard time not thinking your players would be a perfect match for Chief Circle. They're pretty terrible.

TheOOB
2013-06-05, 07:05 PM
Flight along with teleportation, is a really tricky problem in D&D, as is any ability that allows characters to move in non-traditional ways(ie, movement forms other than walking, running, jumping, climbing ect).

Out of combat, easy access to flight eliminates a great deal of potential problems. Old rickety bridge, not a problem, giant wall, easy to get past, dangerous fire swamp, just fly over it. A great many physical obstacles are rendered moot if the players can just fly over them. If the system and the GM understands that flight will be common, prevalent, and easy(as it is in D&D 3rd), they can plan around that, and make obstacles and challenges which assume the capability to fly. But if the challenges assume flight and the players cannot fly, or they assume no flight and the players can, you have a problem.

In combat flight basically invalidates the melee abilities of anyone who can't fly. Once again, if flight was assumed, not a problem, you can make foes who can deal with flying players, but it can become a problem if one party has good air capability, and the other does not.

Basically, you, as the GM, need to decide how you want flight to work. Do you want players to have access to it or not. If you want flight to be less common in D&D 3.x, it's as easy as making Fly last 1 round/level and be at personal range(with similar changes to other flying abilities/items), meaning that flight is an occasionally used ability, not the norm.

I don't like OP's solution to the problem. You have to decide whether or not flight is common, safe, or useful. If you build the campaign assuming flight, but tax it heavily, you'll just make the players bitter, but if you build the campaign not assuming flight, you make it so anyone who spends the resources can just overcome challenges with no problem, and in either case you're restricting builds by making it so if players want to do what they expect, they have to spend significant character resources.

Mr Beer
2013-06-05, 07:13 PM
Flight is awesome. I would make a one-time only offer to the player to take back any slots/points used for this ability and spend them elsewhere. Either they are being legitimately shortsighted and will soon regret their decision or they are simply trying to bully you into getting their way and will back off when you make the offer.

Gavinfoxx
2013-06-05, 08:00 PM
You all just don't know Talakeal's players man... They're crazy. craaazzzyyyy... there's lots of terrible, terrible old threads... oh god, the memories... the worst part of it is, he thinks this sort of thing is normal!

*rocks back and forth, whimpering*

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 08:40 PM
So you're saying that one of your players referred to their standard operating procedure as an "edge case that would never come up in actual play?" That's just... Ugh.:smallsigh:

No, more like she is dissapointed that it doesnt provide a tangible combat benefit, only a tactical or situational one. This player is rather like xykon, believes that the answer to any problem is more force and spells that dont have big numbers arent worth using.

When she does use flight outside of combat it is to simply ditch the party and the adventure and skip everything. When she does that i, imo rightfully, chew her out, which makes her think that she isnt "allowed" to use the spell out of combat.

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 08:45 PM
I don't like OP's solution to the problem. You have to decide whether or not flight is common, safe, or useful. If you build the campaign assuming flight, but tax it heavily, you'll just make the players bitter, but if you build the campaign not assuming flight, you make it so anyone who spends the resources can just overcome challenges with no problem, and in either case you're restricting builds by making it so if players want to do what they expect, they have to spend significant character resources.

Not quite. Flight is not assumed, but it is a possibility for people who want to build their character around it rather than as just something anyone can throw on a spell or potion and do.

I am not sure how allowing characters to choose to build their character to do one thing is restricting builds, unless you mean restricting builds that do everything at once, in which case the who,e idea of a class or point buy system restricts builds.

Think of it like the x men. Originally angel had the power of flight. That was it. That was his power and he found ways tomake it work, it was his "build". In the more modern xmen half the team can fly, so they needed to upgrade angel into archangel and give him all sorts of crazy powers to seem special.

i am smply trying to go with the former type of group. If people want to have game changing abilities like flight, invisibility, etherealness, invulnerability, etc they cando so, but they will need to devote a significant portionoftheirresources tomaking it their "thing" ather than just one of a grab bag of super powers available to every castter.

TheStranger
2013-06-05, 08:46 PM
No, more like she is dissapointed that it doesnt provide a tangible combat benefit, only a tactical or situational one. This player is rather like xykon, believes that the answer to any problem is more force and spells that dont have big numbers arent worth using.

When she does use flight outside of combat it is to simply ditch the party and the adventure and skip everything. When she does that i, imo rightfully, chew her out, which makes her think that she isnt "allowed" to use the spell out of combat.

How old are your players, if you don't mind me asking?

jindra34
2013-06-05, 08:48 PM
True to a point, but if everyone else can fly then flight is, again, invaluable for any one individual - practically a requirement... flying is awesome if no one else can do it, but not flying is crippling if everyone else can do it.

So it's some kinda off-center parabola of usefulness I guess? :smallconfused:

Well its value relative to its cost likely stays the same. After all if everyone who matters and all their neighbors can fly, then it must not cost much to do. Which of course means flight is (almost) always worth the price.

Talakeal
2013-06-05, 08:49 PM
Flight is awesome. I would make a one-time only offer to the player to take back any slots/points used for this ability and spend them elsewhere. Either they are being legitimately shortsighted and will soon regret their decision or they are simply trying to bully you into getting their way and will back off when you make the offer.

The player hasnt devoted any resources to flight, that is the problem. They want to be able to use flight to full effect despite not being willing to devoteanythingto the ability but a single spell slot.

Tengu_temp
2013-06-05, 08:58 PM
You do realize that "iconic" doesn't mean "original," right?

Not my point. Looking at DND through the prism of OotS, and looking at all fantasy through the prism of DND, will severely limit your vision. Once you look outside DND 3e, you realize that having mages fly around all the time is nowhere near as common as you might think. Nothing iconic about them.

Mr Beer
2013-06-05, 09:56 PM
The player hasnt devoted any resources to flight, that is the problem. They want to be able to use flight to full effect despite not being willing to devoteanythingto the ability but a single spell slot.

- Explain why flight is worth it.

- State that this is what it costs, if it's not worth it to the player, then don't take it.

- Mention that everyone else, enemies included, operates under the same rules and you're not making an exception for one player.

- That's the way I'm running the game, if you don't like it, of course you are entitled to your opinion but if you play, you play under these rules.

Final answer, stop whining or you don't play. This is a threat that I've used and then carried out myself and guess what, I saw a remarkable change of attitude. Of course if it doesn't work and the person doesn't play again, that's also a win.

Sith_Happens
2013-06-05, 11:39 PM
No, more like she is dissapointed that it doesnt provide a tangible combat benefit, only a tactical or situational one. This player is rather like xykon, believes that the answer to any problem is more force and spells that dont have big numbers arent worth using.

And she hasn't noticed that blowing things up tends to be a lot easier while you're not being stabbed?:smallsigh:

Talakeal
2013-06-06, 12:10 AM
How old are your players, if you don't mind me asking?

Mid to late 20s.

GnomeFighter
2013-06-06, 04:32 AM
The player hasnt devoted any resources to flight, that is the problem. They want to be able to use flight to full effect despite not being willing to devoteanythingto the ability but a single spell slot.

So the player is saying "I should have flight. Make rules for me to have flight" and your saying "Ok, but at a cost"? Where is the rule for flight she is using at the moment coming from, or has she just decided that she is a mage so mush have it?

Flight is not an iconic ability of any spell casters IMO. I know some have it in OOTS, but thats about it. Its not like your saying she can't have a pointy hat (with stars on) or fireball. Those are iconic images of mages.

If she is being really difficult... Use it against her. Same as players wandering away from the party, they get attacked by monsters they cannot handle on there own. She gets attacked by a dragon at 10000 feet. The first the party know is when her limp chard body drops to the ground.

Or if you want to be less evil, random encounters. Any time the party is unexpectedly attacked they will be one member short. She can't join as she is at least a mile away and will not know what is happening.

Ashtagon
2013-06-06, 05:36 AM
http://www.thepiazza.org.uk/bb/viewtopic.php?f=70&t=3643

Here's what I did to the fly spell:

* Reduce speed to your base land speed, to stop it being a fast movement tool
* Make it self only, instead of touch,
* Make it so it requires active concentration. Any round in which the wizard doesn't spend a standard action maintaining the spell (srd (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#duration)) will result in the spell ending (you land as if you had cast feather fall). This stops the arcane aerial artillerist option.

Note that the L1 feather fall and L2 levitation spells are essentially more limited versions of fly. This spell essentially gives 3D movement where the levitate spell only gives vertical freedom of movement.

I'd probably consider a L4 spell with most of the original fly spell functionality.

nedz
2013-06-06, 05:22 PM
Iconic? Funny, I don't remember Gandalf or Merlin going "up up and away!" and flying off with one hand outstretched forward at any point.
Well Gandalf would just cast Summon Eagles whenever he wanted to fly, I don't know about Merlin.

No, more like she is disappointed that it doesn't provide a tangible combat benefit, only a tactical or situational one. This player is rather like xykon, believes that the answer to any problem is more force and spells that don't have big numbers aren't worth using.

When she does use flight outside of combat it is to simply ditch the party and the adventure and skip everything. When she does that i, imo rightfully, chew her out, which makes her think that she isn't "allowed" to use the spell out of combat.
Flying obviates terrain and so is incredibly powerful especially since it makes you immune to most melee. It also bypasses lots of challenges. It's probably worth +0.75 Tiers. That said it is quite easy to design encounters where it's an impediment — flying opponents, strong winds, archers, low ceilings, ...

It seems that your player is used to playing imperiously and in easy mode. You should be grateful, I suppose, that she thinks blasting is powerful.

LibraryOgre
2013-06-06, 05:34 PM
It seems that your player is used to playing imperiously and in easy mode. You should be grateful, I suppose, that she thinks blasting is powerful.

For me, it's never been about blasting being POWERFUL.... it's about blasting being FUN.

Scow2
2013-06-06, 05:40 PM
[url]
* Make it self only, instead of touch
This is a terrible. terrible, terrible "Screw Mundanes Casters Uber Alles" idea that needs to burn in a fire. Seriously.

nedz
2013-06-06, 06:19 PM
For me, it's never been about blasting being POWERFUL.... it's about blasting being FUN.

That's excellent, but it's not how the OP is describing his player.:smallamused:

Talakeal
2013-06-06, 07:22 PM
This is a terrible. terrible, terrible "Screw Mundanes Casters Uber Alles" idea that needs to burn in a fire. Seriously.

Agreed. I have eliminated all self only buffs in my campaign.

Slipperychicken
2013-06-06, 08:53 PM
Flight's a lot better than the game gives it credit for.

In my opinion, Flight spells as presented in dnd 3.5, if they should be in the game at all (they ruin a lot of things), should be at least 6th level magic. Maybe Overland Flight as an 8th or 9th level spell, maybe.

Doug Lampert
2013-06-06, 09:55 PM
This is a terrible. terrible, terrible "Screw Mundanes Casters Uber Alles" idea that needs to burn in a fire. Seriously.


Agreed. I have eliminated all self only buffs in my campaign.

Ditto. Self only buffs are BAD. If you won't offer a buff to melee then it shouldn't exist for casters.

I'd argue that almost all buff spells except defensive buffs with a duration of "24 hours" are bad (Buff is actually the key step in Scry, Buff, Teleport, and it's the key step because of short duration and offensive buffs), but that's a different argument, self only buffs are exceptionally bad.

Doug Lampert
2013-06-06, 09:59 PM
Flight's a lot better than the game gives it credit for.

In my opinion, Flight spells as presented in dnd 3.5, if they should be in the game at all (they ruin a lot of things), should be at least 6th level magic. Maybe Overland Flight as an 8th or 9th level spell, maybe.

Fifth is high enough. At fifth the casters have teleport and most things flight ruins teleport also kills, but it kills them harder, for a larger group, and twice on Sunday. The trivial chance of missing the target is almost completely handled by the phenomenally difficult method of having a second teleport prepared and a scroll with a third for real emergencies; to make an entire group mobile with flight will take 4 spells, two teleports is cheap by comparison.

Scow2
2013-06-06, 11:10 PM
Fifth is high enough. At fifth the casters have teleport and most things flight ruins teleport also kills, but it kills them harder, for a larger group, and twice on Sunday. The trivial chance of missing the target is almost completely handled by the phenomenally difficult method of having a second teleport prepared and a scroll with a third for real emergencies; to make an entire group mobile with flight will take 4 spells, two teleports is cheap by comparison.

Actually, Teleport is generally less useful than Fly tactically. Yeah, it's better overland travel, or a quick tactical move - but Fly lasts entire battles, and allows you to completely ignore melee at will.

Ashtagon
2013-06-07, 12:05 AM
This is a terrible. terrible, terrible "Screw Mundanes Casters Uber Alles" idea that needs to burn in a fire. Seriously.

If you read through the entire modified spell carefully, you'd notice it's actually a non-combat spell.

Slipperychicken
2013-06-07, 06:10 AM
Actually, Teleport is generally less useful than Fly tactically. Yeah, it's better overland travel, or a quick tactical move - but Fly lasts entire battles, and allows you to completely ignore melee at will.

This is just about the gist of it.

Dire Bear? Cast Fly and piss on it till it dies.
Tarrasque? Same deal, just bring a Wish scroll.
Fighter without Flight? Same deal as bear, but cast Protection From Arrows first so you can eat his dinky crossbow bolts and not care.

Eldariel
2013-06-07, 06:40 AM
Fighter without Flight? Same deal as bear, but cast Protection From Arrows first so you can eat his dinky crossbow bolts and not care.

Pro-Arrows is only DR/Magic; epically useless. Wind Wall is slightly more solid though positional. Also, even Fighter with Flight; cast Dispel Magic, laugh. You can Dispel whatever item is granting him Flight or the Flight-spell; either way he tends to be out for a while after.

Doug Lampert
2013-06-07, 10:26 AM
Pro-Arrows is only DR/Magic; epically useless. Wind Wall is slightly more solid though positional. Also, even Fighter with Flight; cast Dispel Magic, laugh. You can Dispel whatever item is granting him Flight or the Flight-spell; either way he tends to be out for a while after.

The correct way to give fighters flight would be with mounts. By the time you're mostly fighting flying things it's fairly obvious that a flying mount isn't inherently overpowered.

But D&D third makes mounts suck in so many ways that this doesn't work. (You attack the mount and rider separately and they have separate AC and HP pools and are hit separately by area powers and most flying monsters with adequate HP are better fighters than the fighter so it's not fighter on a mount it's mount with a pet fighter). Mounted combat and ride would fix some of this, except that fighters have so few skill points and mounted combat helps only against things that attack the mount's AC.

The Fury
2013-06-07, 09:36 PM
In my game i recently made a change that requires a character to spend several feats and skill points to make effective use of flight. The party mage complained that the flight spell was no longer worth it as the only real mechanical benefit to flight is a small ac boost for high ground, and thus i had robber her of an "iconic" mage ability which was vital from a flavor perspective.

I tried to argue that flight was a trmendous tactical boost as it allowed you to ignore all melee attacks from lanlocked foes, allowed a character to ignore most terrain and interposing enemies, and to simply bypass a good number of encounters and obstacles, but the player dismissed these as edge cases that would never come up in actual play.

So am i off base here? Is flight not all it is cracked up to be? How or how not?

I got to admit that your player does sort of have a point. Flight is a useful ability but as you're running it, it takes several feats to use properly? Honestly, if I were playing an arcane spellcaster I might like to have flight but unless the party is leveling up like crazy or feats are acquired differently I don't think I'd take a whole feat tree to use it.
Also, regarding "edge" abilities; if terrain rules come up often enough and if flying could actually allow someone to avoid being attacked then it's a useful ability. If it's a dungeon crawl with even terrain and all enemies have a ranged attack of some kind then flight actually is pretty useless.



Not my point. Looking at DND through the prism of OotS, and looking at all fantasy through the prism of DND, will severely limit your vision. Once you look outside DND 3e, you realize that having mages fly around all the time is nowhere near as common as you might think. Nothing iconic about them.

While that's true the subject of mages having flight was brought up in the context of an RPG that at least sounds similar to D&D 3.something. And in that context mages do fly around all the time.
While you're not wrong, all D&D concepts don't work well in other fantasy. It's also true that not all fantasy concepts work in D&D.

Agrippa
2013-06-07, 11:06 PM
Not my point. Looking at DND through the prism of OotS, and looking at all fantasy through the prism of DND, will severely limit your vision. Once you look outside DND 3e, you realize that having mages fly around all the time is nowhere near as common as you might think. Nothing iconic about them.

I'd say that the idea of magical flight is iconic, but also much rarer in myth and legend than in D&D (all editions). In Celtic mythology Birog, druidess of the Tuatha De Danann, flew to rescue the infant Lugh after his wicked grandfather, the Formori king Balor, had him thrown to the seas. In this case she was riding a gust of wind, but that's still pretty impressive. So I conclude that flight is an iconic magical power, and a rare one.

TuggyNE
2013-06-08, 01:06 AM
I'd say that the idea of magical flight is iconic, but also much rarer in myth and legend than in D&D (all editions). In Celtic mythology Birog, druidess of the Tuatha De Danann, flew to rescue the infant Lugh after his wicked grandfather, the Formori king Balor, had him thrown to the seas. In this case she was riding a gust of wind, but that's still pretty impressive. So I conclude that flight is an iconic magical power, and a rare one.

Which D&D, as so often happens, has cavalierly tossed to the serried ranks of mid-level spellcasters: "Here, have something nice. Next level, how does some shapechanging sound?"

Bogardan_Mage
2013-06-08, 01:53 AM
Iconic? Funny, I don't remember Gandalf or Merlin going "up up and away!" and flying off with one hand outstretched forward at any point.
I don't remember them slinging fireballs about either. The only thing Gandalf brought to the iconic wizard was his fashion sense, and even then Odin beat him to it by a couple of millennia.

Agrippa
2013-06-08, 02:52 AM
Which D&D, as so often happens, has cavalierly tossed to the serried ranks of mid-level spellcasters: "Here, have something nice. Next level, how does some shapechanging sound?"

Yeah, well part the problem was the Gygax and Arneson saw 5th to 11th level as "high level" and 12th and up as the equivalent to epic level in modern D&D parlance. The basic idea being that most PCs who survived to 9th-11th level were about to retire and set themselves up as nobilty and landed gentry. In other words the PCs spent most of their carrers as criminals, archaeologists/looters, mercenaries, monster hunters, holy warriors and vagabonds all to get rich and enter politics.

The Rose Dragon
2013-06-08, 04:26 AM
While that's true the subject of mages having flight was brought up in the context of an RPG that at least sounds similar to D&D 3.something. And in that context mages do fly around all the time.
While you're not wrong, all D&D concepts don't work well in other fantasy. It's also true that not all fantasy concepts work in D&D.

If you're posting in the general RPGs forum, you are likely to get general answers that consider a lot of settings, myths and systems. If you want a system-specific answer, you should post in one of the system-specific forums.