Opinions on Flight for PCs

[Auramis]

This might just be me with this, but I've always felt like flight is something that people underestimate in terms of its usefulness. As a DM, I'm not particularly fond of allowing players to take races that would allow flight (such as the tiefling variant or the aarakocra), and will request they not do it.

I want opinions from y'all on flight. Am I too xenophobic to the idea of flight and need to focus more on tuning encounters to account for flight? Am I right in assuming it's a supremely useful ability and should be apprehensive?

[MrStabby]

You are right, it is an exceptionally useful ability.

It helps players hit the most vulnerable targets, bypass traps, see behind cover, hugely imbalances against anyone without long ranged weapons and generally muck up a whole lot of stuff. Encounters planned with difficult or dangerous terrain become much easier as do those with small area of effect used by the enemy.

It is worth being very careful with.

[lebefrei]

I agree with you; flight is a third level spell and only last 10 minutes. A sorcerer can make it last 20. There is no way to further extend it.

Druids cannot wild shape into flying creatures until 8th level. They cannot use a ranged weapon while flying, nor cast spells until 18th level. They must enter melee range to attack.

Yet at level 1, a flying race can take a bow or ranged cantrip and be completely immune to melee. At level four with Sharpshooter they can attack from 600 feet in the air! This is wildly imbalanced.

Winged tieflings shouldn't be able to fly until at least dragon sorcerers and tempest clerics can. Or they shouldn't exist. Dragonborn are from a race that all have wings, yet they don't.

Aarakocra are mostly broken because they now have six limbs. They should have legs and wings with hands like a bat like they used to, meaning they can't wield complicated weapons in the air. Giving them separate arms made them overpowered as ranged attackers.

[Rhaegar]

There is also a danger with having one character with flying, with the rest not, in that they may too often fly ahead and get attacked away from the party and killed.

[Steampunkette]

Meh. Plan for fliers and they become a nonissue. Flying bypasses pit traps? Use rockfalls and spell traps. No ranged enemies in an encounter? Add some. Use trees to provide two vector cover, or building awnings. Have giants throw boulders. Put the party in a room with high ceilings and net wielding foes. Embrace flying PCs by adding flying NPCs for aerial combat.

Fliers only break the game if the DM lets them.

That said... let flying work, sometimes. Let the player get use and success off their traits.

[MrStabby]

Meh. Plan for fliers and they become a nonissue. Flying bypasses pit traps? Use rockfalls and spell traps. No ranged enemies in an encounter? Add some. Use trees to provide two vector cover, or building awnings. Have giants throw boulders. Put the party in a room with high ceilings and net wielding foes. Embrace flying PCs by adding flying NPCs for aerial combat.

Fliers only break the game if the DM lets them.

That said... let flying work, sometimes. Let the player get use and success off their traits.

I think this is both right and wrong. Yes all of these can fix individual encounters but at the same time it very much narrows the range of possible encounters that a DM can throw at a party. These things fundamentally rule out certain types of encounter and challenge types. More and more you push your players to fight sapient races capable of long range spells and missile weapons whilst eliminating encounters based on more primitive life-forms without ranged attacks. Your encounter with a a shamble of zombies may be good and thematic for an encounter but adding in skeletons with bows may raise more questions than it answers in terms of resolving flying.

Any encounter can be fixed by adding elements to deal with flying but in doing so sometimes you weaken the theme or path of a campaign.

[lebefrei]

Meh. Plan for fliers and they become a nonissue.

Fliers only break the game if the DM lets them.

The same could be said for races with at-will invisibility, or misty step. 5e was supposed to overcome these balance problems, and the PHB does a pretty good job. Allowing these races harkens back to everything wrong with 3.5, in my opinion. Power creep is happening in splatbooks, and we need to say no to it before the PHB races are obsolete.

At will flight negates many things placed in the PHB to balance the ability. It's significantly better than the flight spell, and dragon sorcerers have to wait until level 14 for a similar feature. It's wildly out of place for the game.

[Thomasd851]

I haven't been able to see any issue with flight at 1st level.
Worried about scouting? Ban Find Familiar, an owl or hawk would be much less conspicuous and have advantage on perception sight checks.
Worried about access to tall buildings with guards not guarding the roof areas? Druid can turn into a spider at 2nd level and get into it without any worry. Then they can snoop around, pocket some things and spider out again.
Worried about flight in combat? Giving things ranged is as normal and easy as dealing with casters or ranged rogues. A flying character generally has less access to cover in the skies and a rogue at 2nd level would be able to disengage or dash to keep away from melee while attacking.
If you are worried about scaling and keeping track you will have that issue with ranged characters who actually take advantage of sniper options.
If you are worried about a buff character flying people over spike pits or up mountains give them a reason not to, make it dangerous or cramped. Maybe people are too heavy to be carried safely or maybe a strength check should be made every few feet.
If they are up against a group of only melee NPC's that would be hot peroggative. Maybe use Earthbind or hold person to knock them to the ground.
If players can deal with fliers other groups should be able to aswel.

[Grod_The_Giant]

@Thomasd851-- it's not so much that it's hugely problematic, it's that it's deeply asymmetic-- two races can fly at first, and it doesn't show up again until 5th level (in a very limited form); practical use of that takes even long, and the only similar ability at friggin' 14th. 5e was pretty miserly about flight in general (whether that's good or bad is subjective), except for these two random races that can do it from the start.

It's friggin' preposterous. I'd take a page from 3e's flying races:

At level one, your wings give you Advantage on Athletics checks made to jump, and you can glide, letting you fall safely and move forward 20 feet for every 5ft of descent.
At level 5, you can full-on fly for Con mod rounds at a stretch, or double that duration by taking a level of exhaustion. You also nab a level of exhaustion if you fly more than 10 minutes between Long Rests.
At level 10, you get unlimited flight.

[RickAllison]

I love flying in games, the aarakocra are my favorite race! That being said, I also realize that it changes the dynamics of many battles. When I entered into a game as a rogue flyer (melee, not ranged), I turned an encounter that was supposed to involve dealing with zombie hordes while being pelted with arrows from platforms above into a two-part battle as the rest of the party duked it out with zombies and half the crossbowmen while I screwed with the rest. By the time the rest of the party made it up to the second level, I had killed four of the five crossbowmen and was working on a fifth. A third of the enemy sections had to engage on weaker, melee terms with my PC because the DM had not planned for (though he had approved) my character as flying. In our last encounter with a weakened kraken, my monk flyer trivialized the Fling ability because he could grab each person and have them back on the ship in one turn. While I don't think the flight barrier is too much of an issue, it requires the DM to create encounters that are more... three-dimensional.

[Drackolus]

I play a homebrewed dragonwraught kobold with a base 15' fly, and as a draconic sorcerer that will increase at 14. I don't fly up very high because I don't want to get shot to unconscious in a single round and then get an auto-fail death save from falling. I use it to get on buildings quicker, which a thief or really anyone can already do. Maybe I'm not being clever enough, but I try to give my attackers as few clear shots as possible. Because I like living and 17 ac and 13 con is just not that much. Not to mention that my party can't do a single thing to protect me up there.

[Belac93]

I personally let people use it when I DM. If they want to be cheesy and powergame, I let them. However, I let them remember that, no matter how good a particular ability is, I am the DM. I can powergame as much as I want, without limitations.

If they brag about being able to kill kobolds from 600 feet in the air, I introduce them to the kobolds master, who is pissed about the arrows, and wants to take it out on this squishy archer, all separated from his companions.

[RickAllison]

I personally let people use it when I DM. If they want to be cheesy and powergame, I let them. However, I let them remember that, no matter how good a particular ability is, I am the DM. I can powergame as much as I want, without limitations.

If they brag about being able to kill kobolds from 600 feet in the air, I introduce them to the kobolds master, who is pissed about the arrows, and wants to take it out on this squishy archer, all separated from his companions.

*Kills swarms of kobolds and other enemies without fear of retribution for the first 11 levels.*
*Continues same strategy at level 12*
*Gets grabbed out of the sky by a roc's talons*
*Screams as he is stuck in 1v1 with the king of the skies who can fly at over twice his speed*

[JumboWheat01]

While it can be a great boon, it can also be a bad problem at really low levels. Gravity can be a harsh mistress to one who has very few hit points. Insta-death due to long-distance face plant is not fun. And if you're flying low enough to avoid fall damage, you're really not taking advantage of the ability to fly.

Plus, if your players really like flying, simply make more dungeons that include simple hallways and rooms not much more than 10 feet high. That puts them with Polearm range, even if they could somehow get off the ground and hang there. You don't need to create extra traps or anything of the like. And dungeons and crypts are common enough adventure areas.

As for out door moments, well that's fine, let them enjoy a little bit of freedom. Just put a few more archers or crossbowmen in a random encounter. Those are also good for stopping fledgeling mages as well, which can become many levels of godly.

[Steampunkette]

Any encounter can be fixed by adding elements to deal with flying but in doing so sometimes you weaken the theme or path of a campaign.

As a DM you're making the theme and path of the game and should be accounting for the party while doing so. Whether it's a flier or a half elf with a haunted past being chased by some person or organization. Both of those things can change the tone, direction, and theme of the campaign if you don't account for them from the beginning.

[RickAllison]

Plus, if your players really like flying, simply make more dungeons that include simple hallways and rooms not much more than 10 feet high. That puts them with Polearm range, even if they could somehow get off the ground and hang there. You don't need to create extra traps or anything of the like. And dungeons and crypts are common enough adventure areas.

We had a necromancer boss hidden behind two flesh golems and three crossbowmen at level 5. The flying meant that our druid could Entangle, the wizard could Web, and other actions could lock down ground-based enemies. Meanwhile, the flyer could skirt all of those issues because he can still fly above the ground to avoid those hazards. Makes for a very different battle as we got all the bonuses for locking down the other combatants while the rogue was able to single-handedly sneak attack (Swashbuckler) the boss in two rounds.

[Naanomi]

I generally find flying to not be too bad unless everyone can do it... Or if there are only a few who can't.

One flying character puts himself in a strong but vulnerable tactical position while melee types are still attacking other teammates. A full flying party bypasses many normal adventure features; one non-flyer is the embarrassing anchor keeping the party down and becoming the lone meatbag standing against every opponent their allies fly over

[Azedenkae]

Flight unfortunately comes with the disadvantage of falling, which can actually kill low level characters, since if they go to 0hp, they actually become unconscious, and then take extra damage from the fall. This would mean at least a failed death saving throw, if not instant death.

Of course, whether or not that enough counterbalances the tremendous advantage of flight is not really clear, but hey, I haven't really played enough games to really make a judgement.

Really though, I am all for RAW. I do encourage my players to take on flight-enabled characters if they so wish. At this moment in time, although I am slightly suspicious, I am leaving it as one of those things that seems game-breaking, but may not really be. Don't forget that each race excels at something, and if the variant Tiefling and Aarakocra can fly, they are not as good in other respects.

[JoeJ]

Flight opens up some possibilities in adventure design. It allows for obstacles and traps that can only be bypassed if somebody can get over them, and makes for more interesting 3-dimensional combat.


It's friggin' preposterous. I'd take a page from 3e's flying races:

At level one, your wings give you Advantage on Athletics checks made to jump, and you can glide, letting you fall safely and move forward 20 feet for every 5ft of descent.
At level 5, you can full-on fly for Con mod rounds at a stretch, or double that duration by taking a level of exhaustion. You also nab a level of exhaustion if you fly more than 10 minutes between Long Rests.
At level 10, you get unlimited flight.


How can this possibly be justified? You're saying that every single PC of those races starts out crippled, but if they kill enough monsters they mysteriously get better. That doesn't make any sense.

[Thomasd851]

I think the PHB should be updated, it came out before both flying races so they may have better information now.
Many people want them to update the flying combat and underwater combat ideas.
Plus in my opinion some class features should be changed around to better suit flying or aquatic based characters.
A race that spend their entire lives underwater shouldn't only be able to turn into land creatures at 2nd Druid level. Things like that should be considered.

As for stealthing I would say you can't hide while flying. The flying races aren't designed to glide, they are designed to flap. Flapping makes a fair bit of noise and if you are noisy you can't hide.

[JoeJ]

As for stealthing I would say you can't hide while flying. The flying races aren't designed to glide, they are designed to flap. Flapping makes a fair bit of noise and if you are noisy you can't hide.

Is this really necessary? There isn't a lot to hide behind in the sky. Besides, owls flap and they're extremely quiet.

[RickAllison]

Is this really necessary? There isn't a lot to hide behind in the sky. Besides, owls flap and they're extremely quiet.

Two things to keep in mind:

1) Owls are freaking ninjas. Their feathers are specifically designed to be far softer than the hard-edged feathers of other raptors so that they can flap completely silent to the trained ears of its prey.

2) Other raptors are totally made for gliding!!! Raptors rarely flap, because it is incredibly tiring. When a raptor attacks, they dive to strike and only flap to keep up speed while finding a nice thermal to fly around on. Tieflings might not glide much, but aarakocra would probably spend less than 10% of flight time actually flapping. Here is a statement from someone more qualified than just being an avian-fan:


Two scientists who studied eagles, Jon. M. Gerrard and Gary R. Bortolotti, write that "Eagles are capable of sustained flapping flight but they usually spend little time doing it. During the month when Cindy (one of the female eagles they studied) was observed intensively, she averaged less than 2 minutes per hour in flapping flight. That is not surprising when one considers the large expenditure of energy required by the pectoral and supracoracoid muscles to power the huge wings. The energy needed to maintain a bird in flat soaring or gliding flight is much less, perhaps a 20th or less the power needed for flapping. Therefore, eagles will always choose to soar or glide when possible."

By their findings, the eagles only spend 3.33% of flight time flapping.

[Ninja_Prawn]

Flight opens up some possibilities in adventure design. It allows for obstacles and traps that can only be bypassed if somebody can get over them, and makes for more interesting 3-dimensional combat.

That's been my experience. I'm currently running two games with homebrewed flying races (pixies and faerie dragons) and it's been nothing but fun. It probably helps that my players a sensible lot and we generally focus more on non-violent solutions to problems, but then, who's to say any other group of players couldn't do the same?

[Ikitavi]

I dunno, first couple of times flight is encountered, it can and should be a bit overpowered. But it shouldn't take much time after that before they become skeet. If it is known that there are flying characters wearing a town's ransom in magic items flying unsupported at low altitude...

As a GM, I would certainly allow a character to have as disgusting a victory as they could conceive of after using flight, and they would be the talk of the town, and I would give out hints that lots of people are giving serious thoughts about how to counter flight. The first attempts at countering flight would be a bit lame, but if the PC was overconfident, and approached something that enticed their curiosity from the air, they could find themselves grounded in short order.

Long term, flight might become the new armored knight, the pinnacle in reaction forces. It might become part of the culture, that to be part of the highest status forces you have to be capable of flight.

[Regitnui]

I'm putting together an Eberron campaign based around pirates. Aacockra (sp?) aren't allowed in the campaign because a) they don't live in the area and b) I have enough available races, thank you. But the campaign has numerous examples of planned aerial assaults; the PCs' patron is one of the few Princes who own an airship, and so airdropping onto the enemy flagship is a viable tactic. However, when ship-to-ship combat happens, it's the ranged attacked that happen first; any flying character would be a juicy target for the enemy wizards and crossbowmen trying to damage the ship or sails.

[JellyPooga]

You are right, it is an exceptionally useful ability.

...when you're outside, in the open, facing opponents that have zero ranged capability.

This accounts for a very small amount of game-time, in my experience.

Inside, even in a forest, flight can be extremely limited when you have wings. Let's not forget that the 3rd level spell and other means of available flight at higher level are magical flight; you don't have to worry about your 12'+ wingspan, the challenge of low-level flying by physical means (wings touching the ground, obstacles in the way, preserving lift and forward momentum, etc.), or falling when you "stall".

Seriously, just a little thought about the mechanics of physical flight and 90% of the so-called "problems" of having early-access flight disappear. In your average "dungeon" winged flight is pretty useless.

[Shaofoo]

I think it is also to note that both PC flying races (bird people and tieflings) have the caveat of having to first be allowed by the DM before they can be used by RAW. If you think your game can't handle flying people at level 1 then you can just deny them the ability to be said races and point in the books how both options are basically DM allowed only and that they have no recourse on the matter.

Even the makers of the game knows that flying is a very powerful thing and has added explicit limiters for DMs so they aren't over their head trying to deal with things beyond their control.

[JumboWheat01]

2) Other raptors are totally made for gliding!!! Raptors rarely flap, because it is incredibly tiring. When a raptor attacks, they dive to strike and only flap to keep up speed while finding a nice thermal to fly around on. Tieflings might not glide much, but aarakocra would probably spend less than 10% of flight time actually flapping.

I dunno, they don't look very aerodynamic. While sure, aarakocra are about as bird like as you can get for a humanoid creature, compared to the sleek form for a proper bird of prey, they would probably have a hard time gliding over any long distance. Add on any clothing or light armor they happen to be wearing and the drag ratio increases. Throw on other things, like packs and weapons, and it gets even worse, and the weight issue makes gliding EXTREMELY inefficient compared to a bird of prey. Aarakocra probably have to flap a good degree of their time in the air.

Unless they happen to be going at it stark naked with no equipment of any way, shape or form when they fly ahead, which would leave them extremely vulnerable. Though they might not seen at all, as we well know, naked = invisible (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0026.html).

[MrStabby]

...when you're outside, in the open, facing opponents that have zero ranged capability.

This accounts for a very small amount of game-time, in my experience.



In my experience this is also a fairly modest amount of time - probably under 20% of encounters. On the other had these are not the only times when flying is an issue.

Firstly you don't have to be in the open for flying to be an issue. There are spells that done need to be able to see things to affect them. Correspondingly the more cluttered the landscape the more useful flying is to cross over obstacles. Even if flying were to be no more than moving through being able to cast misty step at will it would be very powerful.

The zero ranged attacks condition is relevant but it is what changes it from a very powerful ability to an automatic win ability. There are also elements of a sliding scale here - sufficiently few ranged attacks such that you can remove the ranged attacks and have air supremacy is still pretty damn powerful.

It certainly doesn't require being outside to work. Any big cathedral, hall or cavern will favour a character with flight. Any big dramatic space that might be fitting for an interesting fight will tend to give an advantage to a flyer.

[Grod_The_Giant]

How can this possibly be justified? You're saying that every single PC of those races starts out crippled, but if they kill enough monsters they mysteriously get better. That doesn't make any sense.
Simple-- flight is largely a vestigial function, mostly lost as they evolved greater intelligence and tool-using capabilities. The muscles and tendons and stuff are still there, but over thousands of years they had bones thicken, circulatory systems become less efficient, and so on. At this point, even a small amount of flight takes years of training and a tremendously strong body to accomplish, and flying for extended periods is beyond the capabilities of all but the greatest athletes and heroes. (Mages, meanwhile, compensate for weaker bodies by strengthening themselves over the years with magic). Level is an abstraction and you gain experience from many more things than just killing monsters.

This being 5e, I suppose you could also tie the improvement to stats-- gliding as a base, limited flight at Str or Con 16, and full flight at Str or Con 20.

[RickAllison]

Simple-- flight is largely a vestigial function, mostly lost as they evolved greater intelligence and tool-using capabilities. The muscles and tendons and stuff are still there, but over thousands of years they had bones thicken, circulatory systems become less efficient, and so on. At this point, even a small amount of flight takes years of training and a tremendously strong body to accomplish, and flying for extended periods is beyond the capabilities of all but the greatest athletes and heroes. (Mages, meanwhile, compensate for weaker bodies by strengthening themselves over the years with magic). Level is an abstraction and you gain experience from many more things than just killing monsters.

This being 5e, I suppose you could also tie the improvement to stats-- gliding as a base, limited flight at Str or Con 16, and full flight at Str or Con 20.

That works for feral tieflings, as they could likely have had to hide their wings, etc. doesn't work for Aarakocra who natively fly everywhere. They actually have vestigial land capabilities because walking is underdeveloped for them.

[Regitnui]

That works for feral tieflings, as they could likely have had to hide their wings, etc. doesn't work for Aarakocra who natively fly everywhere. They actually have vestigial land capabilities because walking is underdeveloped for them.

If the aarakocra are common enough, people would know that and plan accordingly. In my opinion, if the species is as common enough to be a player race, it's common enough that bandits or guards plan to face flying opponents.

[JoeJ]

Simple-- flight is largely a vestigial function, mostly lost as they evolved greater intelligence and tool-using capabilities. The muscles and tendons and stuff are still there, but over thousands of years they had bones thicken, circulatory systems become less efficient, and so on. At this point, even a small amount of flight takes years of training and a tremendously strong body to accomplish, and flying for extended periods is beyond the capabilities of all but the greatest athletes and heroes. (Mages, meanwhile, compensate for weaker bodies by strengthening themselves over the years with magic). Level is an abstraction and you gain experience from many more things than just killing monsters.

This being 5e, I suppose you could also tie the improvement to stats-- gliding as a base, limited flight at Str or Con 16, and full flight at Str or Con 20.

Except that, for aarakocra at least, it's not a vestigial ability. It's something that every other non-crippled member of the race can do just fine. It would be like requiring a human PC to start with only one arm and have the other one slowly grow as they gain levels.

[OldTrees1]

That works for feral tieflings, as they could likely have had to hide their wings, etc. doesn't work for Aarakocra who natively fly everywhere. They actually have vestigial land capabilities because walking is underdeveloped for them.

Except that, for aarakocra at least, it's not a vestigial ability. It's something that every other non-crippled member of the race can do just fine. It would be like requiring a human PC to start with only one arm and have the other one slowly grow as they gain levels.


You could have it that Aarakocra children socially mature faster than physically. Thus they become adventurers/take up trades before their wings full develop. This does mean you would need to increase the expected level of an adult Aarakocra, but is that really a problem? Perhaps, depending on your campaign world, but not a problem in mine.

[Ewhit]

This might just be me with this, but I've always felt like flight is something that people underestimate in terms of its usefulness. As a DM, I'm not particularly fond of allowing players to take races that would allow flight (such as the tiefling variant or the aarakocra), and will request they not do it.

I want opinions from y'all on flight. Am I too xenophobic to the idea of flight and need to focus more on tuning encounters to account for flight? Am I right in assuming it's a supremely useful ability and should be apprehensive?

Is flight useful. Yes. If your not careful they can mess your plans up. I fly 30 feet up and rain death upon the enemy below while my allies fight on the ground
It depends on the type of dm you are. You can always allow them To have it and let them use it on and off but as DM you can always and I repeat always mess with them.
1. Have range attack spells to hit the flyers
2. No room to fly height is 10 15 feet.
3. Counter spell the flying so they fall
4. Any numerous things you can think of as dm.
5. if you let them have it let the use it. Just not always to their advantage

Or as dm don't allow it

[JoeJ]

You could have it that Aarakocra children socially mature faster than physically. Thus they become adventurers/take up trades before their wings full develop. This does mean you would need to increase the expected level of an adult Aarakocra, but is that really a problem? Perhaps, depending on your campaign world, but not a problem in mine.

The race comes from the Elemental Plane of Air. They should be able to fly before they can walk. Having PCs start out without their normal mode of movement breaks verisimilitude beyond recovery.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

The race comes from the Elemental Plane of Air. They should be able to fly before they can walk. Having PCs start out without their normal mode of movement breaks verisimilitude beyond recovery.

Possibly one could have it that Aaracockra find it harder to fly on the Prime Material than the EPoA, due to higher gravity/separation from the Wind Dukes/Transitive Numinosity/whatever (this might also involve adding some special stuff to the EPoA if you go there - e.g., if it has lower gravity, making anyone able to effectively 'glide' there or something). Or you retcon Aaracockra a bit and say that your average young adult Aaracockra can only glide, and rely on thermals in the EPoA. Or you say that an Aaracockra below 5th level isn't actually an adult yet. Messing with their flight messes with verisimilitude, but it can actually be recovered quite easily.

[Grod_The_Giant]

You could have it that Aarakocra children socially mature faster than physically. Thus they become adventurers/take up trades before their wings full develop. This does mean you would need to increase the expected level of an adult Aarakocra, but is that really a problem? Perhaps, depending on your campaign world, but not a problem in mine.
I think this was the explanation for Raptorans.

Possibly one could have it that Aaracockra find it harder to fly on the Prime Material than the EPoA, due to higher gravity/separation from the Wind Dukes/Transitive Numinosity/whatever (this might also involve adding some special stuff to the EPoA if you go there - e.g., if it has lower gravity, making anyone able to effectively 'glide' there or something). Or you retcon Aaracockra a bit and say that your average young adult Aaracockra can only glide, and rely on thermals in the EPoA. Or you say that an Aaracockra below 5th level isn't actually an adult yet. Messing with their flight messes with verisimilitude, but it can actually be recovered quite easily.
This is also a good suggestion.

[RickAllison]

You could have it that Aarakocra children socially mature faster than physically. Thus they become adventurers/take up trades before their wings full develop. This does mean you would need to increase the expected level of an adult Aarakocra, but is that really a problem? Perhaps, depending on your campaign world, but not a problem in mine.

Ummmmm, remember that if aarakocra are anything like their less-developed cousins (which based on the fluff, they have rampant similarities), one of the signs of maturity for them is the fact that they are able to fly away from the nest. Basically, an aarakocra that goes out unable to fly is a equivalent of a 6 to 12 year old human. It seems thoroughly odd that someone of that age would be out adventuring...

EDIT: It might be good to keep in mind that aarakocra are not humanoids that evolved into flight, they are either maigcal creatures that were born/created to fly in their current forms (in which case a non-child aarakocra would certainly be able to fly) or they were birds that evolved/were evolved into a humanoid form (in which case a flying aarakocra is the marking point when they STOP being a child).

[Sitri]

I asked this a few months back. The suggestion I liked and went with was "natural fliers count their own body weight towards carrying capacity. "

[RickAllison]

I asked this a few months back. The suggestion I liked and went with was "natural fliers count their own body weight towards carrying capacity. "

That doesn't solve every problem, but that is a good idea :smallsmile: Aarakocra do tend to weigh significantly less than the non-hollow boned humanoids

[OldTrees1]

I think this was the explanation for Raptorans.


Ummmmm, remember that if aarakocra are anything like their less-developed cousins (which based on the fluff, they have rampant similarities), one of the signs of maturity for them is the fact that they are able to fly away from the nest. Basically, an aarakocra that goes out unable to fly is a equivalent of a 6 to 12 year old human. It seems thoroughly odd that someone of that age would be out adventuring...

EDIT: It might be good to keep in mind that aarakocra are not humanoids that evolved into flight, they are either maigcal creatures that were born/created to fly in their current forms (in which case a non-child aarakocra would certainly be able to fly) or they were birds that evolved/were evolved into a humanoid form (in which case a flying aarakocra is the marking point when they STOP being a child).


Raptorans place a high value on self-reliance. The coming-of-age ritual in raptoran society, known as the Walk of the Four Winds, is a test of self-reliance. Each young raptoran is exiled from the flock and left to walk the earth alone until he or she gains the strength and prowess required to fly under his or her own power up to the flock’s cliff dwellings. Some raptorans may wander the wilderness for months or years before gaining the ability to fly; others may travel to the cities of humans and other races and never return to their homes after learning flight. Even if they travel with others for a time, all raptorans know that the Walk of the Four Winds is a test of the self—with flight as the reward.
Honestly I like this feature of the raptorian culture.

[JoeJ]

Possibly one could have it that Aaracockra find it harder to fly on the Prime Material than the EPoA, due to higher gravity/separation from the Wind Dukes/Transitive Numinosity/whatever (this might also involve adding some special stuff to the EPoA if you go there - e.g., if it has lower gravity, making anyone able to effectively 'glide' there or something). Or you retcon Aaracockra a bit and say that your average young adult Aaracockra can only glide, and rely on thermals in the EPoA. Or you say that an Aaracockra below 5th level isn't actually an adult yet. Messing with their flight messes with verisimilitude, but it can actually be recovered quite easily.

I don't call that recovery. Flight is as basic to aarakocra as walking is to humans. All normal NPCs that are old enough to leave the nest manage it just fine, so why can't PCs? I wouldn't require a human PC to start out having to crawl because they haven't learned how to walk yet. The best "fix" for both aarakocra and winged tieflings is to just use them as presented, or ban them if they don't fit your game.

[Waazraath]

My 2 cents: it's much more powerful then most (all?) other racial features. It's not balanced, also because of the limited availability of flight in general in 5e.

Though a DM can tailor encounters, adventures and campaigns round parties that have fly available in unlimited amounts from lvl 1 onwards, it requirers much more work, and bypasses several fun concepts. Don't know if I'd vote to ban it, but I wouldn't choose it in most campaigns as a player, and probably advice against it in most campaigns as a DM.

[RickAllison]

My 2 cents: it's much more powerful then most (all?) other racial features. It's not balanced, also because of the limited availability of flight in general in 5e.

Though a DM can tailor encounters, adventures and campaigns round parties that have fly available in unlimited amounts from lvl 1 onwards, it requirers much more work, and bypasses several fun concepts. Don't know if I'd vote to ban it, but I wouldn't choose it in most campaigns as a player, and probably advice against it in most campaigns as a DM.

I am a full proponent of flying classes. I think they make the game much more interesting and add another dimension (literally) to combat. I also agree with you completely. An unprepared DM can find entire combats being made trivial through one flyer (we just recently had an encounter that went from a TPK to a victory against a 3X Deadly encounter without casualties due to the increased movement and flight of the aarakocra) and this is a problem that does not have an easy solution.

[Grod_The_Giant]

I am a full proponent of flying classes. I think they make the game much more interesting and add another dimension (literally) to combat. I also agree with you completely. An unprepared DM can find entire combats being made trivial through one flyer (we just recently had an encounter that went from a TPK to a victory against a 3X Deadly encounter without casualties due to the increased movement and flight of the aarakocra) and this is a problem that does not have an easy solution.
I think the issue with the Aaracockra and Winged Tieflings is that 5e is otherwise so miserly with flight. 3.5 had tons of options-- races, feats, flying mounts, half a dozen class features, dozens of spells and magic items... I understand that 5e is a newer system and is trying to not put out too much material, but with limited spell slots and magic items being such an optional thing... it's just so glaringly different from literally everything else in the game I don't understand it.

[Shaofoo]

I think the issue with the Aaracockra and Winged Tieflings is that 5e is otherwise so miserly with flight. 3.5 had tons of options-- races, feats, flying mounts, half a dozen class features, dozens of spells and magic items... I understand that 5e is a newer system and is trying to not put out too much material, but with limited spell slots and magic items being such an optional thing... it's just so glaringly different from literally everything else in the game I don't understand it.

I think that part of the reason it is limited it is because the designers want it to be limited. First level flight is something that the designers keep saying that it is restricted by the DM by RAW, this is something that they want the DM to really think over if they want it for their campaign. They probably don't want to close it off completely but if you are keeping yourself at night thinking how to balance it then you should just take up on the designer's offer to restrict flying races and leave it like that. Better to have a balanced campaign without one race than having an imbalanced campaign because of one race.

The same deal was like this in 4e, there were very little flying races and those that were flying actually had an altitude limit (so no flying 600 feet shooting from long range shenanigans).

[Sigreid]

I personally don't see it as a problem. It's no different than spells, or mastery of disguises or whatever. As long as you know what the abilities are you should be able to level appropriate challenges.

[Thomasd851]

I will rehash the idea that the PHB should be updated, it has been a while since original material was put out and it didn't cover flying racially. The SCAG and Player's Companion were released after so there is a chance they will make an update to the material. After all they do directly mention Seaelves and winged elves so it is likely they will provide more information about them later. (I am super keen for an aquatic campaign)

I like the idea of your own weight mattering, and needing space to fly. In my campaign we find if the material doesn't provide information then using real world information and adapting it to the likeness of the rules makes for fun variants.
As for the 'it's possible here it should be possible there' I agree with the statement, however for a character to work out how to do things like gunpowder it would require some effort or background information.

[Sitri]

That doesn't solve every problem, but that is a good idea :smallsmile: Aarakocra do tend to weigh significantly less than the non-hollow boned humanoids

Very true, but at least the MADness will be seen as an opportunity cost for what many have already described as a pretty unbalanced ability. Also it cuts down on transport abuse.

I don't have a book in front of me, anyone know their average weight of the top of their heads? Just curious.

[Shaofoo]

I will rehash the idea that the PHB should be updated, it has been a while since original material was put out and it didn't cover flying racially. The SCAG and Player's Companion were released after so there is a chance they will make an update to the material. After all they do directly mention Seaelves and winged elves so it is likely they will provide more information about them later. (I am super keen for an aquatic campaign)


I don't get this logic, why would the PHB need updates for other races found in other sources? This never happened before, at best they might release a compendium for any free stuff down the line but I see very little reason why they would rip apart stuff from their paid books to give to others. It won't be a free lunch.

Besides even if they do cover racial flying it will come with a big disclaimer saying that the DM is within the rules to bad any flying races from the game, like I said they probably won't be doing much flying races since it will come with a big "if the DM allows" on every single one.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

I don't call that recovery. Flight is as basic to aarakocra as walking is to humans. All normal NPCs that are old enough to leave the nest manage it just fine, so why can't PCs? I wouldn't require a human PC to start out having to crawl because they haven't learned how to walk yet. The best "fix" for both aarakocra and winged tieflings is to just use them as presented, or ban them if they don't fit your game.

Yes, this is why the words 'change' and 'retcon' were used in my post. I see no reason why the race lore should be sacrosanct when the mechanics are not. Particularly when the lore changes every edition anyway. (Remember when 5 Aarakocra's could summon an air elemental? Remember when they had naff all to do with the EPoA or the Wind Dukes? I do.)

[RickAllison]

Yes, this is why the words 'change' and 'retcon' were used in my post. I see no reason why the race lore should be sacrosanct when the mechanics are not. Particularly when the lore changes every edition anyway. (Remember when 5 Aarakocra's could summon an air elemental? Remember when they had naff all to do with the EPoA or the Wind Dukes? I do.)

Actually, Aarakocra can still do that. They don't talk about it in the EEPC, but the MM has specific rules for it

[TheTeaMustFlow]

Actually, Aarakocra can still do that. They don't talk about it in the EEPC, but the MM has specific rules for it

Huh. I am apparently blind. Anyone want to prove me wrong on the Wind Dukes while we're at it?

[Vogonjeltz]

This might just be me with this, but I've always felt like flight is something that people underestimate in terms of its usefulness. As a DM, I'm not particularly fond of allowing players to take races that would allow flight (such as the tiefling variant or the aarakocra), and will request they not do it.

I want opinions from y'all on flight. Am I too xenophobic to the idea of flight and need to focus more on tuning encounters to account for flight? Am I right in assuming it's a supremely useful ability and should be apprehensive?

I've yet to see a module in which even an entire party of flying characters would have a significant (or in some cases, any) impact on the game. Lost mines of phandelver the starter adventure alone has approximately 0 locations where flight would be truly advantageous.

[JoeJ]

Yes, this is why the words 'change' and 'retcon' were used in my post. I see no reason why the race lore should be sacrosanct when the mechanics are not. Particularly when the lore changes every edition anyway. (Remember when 5 Aarakocra's could summon an air elemental? Remember when they had naff all to do with the EPoA or the Wind Dukes? I do.)

So I can completely change the race in order to make it a very bad choice mechanically*, as well as less interesting from both the player's and the DM perspective? I see no up side to doing that.

* An aarokocra has the same ability mods as a wood elf, but instead of darkvision, keen senses, fey ancestry, trance, elf weapon training, and mask of the wild, all they get, apart from flight, is a weak unarmed attack and a walking speed that's 10 feet slower.

[Grod_The_Giant]

So I can completely change the race in order to make it a very bad choice mechanically*, as well as less interesting from both the player's and the DM perspective? I see no up side to doing that.
You're moving the goalposts; your previous complaints was that the fluff prohibited any changes. Now that a reasonable, fluff-friendly alteration has been suggested, you're complaining about mechanics. But even then...

* An aarokocra has the same ability mods as a wood elf, but instead of darkvision, keen senses, fey ancestry, trance, elf weapon training, and mask of the wild, all they get, apart from flight, is a weak unarmed attack and a walking speed that's 10 feet slower.
Assuming we go with my legacy suggestion...

Darkvision is rarely important, in my experience--you'll need light for the humans and the like anyway.
Keen Senses is better than the jumping boost, true.
Fey Ancestry is niche, and I'd say immunity to falling damage is just about equally niche.
Trance is almost pure fluff.
Weapon Training is kind of sad, but most classes have the weapons they need to work.
Mask of the Wild is good, but I think a glide speed is a reasonable trade, if not better.
You don't get the speed boost, but you're only 5ft slower than a normal race.

So you're a little bit weaker than normal for the first few levels; when you've adventured more and adapted properly to the plane you're well above average, and at 10th level your racial choice means more than anyone's.

Also, how about a disclaimer on their flight that it functions as though they were five levels higher on the Elemental Plane of Air? Boom, now everyone can fly quite well. (As the Raptoran racial entry points out, using a round to fly and then gliding gives you fantastic duration)

[JoeJ]

You're moving the goalposts; your previous complaints was that the fluff prohibited any changes. Now that a reasonable, fluff-friendly alteration has been suggested, you're complaining about mechanics. But even then...

No, my complaint wasn't that the fluff prohibited changes, but that not giving PCs the standard racial ability breaks verisimilitude. Nothing suggested here changes that. You're still removing a normal ability for no good reason. I mean, you could also rule that human PCs have to crawl until 5th level before being able to stand up, and it would have the same effect. It breaks verisimilitude so badly that I would be unable to treat a game with that rule seriously, even if I wasn't playing one of the affected races.



Darkvision is rarely important, in my experience--you'll need light for the humans and the like anyway.
Keen Senses is better than the jumping boost, true.
Fey Ancestry is niche, and I'd say immunity to falling damage is just about equally niche.
Trance is almost pure fluff.
Weapon Training is kind of sad, but most classes have the weapons they need to work.
Mask of the Wild is good, but I think a glide speed is a reasonable trade, if not better.
You don't get the speed boost, but you're only 5ft slower than a normal race.
[/LIST]
So you're a little bit weaker than normal for the first few levels; when you've adventured more and adapted properly to the plane you're well above average, and at 10th level your racial choice means more than anyone's.

Also, how about a disclaimer on their flight that it functions as though they were five levels higher on the Elemental Plane of Air? Boom, now everyone can fly quite well. (As the Raptoran racial entry points out, using a round to fly and then gliding gives you fantastic duration)

If you don't like certain races, why not just ban them instead of come up with some kind of justification for crippling them?

edit: I'm not really sure why this bugs me so much, but for some reason it really does.

[Grod_The_Giant]

No, my complaint wasn't that the fluff prohibited changes, but that not giving PCs the standard racial ability breaks verisimilitude. Nothing suggested here changes that. You're still removing a normal ability for no good reason. I mean, you could also rule that human PCs have to crawl until 5th level before being able to stand up, and it would have the same effect. It breaks verisimilitude so badly that I would be unable to treat a game with that rule seriously, even if I wasn't playing one of the affected races.
When did anyone suggest not applying the same rule to NPCs? Of course you'd apply the same rule to NPCs. To not do so would be exactly as absurd as you describe.


If you don't like certain races, why not just ban them instead of come up with some kind of justification for crippling them?
I don't dislike the race, I just think that a mechanical element is inappropriate and would like to change it.

[JoeJ]

I don't dislike the race, I just think that a mechanical element is inappropriate and would like to change it.

Why is it inappropriate? It's not like there aren't other ways for PCs to fly.

[GraakosGraakos]

I'm playing an Aarakocra monk in an upcoming campaign. The DM ruled I can't fly unless I have a square to either side of me on my left and right (to take off) and I have to have at least 10 feet above me. I also can't step of the wind or Dodge in midair, all of which I think makes sense.

[OldTrees1]

Why is it inappropriate? It's not like there aren't other ways for PCs to fly.

However when those abilities come online later and thus when the monsters are expected to be capable of handling flight is different. For some groups this is not enough to change anything (in which case you go with the default Flight at 1st level version), for the other groups the "Adult Aarakocras (PC or NPC) are higher than 1st level" is a viable mechanical change that continues to have a consistent fluff.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Why is it inappropriate? It's not like there aren't other ways for PCs to fly.
Because...

I think the issue with the Aaracockra and Winged Tieflings is that 5e is otherwise so miserly with flight. 3.5 had tons of options-- races, feats, flying mounts, half a dozen class features, dozens of spells and magic items... I understand that 5e is a newer system and is trying to not put out too much material, but with limited spell slots and magic items being such an optional thing... it's just so glaringly different from literally everything else in the game I don't understand it.
Flight is not an assumed thing in 5e. Besides the two races in question, there's...

A 14th level Barbarian ability that only functions during a rage.
A 17th level Cleric ability.
An 8th level Druid ability, limited to certain Wild Shaped forms.
An 11th level Monk ability, costing a lot of Ki points.
A 20th level Paladin ability, useable for one hour/day.
A 14th level Sorcerer ability.
A 3rd level spell lasting 10 minutes.

There's a pattern here. Flight is either a high-level ability, sharply limited in how often it can be used, or both. The races give you a freaking 14th level class ability. Imagine a race that gave you Diamond Soul, or Cleaning Touch, or Reliable Talent, or Create Thrall, or any other comparable ability. It's inappropriate relative to all alternatives. It's not going to break the game, but it's wildly inappropriate to the established paradigm.

[Sigreid]

I'm playing an Aarakocra monk in an upcoming campaign. The DM ruled I can't fly unless I have a square to either side of me on my left and right (to take off) and I have to have at least 10 feet above me. I also can't step of the wind or Dodge in midair, all of which I think makes sense.

It makes perfect sense. Hopefully flying monsters such as dragons will also be unable to fly unless there is enough space for them to unfurl their wings.

[Sigreid]

Honestly, I don't think flight is that great of an ability unless the majority of the campaign is going to take place on the open tundra, or it's an ability the whole party has and it's basically and aerial campaign. Come to think of it, it could be pretty fun having a campaign that was a group of bird men, Heroes from the Sky!

[Regitnui]

I'm playing an Aarakocra monk in an upcoming campaign. The DM ruled I can't fly unless I have a square to either side of me on my left and right (to take off) and I have to have at least 10 feet above me. I also can't step of the wind or Dodge in midair, all of which I think makes sense.

I'd call that a fair fix. I'd even go so far as to say you need a bit of a runup; since most larger birds do as well.

[Auramis]

Thanks to everyone who's responded since I posted. I've thought about everyone's opinions a lot. I think the best response to flight, really, is that if flight is common enough among adventurers, it should be common among encounters and NPCs as well. Flying guards, flying bandits, flying monsters, etc. That said, in my head, it seems like it would drastically alter the world if everyone could fly.

As a DM who isn't comfortable with flight, I think it's probably best to just not allow it in the campaign I'm doing. I'm not nearly advanced with my DMing enough to let it be allowed. I'm admittedly lazy, and the less I have to think about with adding the third dimension of height in an encounter (it already is there, but more so is what I mean), I think the better off I'll personally be.

[OldTrees1]

As a DM who isn't comfortable with flight, I think it's probably best to just not allow it in the campaign I'm doing. I'm not nearly advanced with my DMing enough to let it be allowed. I'm admittedly lazy, and the less I have to think about with adding the third dimension of height in an encounter (it already is there, but more so is what I mean), I think the better off I'll personally be.
A reasonable position. The 3rd dimension can get quite complicated to represent on a 2D map. Especially if there are things on the faces of walls. (Have you ever tried to make terrain on the face of a wall? It is not an easy thing to show on a map. :smallbiggrin: Darn Ragnorra! :smallmad::smalltongue:)

[RickAllison]

A reasonable position. The 3rd dimension can get quite complicated to represent on a 2D map. Especially if there are things on the faces of walls. (Have you ever tried to make terrain on the face of a wall? It is not an easy thing to show on a map. :smallbiggrin: Darn Ragnorra! :smallmad::smalltongue:)

Here's a fun thing to keep in mind. If you accurately account for diagonals, 5' reach cannot hit in the {5',5',5'} diagonal because it is closer to 10'. If you ever introduce flying to the party, expect to either go AL and disregard accuracy totally or be prepared to break out Pythagoras!

[JoeJ]

Because...

Flight is not an assumed thing in 5e. Besides the two races in question, there's...

A 14th level Barbarian ability that only functions during a rage.
A 17th level Cleric ability.
An 8th level Druid ability, limited to certain Wild Shaped forms.
An 11th level Monk ability, costing a lot of Ki points.
A 20th level Paladin ability, useable for one hour/day.
A 14th level Sorcerer ability.
A 3rd level spell lasting 10 minutes.

There's a pattern here. Flight is either a high-level ability, sharply limited in how often it can be used, or both. The races give you a freaking 14th level class ability. Imagine a race that gave you Diamond Soul, or Cleaning Touch, or Reliable Talent, or Create Thrall, or any other comparable ability. It's inappropriate relative to all alternatives. It's not going to break the game, but it's wildly inappropriate to the established paradigm.

So what? Seriously, what difference does it make that some PCs can fly at lower levels than others? If the ability to fly is a problem at all, then it's a problem at any level. It's no harder to DM a group with a flying character at 1st level than it is at 20th.

Do you also consider water genasi inappropriate because Water Breathing is a 3rd level spell? Or elves and dwarves because Darkvision is a 2nd level spell? Or halflings because rerolling all natural 1s isn't available as a class ability at all?

[RickAllison]

So what? Seriously, what difference does it make that some PCs can fly at lower levels than others? If the ability to fly is a problem at all, then it's a problem at any level. It's no harder to DM a group with a flying character at 1st level than it is at 20th.

Do you also consider water genasi inappropriate because Water Breathing is a 3rd level spell? Or elves and dwarves because Darkvision is a 2nd level spell? Or halflings because rerolling all natural 1s isn't available as a class ability at all?

Well, that's not strictly true. If we take the CR guidelines into consideration, flight isn't really the issue. Flight+ranged is an issue enough at early levels to merit a quarter-CR on its own, but is not viewed as a significant power boost after CR 10 because higher level creatures have more ways to curb flight (except Big T, but that's its own issue).

The issue I see with trying to nerf the flying capabilities at lower levels is that the reasons make no sense in-game. Unless we begin portraying the flyers as children, it breaks verisimilitude. I believe it was Grod (and correct me if I'm wrong) who suggested that aarakocra could be unused to flight in the Material Planes. It's a decent enough reason if we assume that every aarakocra adventurer is fresh out of the Elemental Plane of Air, but that then begins to bring up very-reasonable questions.

Those same restrictions should then apply to the aarakocra from the MM, as who is to say they have been on the Material Plane any longer? If the property was one of the EPoA, then shouldn't the air elementals who reside there suffer similar problems when they are thrust into the world? Also, wouldn't that then mean that other denizens of elemental planes who leave lose their powers as well? Do genasi powers become stronger when they enter these elemental planes?

When arbitrary restrictions are put in play for the sake of balance, it can open up more problems than it solves.

[Belac93]

I feel like its pretty easy to deal with, but not for everyone. If you want most of the enemies in your game to be beasts, its probably not a good idea. However, have you seen bandits? Their ranged attack is actually better than their melee. Its not hard to plan around, but you have to be prepared for it, and many DMs don't want to have to do that.

I'm willing to accommodate my players when I DM if they want to fly, but many people just want to run the story.

[Zalabim]

Because...

Flight is not an assumed thing in 5e. Besides the two races in question, there's...

A 14th level Barbarian ability that only functions during a rage.
A 17th level Cleric ability.
An 8th level Druid ability, limited to certain Wild Shaped forms.
An 11th level Monk ability, costing a lot of Ki points.
A 20th level Paladin ability, useable for one hour/day.
A 14th level Sorcerer ability.
A 3rd level spell lasting 10 minutes.

There's a pattern here. Flight is either a high-level ability, sharply limited in how often it can be used, or both. The races give you a freaking 14th level class ability. Imagine a race that gave you Diamond Soul, or Cleaning Touch, or Reliable Talent, or Create Thrall, or any other comparable ability. It's inappropriate relative to all alternatives. It's not going to break the game, but it's wildly inappropriate to the established paradigm.

You forgot an entire category of flight that's available from level 1-5. Magic items and flying mounts which, like flying races, require DM permission to have.


Well, that's not strictly true. If we take the CR guidelines into consideration, flight isn't really the issue. Flight+ranged is an issue enough at early levels to merit a quarter-CR on its own, but is not viewed as a significant power boost after CR 10 because higher level creatures have more ways to curb flight (except Big T, but that's its own issue).

The CR guidelines have their own problem because they're rating the capability of a PC party to handle a given ability. Invisibility is trivial* for PCs to handle, but can be very strong against a lot of enemies.

*Given its countered by first level spells and even some mundane items.

[ravenkith]

I want opinions from y'all on flight. Am I too xenophobic to the idea of flight and need to focus more on tuning encounters to account for flight? Am I right in assuming it's a supremely useful ability and should be apprehensive?

Flight as a racial property is gamebreaking in the right hands, and really imbalancing, period.

Barring some workaround where you get varying levels of access to flight as you level (gliding, limited duration, etc.), you should flat out disallow it. Just make sure to let people know ahead of time.

[JoeJ]

Flight as a racial property is gamebreaking in the right hands, and really imbalancing, period.

Barring some workaround where you get varying levels of access to flight as you level (gliding, limited duration, etc.), you should flat out disallow it. Just make sure to let people know ahead of time.

It certainly doesn't break anything. If you can handle flying monsters as a DM you can handle flying PCs just as easily.

[ravenkith]

It certainly doesn't break anything. If you can handle flying monsters as a DM you can handle flying PCs just as easily.
Your comment just goes to show that you aren't the right hands.

[pwykersotz]

It certainly doesn't break anything. If you can handle flying monsters as a DM you can handle flying PCs just as easily.

I disagree with your statement that it doesn't break anything. It forces the DM to design around it and to abandon many styles of encounter that can be bypassed by flight. If you don't want the PC's crossing that gorge yet, you better make sure there are archers defending it. That's fine, but previously the gorge alone would have sufficed. Do the PC's need to retrieve the princess from the tallest tower? Better add flying monsters to guard her.

It can be a LOT more work. Now you (and I) may not have a trouble with that, but I've damaged the narrative and difficulty of several games with it.

[Regitnui]

Do the PC's need to retrieve the princess from the tallest tower? Better add flying monsters to guard her.


Bars over the windows, arrow slits instead of windows, imprison the princess in a basement like any sensible villain, or have there be no footholds near or on the tower in question. There, four easy ways of narratively nullifying a flying hero in the case of the fairytale princess.

[pwykersotz]

Bars over the windows, arrow slits instead of windows, imprison the princess in a basement like any sensible villain, or have there be no footholds near or on the tower in question. There, four easy ways of narratively nullifying a flying hero in the case of the fairytale princess.

All of which are forcing the DM to design around flight.

Let me put this another way. If three dimensional movement were not a sizable advantage, it would not be coveted as much as it is, nor would the Aarakocra be forced to have no other class features in order to pay for it.

It's silly to think that it's not an advantage, it is. A large one. And some DM's have difficult times adjusting for that, especially at low levels. Low levels are relatable. You fight bandits, you have a few small spells, damage is limited. Flight requires thinking outside the box in a way that only the mid-levels really begin to dig into.

[N810]

Personally I think flying is offset by fall damage...
all of a sudden, hater harmless spells and effects become lethal.
(stun, sleep, paralysis, blindness, etc... )

want to remember how high you are flying...
use checkers or dice under your characters base.

Ps. towers should have arrow slots, not big windows.

[JoeJ]

Your comment just goes to show that you aren't the right hands.

What do you mean by that?


I disagree with your statement that it doesn't break anything. It forces the DM to design around it and to abandon many styles of encounter that can be bypassed by flight. If you don't want the PC's crossing that gorge yet, you better make sure there are archers defending it. That's fine, but previously the gorge alone would have sufficed. Do the PC's need to retrieve the princess from the tallest tower? Better add flying monsters to guard her.

It can be a LOT more work. Now you (and I) may not have a trouble with that, but I've damaged the narrative and difficulty of several games with it.

That doesn't break the game, it's part of the game. Every situation you list applies to every form of flight: spells, magic items, flying mounts, wild shape, etc. Those have all been long established in D&D. Having flight also available as a racial ability changes precisely nothing about any of those situations. The only thing it does is make it harder to railroad the party at low levels, which is not a bad thing IMO.

Whether the PCs can fly or not, as long as there are monsters that fly you still have to plan around it or you won't have any verisimilitude. If the kidnapped princess is in a tower with big, unbarred windows, what's to keep her from being snatched by the first monster that flies past? What kind of an idiot would depend on a gorge as a defense in a world with gargoyles and giant eagles and manticores?

Furthermore, having to plan encounters that take into account flight is neither harder nor easier than having to plan encounters that take into account the inability to fly. Are there archers shooting down from a balcony? If no one can fly, then the DM has to make sure there's some way for the PCs to reach them. Is there a gorge? The DM has to think of a way the party can cross it. Is the princess locked in a tower? The DM has to make sure the guards are either weak enough for the party to fight their way all the way up and back down again, or oblivious enough for them to sneak the same distance.

[pwykersotz]

That doesn't break the game, it's part of the game. Every situation you list applies to every form of flight: spells, magic items, flying mounts, wild shape, etc. Those have all been long established in D&D. Having flight also available as a racial ability changes precisely nothing about any of those situations. The only thing it does is make it harder to railroad the party at low levels, which is not a bad thing IMO.

Whether the PCs can fly or not, as long as there are monsters that fly you still have to plan around it or you won't have any verisimilitude. If the kidnapped princess is in a tower with big, unbarred windows, what's to keep her from being snatched by the first monster that flies past? What kind of an idiot would depend on a gorge as a defense in a world with gargoyles and giant eagles and manticores?

Furthermore, having to plan encounters that take into account flight is neither harder nor easier than having to plan encounters that take into account the inability to fly. Are there archers shooting down from a balcony? If no one can fly, then the DM has to make sure there's some way for the PCs to reach them. Is there a gorge? The DM has to think of a way the party can cross it. Is the princess locked in a tower? The DM has to make sure the guards are either weak enough for the party to fight their way all the way up and back down again, or oblivious enough for them to sneak the same distance.

I disagree regarding the bolded, but given that you have clearly acclimated to presenting stories with the expanded paradigm of flight, I'm not sure I can convince you. I'm arguing this point because I remember being stymied as a newer GM with this prospect, I've since outgrown it too.

And yes, it is part of the game. I never said it breaks the game, though someone earlier than me may have. I said it breaks DM designs if they aren't robust. Which is really the main thing. It's not that some idiot thought that a gorge would defend against manticores and dragons, it's that a GM might have used it as an obstacle. These gargoyles and giant eagles serve at the convenience of the DM. If they are inconvenient, he doesn't have to worry about them. But player characters can be expected to leverage every tool at their disposal, as is proper for them to do. Flight is awesome because flight is a game-changer.

[RickAllison]

As a side note, a fun, flavorful, and difficult enemy for aarakocra players is a Shield Master gargoyle (probably with added Athletics proficiency. Sworn enemies of the PC race, the gargoyle then becomes very effective at rendering PC flyers prone and thus subjecting them to fall damage.

[Taejang]

I generally find flying to not be too bad unless everyone can do it... Or if there are only a few who can't.
This, right here. If most of the party is still on the ground, then melee enemies still have targets. Ranged characters usually hide behind their melee companions anyway; there is literally no difference here. Now if the whole party can fly... that's going to be very different.


Flight is not an assumed thing in 5e. Besides the two races in question, there's...

A 14th level Barbarian ability that only functions during a rage.
A 17th level Cleric ability.
An 8th level Druid ability, limited to certain Wild Shaped forms.
An 11th level Monk ability, costing a lot of Ki points.
A 20th level Paladin ability, useable for one hour/day.
A 14th level Sorcerer ability.
A 3rd level spell lasting 10 minutes.

You left out flying mounts (for Ranger, a Paladin spell, or anyone who roleplays having a pet), summoning spells and abilities and items, the Polymorph spell and abilities and items, magical items that grant flight (some of which are uncommon, and thus fairly available in any campaign that has magic items), Warlock of the Pact (who can be halflings and have an imp familiar, which can carry them and thus become a flying mount), and probably still other ways to gain flight that I'm also forgetting.


As a DM who isn't comfortable with flight, I think it's probably best to just not allow it in the campaign I'm doing. I'm not nearly advanced with my DMing enough to let it be allowed. I'm admittedly lazy, and the less I have to think about with adding the third dimension of height in an encounter (it already is there, but more so is what I mean), I think the better off I'll personally be.

A reasonable position. The 3rd dimension can get quite complicated to represent on a 2D map.
Like OldTrees said, that is reasonable. Even if you are an advanced DM, commonly-used flight can slow down a game, as you have to describe and deal with a lot more real estate.

For others reading this thread, I'll make my case for why flight isn't overpowered.

1) Those races that get at-will flight give up a lot. For instance, aarakocra can't wear medium or heavy armor and still fly. And while they get flight, they also get nothing else. Flight is wicked powerful, but in situations where it isn't helpful (like almost every room in a dungeon or cave or building, where ceilings are rarely high enough), aarakocra are weaker than other races.

2) As mentioned before, ranged characters almost always hide behind their melee friends anyway. Removing a ranged character from melee opponents is something every ranged character tries to do, with spells or hiding or terrain or whatever. Flight is just another option.

3) Once airborn, you can't hide very well. Virtually everyone on the battlefield will have direct line-of-sight to you; no cover to hide behind and nothing to stop all ranged enemies from pelting you. Spells can help with this (Darkness, Fog, etc), but have their own drawbacks and require resources to set up.

4) Flight is trivially easy to deal with. First, every archer can hit you without worrying about hitting their own guys. Second, every spell or effect that causes Prone or Restrain will utterly maim a flying creature. You don't need enemy wizards to prepare Earthbind; just give them Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Sleep, Web, etc. What's more, flight doesn't invalidate all the other spells typically used against ranged characters. Flight does not equal immunity.

5) Encounters which don't include ranged opponents were not likely to hit the archer/wizard in the group anyway (see point #2). Either the party defeats the melee opponents before the group's melee characters drop, or the enemy melee characters wipe out most of the party, and the flying aarakocra ranger is now the only survivor.

[Joe dirt]

This might just be me with this, but I've always felt like flight is something that people underestimate in terms of its usefulness. As a DM, I'm not particularly fond of allowing players to take races that would allow flight (such as the tiefling variant or the aarakocra), and will request they not do it.

I want opinions from y'all on flight. Am I too xenophobic to the idea of flight and need to focus more on tuning encounters to account for flight? Am I right in assuming it's a supremely useful ability and should be apprehensive?

are u aware that even standard race gnomes can fly at first level?

[JoeJ]

Upon reflection, I realize that a lot of the way I think about flight is colored by the fact that one of my favorite genres of RPG is superhero. And going all the way back to my first game of Villains & Vigilantes in the early 1980s, I can't think of a single game I played, on either side of the GMs screen, where there weren't at least some PCs who could fly. Nor can I think of a single case in which flight caused any difficulties for the GM.

Now I realize that those games have different rules, but it's not rules complaints that I'm hearing; it's adventure design. And there's why I'm having trouble accepting that it creates any extra work for the DM. It's not a problem if PCs can fly through Freedom City, so why is it a problem if they can fly in the Forgotten Realms?

[Vogonjeltz]

Yes, this is why the words 'change' and 'retcon' were used in my post. I see no reason why the race lore should be sacrosanct when the mechanics are not. Particularly when the lore changes every edition anyway. (Remember when 5 Aarakocra's could summon an air elemental? Remember when they had naff all to do with the EPoA or the Wind Dukes? I do.)

Wouldn't it be easier to just not worry about flying when it has such a tiny potential impact on most if not all adventures? Virtually everything is either in a location where flying doesn't work (enclosed spaces) or it has a ranged capability, or it can easily find total cover from a flier courtesy of trees and other plant life.

[Regitnui]

All of which are forcing the DM to design around flight.

All of which are common sense for a castle tower. Yeah, they stop fliers, but they also stop whoever's inside trying to climb out or avoid the problem entirely.

You do need to take flight into account, but also dark vision, swim speed and party level. It's not tremendously difficult. A ravine can also be a challenge for a PC party where one or members can fly; firstly how do they get all their stuff across? Who's carrying who? Are they going to be spotted doing so? Flight doesn't make the encounter any more trivial than the ability to summon a bridge from shadowstuff or put together a ladder.

[pwykersotz]

All of which are common sense for a castle tower. Yeah, they stop fliers, but they also stop whoever's inside trying to climb out or avoid the problem entirely.

You do need to take flight into account, but also dark vision, swim speed and party level. It's not tremendously difficult. A ravine can also be a challenge for a PC party where one or members can fly; firstly how do they get all their stuff across? Who's carrying who? Are they going to be spotted doing so? Flight doesn't make the encounter any more trivial than the ability to summon a bridge from shadowstuff or put together a ladder.

So does it follow that you consider party flight to be a low priority movement option that adds virtually no power or tactical advantage to the game? Or at least the identical amount to swim speed and darkvision? Because if it isn't powerful or useful, it shouldn't be very coveted. My experience is the opposite, flight is highly desired because it's far more valuable than either of those options.

It takes a good deal of learning to adjust for flight. Yes, for magic and other things too, flight isn't the only thing that can mess with less experienced GM's, but it is one of the big ones.

[JoeJ]

So does it follow that you consider party flight to be a low priority movement option that adds virtually no power or tactical advantage to the game? Or at least the identical amount to swim speed and darkvision? Because if it isn't powerful or useful, it shouldn't be very coveted. My experience is the opposite, flight is highly desired because it's far more valuable than either of those options.

Flight is highly desired because of the coolness factor, completely apart from any tactical considerations.


It takes a good deal of learning to adjust for flight. Yes, for magic and other things too, flight isn't the only thing that can mess with less experienced GM's, but it is one of the big ones.

D&D has plenty of flying monsters, even at 1st level. Tactically, a flying PC is no different than a flying monster; they're just wearing the other team's jersey. A DM who can't handle flight during play shouldn't be the DM at all. It's like not being able to adjudicate magic.

If it's just a question of designing the adventure, there are plenty of free and commercial adventures available.

[pwykersotz]

Flight is highly desired because of the coolness factor, completely apart from any tactical considerations.

D&D has plenty of flying monsters, even at 1st level. Tactically, a flying PC is no different than a flying monster; they're just wearing the other team's jersey. A DM who can't handle flight during play shouldn't be the DM at all. It's like not being able to adjudicate magic.

If it's just a question of designing the adventure, there are plenty of free and commercial adventures available.

I am in full agreement with the sensibility that a DM who is uncomfortable running with player flight should work to become comfortable with it.

I disagree that flight is not incredibly tactically useful or that flying PC's equate to flying monsters. Again, the monsters serve at the DM's discretion. The players do not. This was one of the problems I dealt with early on with my games. Flight allows precise strategic repostioning regardless of most terrain features. It forces the DM to have a complete and relatively detailed account of the above view. It forces the DM to account on-the-fly for players tackling a trouble from angles that might not have previously been considered. It nullifies a considerable number of game conditions such as rough terrain, physical obstacles, encounters such as bandits on the road or a wandering ogre, and many, many more.

Should these be issues in the long run? No. As you say, a DM should learn to design and run encounters with flight in mind, if their goal is to become a good DM. But these lessons can take a while to learn. I went the wrong way on it a few times. Doing things like increasing the railroad, over preparing detailed descriptions that ended up being useless, etc. It was a lot of work to find the right ways to deal with it.

[Regitnui]

So does it follow that you consider party flight to be a low priority movement option that adds virtually no power or tactical advantage to the game? Or at least the identical amount to swim speed and darkvision? Because if it isn't powerful or useful, it shouldn't be very coveted. My experience is the opposite, flight is highly desired because it's far more valuable than either of those options.

Not at all. It comes back to what I said earlier; if flight is common enough that player races have it, then the NPCs will have planned to counter/acknowledge it. I'm not a fan of 'special snowflake' adventurers, like CG drow, last of my species, blah blah bloody blah. If you're determined to play an aaracokra, then there's a population nearby. If there's a population of flying birdmen nearby, the NPCs will know about the possibility of flying opposition.

Not to a ridiculous degree, of course. Oozes aren't suddenly gaining the ability to jump. But there are going to be archers, ranged spellcasters, or limited space in most encounters. The tower isn't going to have perches. The ravine won't be only a few metres wide. Encounters will be designed in 3d.

[JumboWheat01]

Not to a ridiculous degree, of course. Oozes aren't suddenly gaining the ability to jump.

...Maybe we need to introduce Dragon Quest Monsters' Slime family to D&D. That'll teach 'em. Good few fliers in there, including some with dragon blood! Draconic slimes!

[ravenkith]

What do you mean by that?

Flight, as a racial ability that you can use at will, can be extremely damaging to play balance.

It can also be VERY broken at level one in the right hands.

To clarify: the 'right hands' in the sentence above would be creative and inventive players who think outside of the box.

When I said that if you couldn't see that the above statement was true, that 'yours were not the right hands' I was implying that you were not one of those people whose thought processes live outside the box, and that the reason you thought at-will flight at level one was perfectly balanced and not abusable was simply because you were not one of these creative-thinking type players.

Now, to explain why I think it's imbalanced and broken:
Ok, for starters, let's acknowledge the fact that there are some automatic limits built into the various means and methods available to PCs when it comes to getting access to flight.

Under normal circumstances, flight (that is, powered and controlled movement through three dimensions) is not available to player characters until level five at the earliest, when arcane casters get access to the fly spell. Arguably, Gaseous form (lvl3 spell - level 5 character) and levitate (level 2 spell - level 3 character) also grant seperation in the third dimension, but both of these spells come with serious limitations, so Fly is the only one that should be considered, here.

The Fly spell only lasts for concentration/10 minutes, and a top speed of 60ft per round. It also uses a third level spell slot, meaning that the number of times per day that you can cast the spell is actually pretty limited.

As a druid, wildshape forms are hard-limited to not be able to fly until level 8 at the earliest. Why? because of the duration of wildshapes (hrs/lvl).

All encounters level 4 and below have their challenge ratings set assuming that the critter in question is not going to have to deal with flight on the part of the PCs - and many of those critters have absolutely no ranged capabilities to deal with enemies who have some how found a way to generate vertical separation.

As an example of what I'm talking about, here, consider if you will, the example of a level 1 fighter vs a polar bear, as opposed to a level 1 fighter with at-will racial flight vs a polar bear.

The first fighter, without flight, is going to struggle to take on that polar bear. It's going to be a heck of a battle, and his life is definitely at risk.

The second fighter, on the other hand, will simply break out a ranged weapon, fly up 30 feet, and shoot until the bear is dead without ever once risking damage.

The at-will flight causes the encounter, which should be challenging for a party of four first level adventurers, into something that is trivial, and basically less meaningful than a speed bump.

Now consider a CR 5 umber hulk up against a lvl 1 Sorceror with at will racial flight: Is the sorceror in any real danger as long as he remains airborne? With charisma being his highest stat, it's unlikely that he'll fail a DC 15 will CHA save, so the Umber hulk is reduced to either throwing 1 rock per round, or burrowing to hide! Granted, a fifth level character could use the Fly spell to get a similar advantage, but only for 20 minutes: A 1st level character with at-will racial flight gets the advantage all day.

While not a trivial encounter, a properly built level 1 sorceror with at-will flight would have a good chance of being able to solo an umber hulk: a monster that theoretically should be a challenge for four fifth level player characters under other circumstances.

Let's not talk about the CR 6 mammoth, which has no range attack and cannot hide at all!

If racial flight can enable you to realistically eliminate a CR 6 monster by yourself at level 1, it's pretty broken.

Furthermore, having the ability to fly all the time trivializes ground-based traps, ground-based encounters, and cuts out a lot of challenges posed by terrain, like climbing, crossing pits and canyons....geez.


I'm literally don't have time to discuss this further, but the CR 6 beatdown at level one should show you exactly why at will racial flight is a bad idea.

[Taejang]

<good reasons and sound logic>
I agree with everything you've just said. But I disagree on the basic premise. Before we get into details, I'll remind you that specific warlock builds can gain flight through their imp familiars. Depending on your interpretation, the imp even gives the warlock magic resistance.

TL;DR: There is nothing wrong with flying PCs. There is everything wrong with an entire party of flying PCs.

Now, Party vs Polar Bear. There are lots of things which can make this a trivial fight (Silent Image comes to mind), but let's only look at at-will, all day long, no resources expended solutions. If the party can prepare, this is simple. Hunting traps, a ring of wooden stakes, etc. If the party can't prepare, they are in for a fight. With proper terrain, they can still trivialize the fight, but in a random encounter, the party will probably have to actually use resources to make such an encounter easy.

Now, you may say that means the flying characters have an advantage. And they do. But only if the entire party is flying. Otherwise, the one PC aarakocra is out of danger, but the rest of the party still has to avoid the polar bear somehow. And that's the crux of the matter.

If the entire party is flying, your argument makes sense. However, the same could be said of an all elf party: things that charm or cause magical sleep suddenly become a lot easier to deal with. Likewise, an all dwarf party is very powerful against poison. Tieflings and fire resistance, dragonborn and elemental resistances, etc etc. Or, a party of all paladins against undead, barbarians against things without magical damage/abilities, and so on.

Diversity in a party is important. Whenever an entire party is all one thing (all fighters, or all aarakocra, or all dragonborn), it will force the DM to adapt encounters. There is nothing wrong with that, really. Unmodified, some encounters will be stupid easy. Others will be extremely difficult. For example, an umber hulk would probably kill a party of aarakocra who all specialize in ranged combat. Why? Because umber hulks' modus operandi is surprise, most of the party will struggle against its gaze, they will be weak against melee, and umber hulks live in the Underdark. And caves. And dungeons. Places where there isn't enough room to fly around out of reach.

To exemplify this concept a little further, our party currently consists of dragonborn. All dragonborn. At level one, we faced off with kobolds. You know what breath weapons do to kobolds? We could kill absurd numbers of kobolds. But man oh man, did we suck with stealth. Because 7 foot tall, 250 pound dragonborn are many things, but stealthy they are not. Most parties have at least one somewhat stealthy character, but we really didn't.

Polar Bear fights with a party of all aarakocra may be super easy, but fighting in dungeons will not be. And since they have, you know, wings, they probably can't use any armor they find, as it has to be customized. But land-based traps may be easier to avoid! Except in dungeons, where traps usually are. But they can travel faster! But while flying, they are easier to spot and follow. But they can avoid difficult terrain! Except in bad weather, when flying is difficult. Well, that's not fair, how often does your campaign have blizzards? As often as the DM decides it does. But that means you're modifying the campaign! ...yeah, that's what DMs do. It's kind of the point of a DM instead of a computer.

So, flying PCs are welcome, but an entire flying party is something to beware of, for the same reasons as a party of all dwarves. You just have to adjust the campaign a little, that's all.

[JoeJ]

Flight, as a racial ability that you can use at will, can be extremely damaging to play balance.

It can also be VERY broken at level one in the right hands.

To clarify: the 'right hands' in the sentence above would be creative and inventive players who think outside of the box.

When I said that if you couldn't see that the above statement was true, that 'yours were not the right hands' I was implying that you were not one of those people whose thought processes live outside the box, and that the reason you thought at-will flight at level one was perfectly balanced and not abusable was simply because you were not one of these creative-thinking type players.

You have that exactly backwards. In the hands of a creative, inventive player, flight makes an entertaining, but in no way unbalanced, addition to the party. It's in-the-box thinking by the DM that creates a problem.


Now, to explain why I think it's imbalanced and broken:
Ok, for starters, let's acknowledge the fact that there are some automatic limits built into the various means and methods available to PCs when it comes to getting access to flight.

Under normal circumstances, flight (that is, powered and controlled movement through three dimensions) is not available to player characters until level five at the earliest, when arcane casters get access to the fly spell. Arguably, Gaseous form (lvl3 spell - level 5 character) and levitate (level 2 spell - level 3 character) also grant seperation in the third dimension, but both of these spells come with serious limitations, so Fly is the only one that should be considered, here.

The Fly spell only lasts for concentration/10 minutes, and a top speed of 60ft per round. It also uses a third level spell slot, meaning that the number of times per day that you can cast the spell is actually pretty limited.

As a druid, wildshape forms are hard-limited to not be able to fly until level 8 at the earliest. Why? because of the duration of wildshapes (hrs/lvl).

All of this is irrelevant. Different characters get abilities at different levels.


All encounters level 4 and below have their challenge ratings set assuming that the critter in question is not going to have to deal with flight on the part of the PCs - and many of those critters have absolutely no ranged capabilities to deal with enemies who have some how found a way to generate vertical separation.

The first part is utterly untrue. There is no such assumption on anybody's part, except perhaps yours.


As an example of what I'm talking about, here, consider if you will, the example of a level 1 fighter vs a polar bear, as opposed to a level 1 fighter with at-will racial flight vs a polar bear.

The first fighter, without flight, is going to struggle to take on that polar bear. It's going to be a heck of a battle, and his life is definitely at risk.

The second fighter, on the other hand, will simply break out a ranged weapon, fly up 30 feet, and shoot until the bear is dead without ever once risking damage.

The at-will flight causes the encounter, which should be challenging for a party of four first level adventurers, into something that is trivial, and basically less meaningful than a speed bump.

Now consider a CR 5 umber hulk up against a lvl 1 Sorceror with at will racial flight: Is the sorceror in any real danger as long as he remains airborne? With charisma being his highest stat, it's unlikely that he'll fail a DC 15 will CHA save, so the Umber hulk is reduced to either throwing 1 rock per round, or burrowing to hide! Granted, a fifth level character could use the Fly spell to get a similar advantage, but only for 20 minutes: A 1st level character with at-will racial flight gets the advantage all day.

While not a trivial encounter, a properly built level 1 sorceror with at-will flight would have a good chance of being able to solo an umber hulk: a monster that theoretically should be a challenge for four fifth level player characters under other circumstances.

Let's not talk about the CR 6 mammoth, which has no range attack and cannot hide at all!

If racial flight can enable you to realistically eliminate a CR 6 monster by yourself at level 1, it's pretty broken.[/QUOTE]

Your examples are absurd. You're completely ignoring all the non-flying members of the party. A flying archer and a grounded archer standing behind the melee tanks are in the same position of doing damage without taking any. Of if everybody can fly, those encounter doesn't happen at all; the party encounters something else, so again there's no problem.

If you're going to cherry pick encounters to maximize PC effectiveness, then a 1st level human fighter with archery style can solo a CR 13 beholder (lock them in an empty chamber big enough to allow the fighter, who is faster, to stay more than 150' from the beholder, but not high enough for the beholder to get 600' above the fighter). That doesn't mean that archery is overpowered, it means that the encounter was badly designed.

And just look at CR 1/8 bandits, who do more damage with missile attacks than they do in melee. Or CR 1/2 scouts, who also do more damage with missile weapons. Or CR 1/2 thugs, who do the same damage either way. Or look at bugbears (CR 1), gnolls (CR 1/2), goblins (CR 1/4), hobgoblins (CR 1/2), kobolds (CR 1/8), lizardfolk (CR 1/2), orcs (CR 1/2), skeletons (CR 1/4), and many others that have missile attacks. Or blood hawks (CR 1/8), cockatrice (CR 1/2), darkmantles (CR 1/2), flying snakes (CR 1/8), flying swords (CR 1/4), giant wasps (CR 1/2), harpies (CR 1), hippogriffs (CR 1), mephits (CR 1/4 to 1/2), pixies (CR 1/4), specters (CR 1), sprites (CR 1/4), stirges (CR 1/8) and many others that can fly. These are not rare, special monsters, but some of the most common creatures encountered at low levels.


Furthermore, having the ability to fly all the time trivializes ground-based traps, ground-based encounters, and cuts out a lot of challenges posed by terrain, like climbing, crossing pits and canyons....geez.

It really makes it hard if the players can get off the DM's railroad, doesn't it?

None of what you claim here is true unless every member of the party has access to flight. If that's the case, then they also have the ability to visit cloud cities, and caves high up on sheer cliffs, and towering islands or sea stacks with no place to land a boat. They can visit aarakocra or giant eagle villages, and negotiate three-dimensional dungeons, whether created by flying races, magic, or just natural forces like water and wind.

With just one flier, that chasm becomes a puzzle; how do we get everybody and all their equipment and loot across? Especially if you're using the variant encumbrance rules and/or the party is in combat or otherwise under time pressure. Sure, the flyer won't fall into the pit trap. But if it's concealed, they won't be any more likely than anybody else to spot it in time to warn the rest of the party. And while that flying PC can usually see farther than their buddies on the ground, they can also be seen from farther away.

tldr: Player agency is not a bad thing. If you think outside the box, like you advocated, flight doesn't create problems for a DM. It creates opportunities.