So how do you feel about removing flight ability for the most part from games? My DM doesn't like flying and finds it hard to maneuver and keep track of how high players/creatures are, etc. He's ok with Levitate and Flying spell (but doesn't love them) since they're require resources, concentration and can cause you to fall, but really doesn't like any subclasses that grant flight (Twilight Cleric, Genie Warlock, Stars Druid, etc) and extremely discourages you from using these abilities if you take the subclass. Kind of sucks cause with some like Genie Warlock thats a huge feature of the subclass.
To be fair, he doesn't like using flying monsters either so its not like he'd throw flying creatures at as and then say we can't fly, it goes both ways.
I do agree that flying Races are OP and I personally only like it when you get flight from a spell or Subclass feature.
Do many DM's agree and find it difficult to deal with flying creatures and players and remove it completely from their games or at least limit it somehow?
It seems like a reasonable restriction — and it seems like it’s come up during character generation and is being done pretty fairly. That said, I’ve never found flying PCs to be all that powerful. Most often, it seems to come up when someone invents a white room scenario to show how broken flying is (flying something with a bow vs. the tarrasque is a popular one), but I’ve never seen one of those scenarios actually come up in play. There’s plenty of ways to deal with flying characters — starting with simply giving the enemies bows, and seeing this guy, all alone up there with no cover.
As long-time, DM, I'm not terribly concerned about characters with the ability of flight. Most of the time it would cause an issue, the problem is that the DM didn't account for it during their encounter development or failed to properly challenge the players with smarter or more aerially mobile enemies.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
Flight is OP early on, does render certain obstacles moot and does trivialise certain late game scenarios (Tarrasque, I'm looking at you!).
On the other hand, there is a quite a bit of the game where it isn't OP, it is really cool, and it would leave a rather gaping hole in the game if you were to remove it (you can cast Wish, but you can't fly? Really?). It's also an awesome tool to give to enemies and NPCs that show how powerful they are. IT also pushes DMs to be inventive and not just rehash the same obstacles through all 20 levels of play.
I leave it in the game. It might be a royal PITA, but it's best left alone. Once I temporarily banned a fairy from flying, but it was on an obstacle course that they were voluntarily taking so I had an in-game reason to stop it, and it wasn't cooked up or anything.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
It seems like a reasonable restriction — and it seems like it’s come up during character generation and is being done pretty fairly. That said, I’ve never found flying PCs to be all that powerful. Most often, it seems to come up when someone invents a white room scenario to show how broken flying is (flying something with a bow vs. the tarrasque is a popular one), but I’ve never seen one of those scenarios actually come up in play. There’s plenty of ways to deal with flying characters — starting with simply giving the enemies bows, and seeing this guy, all alone up there with no cover.
Ya I'm not super upset about it and haven't played a class that really utilizes it yet, but I was thinking of Genie Warlock so I might bring it up again to see if he'd mind. Definitely don't want to make any extra work or stress on the DM. Maybe we could just re-skin the Genie Warlock to not have flight but get something else instead at lvl 6, not sure what could equal non concentration flight for 10 minutes proficiency bonus times per day lol but its an idea.
I suppose it would depend on how large a playing advantage the flight ability grants the character, over the rest of the party.
Example: I joined a table group a while back, and asked if I could have a character who flies. In this case, the character is an Urd with a fluttering, butterfly-like flight capability equal to its foot travel speed. Sure, going airborne can help a character avoid ground-based attacks but, as this character has learned, getting shot out of the sky is a distinct possibility. Add falling damage to an already grievous injury, and there better be someone on the ground with healing magic, or that character is done! Also, this character cannot carry more weight than the halfway point to 'Lightly Encumbered', or it cannot launch into the sky. In addition, practically every flying monster out there has greater speed and maneuverability than this character. As player, those restrictions are just fine with me.
If someone wants a character with a flight speed of say 80, and the maneuverability of a hummingbird, then game balance issues can come into play. Should that player insist that their character should be able to wear heavy armor, wield a great battle axe, and carry loads of stuff on its back while airborne (an airborne tank), then what? It just comes down to giving the player what they want, vs game balance within the party.
[Edit: In any case, the player is asking the DM to shoulder at least a little more work in order to accommodate this request. Always keep that in mind.]
I suppose it would depend on how large a playing advantage the flight ability grants the character, over the rest of the party.
Example: I joined a table group a while back, and asked if I could have a character who flies. In this case, the character is an Urd with a fluttering, butterfly-like flight capability equal to its foot travel speed. Sure, going airborne can help a character avoid ground-based attacks but, as this character has learned, getting shot out of the sky is a distinct possibility. Add falling damage to an already grievous injury, and there better be someone on the ground with healing magic, or that character is done! Also, this character cannot carry more weight than the halfway point to 'Lightly Encumbered', or it cannot launch into the sky. In addition, practically every flying monster out there has greater speed and maneuverability than this character. As player, those restrictions are just fine with me.
If someone wants a character with a flight speed of say 80, and the maneuverability of a hummingbird, then game balance issues can come into play. Should that player insist that their character should be able to wear heavy armor, wield a great battle axe, and carry loads of stuff on its back while airborne (an airborne tank), then what? It just comes down to giving the player what they want, vs game balance within the party.
[Edit: In any case, the player is asking the DM to shoulder at least a little more work in order to accommodate this request. Always keep that in mind.]
Well in our game at least we've scrapped all Race ability flying. The flying i'm talking about would only be from Subclass features as my examples with Twilight, Stars Druid and Genie Warlock. And I believe all (I definitely know Stars Druid and Genie) can hover as well as fly, so getting shot down wouldn't be a concern due to hover. Certainly with the Fly spell there is a chance to get knocked down, but because of that I think my DM has more issues with the Subclass features due to non concentration, hover and fly combined.
I agree I certainly wouldn't want to overshadow my party, but at the same time it would suck to miss out on a big feature of your subclass. In the case of Genie i'd probably just not play one at all if I was told you can't fly. But hey its the DM's table and not being able to play one or two sublcasses isn't the end of the world!
And I believe all (I definitely know Stars Druid and Genie) can hover as well as fly, so getting shot down wouldn't be a concern due to hover. Certainly with the Fly spell there is a chance to get knocked down, but because of that I think my DM has more issues with the Subclass features due to non concentration, hover and fly combined.
I believe the point was, you can’t hover when you hit 0 hp. You’re unconscious then and you just fall. And the fall damage means a failed death save when you hit the ground.
Hover means you don’t have to worry about something knocking you prone and making you fall, but there are still times you’d fall.
And I believe all (I definitely know Stars Druid and Genie) can hover as well as fly, so getting shot down wouldn't be a concern due to hover. Certainly with the Fly spell there is a chance to get knocked down, but because of that I think my DM has more issues with the Subclass features due to non concentration, hover and fly combined.
I believe the point was, you can’t hover when you hit 0 hp. You’re unconscious then and you just fall. And the fall damage means a failed death save when you hit the ground.
Hover means you don’t have to worry about something knocking you prone and making you fall, but there are still times you’d fall.
Does it say anywhere in the rules that if you're knocked unconscious you fall? All I can see is reference to prone it gets knocked down unless it has hover. Doesn't mention unconscious from what I see. I might be looking in the wrong place?
i think most games i've been in have only delayed flying, not outright limited it or banned it.
so flying races are allowed, but the DM tells them they cant use that ability until a later level (usually 5-ish). helpful for growing into the character and getting everyone into the flow of their characters before they get a really nice feature
I don't mind flying characters, as long as they don't mind a random flock of birds potentially knocking them out of the sky, low cloud cover that obscures vision, tree branches, harder to breath if they go too high and the air gets thin (good for ground at a high elevation like on a mountain) , or something more sinister flying by that sees the player as invading their space.
I typically throw these scenarios out there for an encounter that isn't quite balanced for flying, or I roll a D20 that triggers a random "sky" encounter on a 17-20, and then roll a d6 to decide what the encounter is, but it really depends on what is going on in the game at that time too. I typically don't throw anything at them unless they go above their flying speed in elevation, but if they keep climbing on every turn, then I start rolling.
However, if I know I have a player that likes to fly, I will create encounters that will challenge them as well as the party. It isn't always easy or necessary, but doable. Most of the time though players tend to forget some of the awesome things they can do. I have a player in a campaign now that can fly, but always forgets.
Another reason I see a DM ban flying is they can't track the players and enemies heights at all times, so I tell the players they have to keep track of it themselves (I still manage the enemies) and if there is any question about where they are, they roll a D6x10 and that's their elevation; I play it off as their character actually losing track of how high or low they are due to the action of combat and being distracted.
Also, questions always come up regarding range and distance, so my easy solution is just go with whatever the larger number is rather than trying to do some complicated math in the middle of combat. For instance, if an enemy is 15 feet away, but 50 feet above you, then the range to hit is 50 feet. But if the enemy is 5 feet away while hovering 20 feet in the air, then the range is 20 feet. I don't what the actual math is, but I've had no complaints when doing it this way.
I think flight should definitely be included in Dnd because Dnd is almost a way to gain superpowers and play with them. Tons of people would wish to fly if granted a wish, and Dnd is a place where you can sort of do it. I understand why things like Aarockokras might be discouraged because they can mess up the DMs plans. I know you can work around them, but always having flight does take away the obstacles of walls and pits that I think are fun to include as a DM. Still, Dnd is a place where you can temporarily gain superpowers and create stories and if you want to play a person that can fly then, as a DM, I would try to allow it. Especially if it is a class feature. Not being allowed to use a large part of your subclass is not something that I would do.
Flying monsters are fun. Fighting them runs the risk of falling from great heights, and they can maneuver around the players well and then I can use the crazy maps I build.
And I believe all (I definitely know Stars Druid and Genie) can hover as well as fly, so getting shot down wouldn't be a concern due to hover. Certainly with the Fly spell there is a chance to get knocked down, but because of that I think my DM has more issues with the Subclass features due to non concentration, hover and fly combined.
I believe the point was, you can’t hover when you hit 0 hp. You’re unconscious then and you just fall. And the fall damage means a failed death save when you hit the ground.
Hover means you don’t have to worry about something knocking you prone and making you fall, but there are still times you’d fall.
Does it say anywhere in the rules that if you're knocked unconscious you fall? All I can see is reference to prone it gets knocked down unless it has hover. Doesn't mention unconscious from what I see. I might be looking in the wrong place?
If a character is unconscious, they automatically fall prone, per the Unconscious condition rules.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
And I believe all (I definitely know Stars Druid and Genie) can hover as well as fly, so getting shot down wouldn't be a concern due to hover. Certainly with the Fly spell there is a chance to get knocked down, but because of that I think my DM has more issues with the Subclass features due to non concentration, hover and fly combined.
I believe the point was, you can’t hover when you hit 0 hp. You’re unconscious then and you just fall. And the fall damage means a failed death save when you hit the ground.
Hover means you don’t have to worry about something knocking you prone and making you fall, but there are still times you’d fall.
Does it say anywhere in the rules that if you're knocked unconscious you fall? All I can see is reference to prone it gets knocked down unless it has hover. Doesn't mention unconscious from what I see. I might be looking in the wrong place?
If a character is unconscious, they automatically fall prone, per the Unconscious condition rules.
So that would mean they still hover in the air then right? Because hover states if you fall prone you do not fall to the ground.
I used to be VERY against the idea of "free at-will" flight for low-level PCs, because as others have mentioned, it makes many obstacles trivial. However in practice I've never seen it become huge problem.
Sometimes I wish there were some more limits such as altitude or how long you can stay aloft... but I certainly don't want to return to the AD&D other editions' methods of "flight categories"... anyone remember that? "you need to fly at least x feet forward, can only make a 30 degree turn...."
So how do you feel about removing flight ability for the most part from games?
Do many DM's agree and find it difficult to deal with flying creatures and players and remove it completely from their games or at least limit it somehow?
1: Done that long ago — I found it limited a lot of possibility. One of my peeves for years was pixies. Now they are a main playable group, lol. I also have carpets and brooms and the use of them as airships, lol. But in the past I have never allowed flying races as PCs.
I don’t mind it, especially because having it means a full 360 awareness is needed, spatially. For tracking, well, either a stand or a ring if you use take a, otherwise, just make the p,Ayer be precise. I like my imps too much for otherwise.
2: about a third of DMs I know block it to some degree. Isn’t bad, isn’t good, is just a thing.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
If a character is unconscious, they automatically fall prone, per the Unconscious condition rules.
So that would mean they still hover in the air then right? Because hover states if you fall prone you do not fall to the ground.
I mean, you can debate the RAW on it, I guess, but if I were DM, there's no way I'd let you just float there in the sky. Whatever is keeping you up, is something that requires some kind of effort on your part. Even if it's not concentration, you're doing something, and you can't keep doing it once you're unconscious. What's more, being stuck up there could work against you. If you're out of range of healing word, none of your allies will be able to heal you or otherwise stabilize you. You'd be at the mercy of the death saves; and if you stabilized, its 1-4 hours before you wake up.
And that just gave me the image of the party lassoing you and dragging you around like a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon.
I used to be VERY against the idea of "free at-will" flight for low-level PCs, because as others have mentioned, it makes many obstacles trivial. However in practice I've never seen it become huge problem.
Sometimes I wish there were some more limits such as altitude or how long you can stay aloft... but I certainly don't want to return to the AD&D other editions' methods of "flight categories"... anyone remember that? "you need to fly at least x feet forward, can only make a 30 degree turn...."
Those rules were awful. that was half the reason I never even tried to fly in those editions was the complexity of trying to turn. maybe that was the point, a back door way to stop people flying.
Quite frankly, every character has cool abilities that they should be able to use to bypass encounters some time, so that they feel good about themselves + their character. Flying does help adventurers overcome some challenges, though it isn't actually that powerful since the DM can just design things differently to account for this.
That being said, your Dungeon Master has every right to ban this ability, because it can be annoying and they're in charge of the game. Since Genie Warlocks only get access to this by level 6, it might make sense to ask whether flying may work since you have to wait a bit to get it, or to see if you could get a replacement feature or feat for the ability you're losing as a result of this rule.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
To be fair, he doesn't like using flying monsters either so its not like he'd throw flying creatures at as and then say we can't fly, it goes both ways.
So... they're taking the Dragons out of Dungeons and Dragons?
If you stop and look - there's a metric ton of monsters that have the flying ability. And if they're not using flying monsters, because they fly - that seems absolutely wild.
And if they're using flying monsters but removing their flying ability - that seems wild too. Because that's part of their DC is the fact that they can fly.
The DM is missing out on a lot of creatures... like, well, Dragons, stirges, chimeras, pegasus, a lot of different demons, rocs, on and on and on...
The DM should just have a note paper and write down monsters, NPCs, PCs, and write down where their height is in flight, if they are flying.
To me it's wild to think of removing flying creatures (and/or their ability of flight).
Some classes also get flying stuff (whether spells or mounts), that feel crippling to the character too.
Hey
So how do you feel about removing flight ability for the most part from games? My DM doesn't like flying and finds it hard to maneuver and keep track of how high players/creatures are, etc. He's ok with Levitate and Flying spell (but doesn't love them) since they're require resources, concentration and can cause you to fall, but really doesn't like any subclasses that grant flight (Twilight Cleric, Genie Warlock, Stars Druid, etc) and extremely discourages you from using these abilities if you take the subclass. Kind of sucks cause with some like Genie Warlock thats a huge feature of the subclass.
To be fair, he doesn't like using flying monsters either so its not like he'd throw flying creatures at as and then say we can't fly, it goes both ways.
I do agree that flying Races are OP and I personally only like it when you get flight from a spell or Subclass feature.
Do many DM's agree and find it difficult to deal with flying creatures and players and remove it completely from their games or at least limit it somehow?
Thanks
It seems like a reasonable restriction — and it seems like it’s come up during character generation and is being done pretty fairly. That said, I’ve never found flying PCs to be all that powerful. Most often, it seems to come up when someone invents a white room scenario to show how broken flying is (flying something with a bow vs. the tarrasque is a popular one), but I’ve never seen one of those scenarios actually come up in play. There’s plenty of ways to deal with flying characters — starting with simply giving the enemies bows, and seeing this guy, all alone up there with no cover.
As long-time, DM, I'm not terribly concerned about characters with the ability of flight. Most of the time it would cause an issue, the problem is that the DM didn't account for it during their encounter development or failed to properly challenge the players with smarter or more aerially mobile enemies.
Flight is OP early on, does render certain obstacles moot and does trivialise certain late game scenarios (Tarrasque, I'm looking at you!).
On the other hand, there is a quite a bit of the game where it isn't OP, it is really cool, and it would leave a rather gaping hole in the game if you were to remove it (you can cast Wish, but you can't fly? Really?). It's also an awesome tool to give to enemies and NPCs that show how powerful they are. IT also pushes DMs to be inventive and not just rehash the same obstacles through all 20 levels of play.
I leave it in the game. It might be a royal PITA, but it's best left alone. Once I temporarily banned a fairy from flying, but it was on an obstacle course that they were voluntarily taking so I had an in-game reason to stop it, and it wasn't cooked up or anything.
If you're not willing or able to to discuss in good faith, then don't be surprised if I don't respond, there are better things in life for me to do than humour you. This signature is that response.
Ya I'm not super upset about it and haven't played a class that really utilizes it yet, but I was thinking of Genie Warlock so I might bring it up again to see if he'd mind. Definitely don't want to make any extra work or stress on the DM. Maybe we could just re-skin the Genie Warlock to not have flight but get something else instead at lvl 6, not sure what could equal non concentration flight for 10 minutes proficiency bonus times per day lol but its an idea.
I suppose it would depend on how large a playing advantage the flight ability grants the character, over the rest of the party.
Example: I joined a table group a while back, and asked if I could have a character who flies. In this case, the character is an Urd with a fluttering, butterfly-like flight capability equal to its foot travel speed. Sure, going airborne can help a character avoid ground-based attacks but, as this character has learned, getting shot out of the sky is a distinct possibility. Add falling damage to an already grievous injury, and there better be someone on the ground with healing magic, or that character is done! Also, this character cannot carry more weight than the halfway point to 'Lightly Encumbered', or it cannot launch into the sky. In addition, practically every flying monster out there has greater speed and maneuverability than this character. As player, those restrictions are just fine with me.
If someone wants a character with a flight speed of say 80, and the maneuverability of a hummingbird, then game balance issues can come into play. Should that player insist that their character should be able to wear heavy armor, wield a great battle axe, and carry loads of stuff on its back while airborne (an airborne tank), then what? It just comes down to giving the player what they want, vs game balance within the party.
[Edit: In any case, the player is asking the DM to shoulder at least a little more work in order to accommodate this request. Always keep that in mind.]
Well in our game at least we've scrapped all Race ability flying. The flying i'm talking about would only be from Subclass features as my examples with Twilight, Stars Druid and Genie Warlock. And I believe all (I definitely know Stars Druid and Genie) can hover as well as fly, so getting shot down wouldn't be a concern due to hover. Certainly with the Fly spell there is a chance to get knocked down, but because of that I think my DM has more issues with the Subclass features due to non concentration, hover and fly combined.
I agree I certainly wouldn't want to overshadow my party, but at the same time it would suck to miss out on a big feature of your subclass. In the case of Genie i'd probably just not play one at all if I was told you can't fly. But hey its the DM's table and not being able to play one or two sublcasses isn't the end of the world!
I believe the point was, you can’t hover when you hit 0 hp. You’re unconscious then and you just fall. And the fall damage means a failed death save when you hit the ground.
Hover means you don’t have to worry about something knocking you prone and making you fall, but there are still times you’d fall.
Does it say anywhere in the rules that if you're knocked unconscious you fall? All I can see is reference to prone it gets knocked down unless it has hover. Doesn't mention unconscious from what I see. I might be looking in the wrong place?
i think most games i've been in have only delayed flying, not outright limited it or banned it.
so flying races are allowed, but the DM tells them they cant use that ability until a later level (usually 5-ish). helpful for growing into the character and getting everyone into the flow of their characters before they get a really nice feature
I don't mind flying characters, as long as they don't mind a random flock of birds potentially knocking them out of the sky, low cloud cover that obscures vision, tree branches, harder to breath if they go too high and the air gets thin (good for ground at a high elevation like on a mountain) , or something more sinister flying by that sees the player as invading their space.
I typically throw these scenarios out there for an encounter that isn't quite balanced for flying, or I roll a D20 that triggers a random "sky" encounter on a 17-20, and then roll a d6 to decide what the encounter is, but it really depends on what is going on in the game at that time too. I typically don't throw anything at them unless they go above their flying speed in elevation, but if they keep climbing on every turn, then I start rolling.
However, if I know I have a player that likes to fly, I will create encounters that will challenge them as well as the party. It isn't always easy or necessary, but doable. Most of the time though players tend to forget some of the awesome things they can do. I have a player in a campaign now that can fly, but always forgets.
Another reason I see a DM ban flying is they can't track the players and enemies heights at all times, so I tell the players they have to keep track of it themselves (I still manage the enemies) and if there is any question about where they are, they roll a D6x10 and that's their elevation; I play it off as their character actually losing track of how high or low they are due to the action of combat and being distracted.
Also, questions always come up regarding range and distance, so my easy solution is just go with whatever the larger number is rather than trying to do some complicated math in the middle of combat. For instance, if an enemy is 15 feet away, but 50 feet above you, then the range to hit is 50 feet. But if the enemy is 5 feet away while hovering 20 feet in the air, then the range is 20 feet. I don't what the actual math is, but I've had no complaints when doing it this way.
I think flight should definitely be included in Dnd because Dnd is almost a way to gain superpowers and play with them. Tons of people would wish to fly if granted a wish, and Dnd is a place where you can sort of do it. I understand why things like Aarockokras might be discouraged because they can mess up the DMs plans. I know you can work around them, but always having flight does take away the obstacles of walls and pits that I think are fun to include as a DM. Still, Dnd is a place where you can temporarily gain superpowers and create stories and if you want to play a person that can fly then, as a DM, I would try to allow it. Especially if it is a class feature. Not being allowed to use a large part of your subclass is not something that I would do.
Flying monsters are fun. Fighting them runs the risk of falling from great heights, and they can maneuver around the players well and then I can use the crazy maps I build.
If a character is unconscious, they automatically fall prone, per the Unconscious condition rules.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
So that would mean they still hover in the air then right? Because hover states if you fall prone you do not fall to the ground.
I used to be VERY against the idea of "free at-will" flight for low-level PCs, because as others have mentioned, it makes many obstacles trivial. However in practice I've never seen it become huge problem.
Sometimes I wish there were some more limits such as altitude or how long you can stay aloft... but I certainly don't want to return to the AD&D other editions' methods of "flight categories"... anyone remember that? "you need to fly at least x feet forward, can only make a 30 degree turn...."
1: Done that long ago — I found it limited a lot of possibility. One of my peeves for years was pixies. Now they are a main playable group, lol. I also have carpets and brooms and the use of them as airships, lol. But in the past I have never allowed flying races as PCs.
I don’t mind it, especially because having it means a full 360 awareness is needed, spatially. For tracking, well, either a stand or a ring if you use take a, otherwise, just make the p,Ayer be precise. I like my imps too much for otherwise.
2: about a third of DMs I know block it to some degree. Isn’t bad, isn’t good, is just a thing.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Falling prone is not the same as falling unconscious. At this point in the thread, it feels kinda like you're grasping for advantageous loopholes.
I mean, you can debate the RAW on it, I guess, but if I were DM, there's no way I'd let you just float there in the sky. Whatever is keeping you up, is something that requires some kind of effort on your part. Even if it's not concentration, you're doing something, and you can't keep doing it once you're unconscious. What's more, being stuck up there could work against you. If you're out of range of healing word, none of your allies will be able to heal you or otherwise stabilize you. You'd be at the mercy of the death saves; and if you stabilized, its 1-4 hours before you wake up.
And that just gave me the image of the party lassoing you and dragging you around like a Thanksgiving Day parade balloon.
Those rules were awful. that was half the reason I never even tried to fly in those editions was the complexity of trying to turn. maybe that was the point, a back door way to stop people flying.
Quite frankly, every character has cool abilities that they should be able to use to bypass encounters some time, so that they feel good about themselves + their character. Flying does help adventurers overcome some challenges, though it isn't actually that powerful since the DM can just design things differently to account for this.
That being said, your Dungeon Master has every right to ban this ability, because it can be annoying and they're in charge of the game. Since Genie Warlocks only get access to this by level 6, it might make sense to ask whether flying may work since you have to wait a bit to get it, or to see if you could get a replacement feature or feat for the ability you're losing as a result of this rule.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.So... they're taking the Dragons out of Dungeons and Dragons?
If you stop and look - there's a metric ton of monsters that have the flying ability. And if they're not using flying monsters, because they fly - that seems absolutely wild.
And if they're using flying monsters but removing their flying ability - that seems wild too. Because that's part of their DC is the fact that they can fly.
The DM is missing out on a lot of creatures... like, well, Dragons, stirges, chimeras, pegasus, a lot of different demons, rocs, on and on and on...
The DM should just have a note paper and write down monsters, NPCs, PCs, and write down where their height is in flight, if they are flying.
To me it's wild to think of removing flying creatures (and/or their ability of flight).
Some classes also get flying stuff (whether spells or mounts), that feel crippling to the character too.
Check out my publication on DMs Guild: https://www.dmsguild.com/browse.php?author=Tawmis%20Logue
Check out my comedy web series - Neverending Nights: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Wr4-u9-zw0&list=PLbRG7dzFI-u3EJd0usasgDrrFO3mZ1lOZ
Need a character story/background written up? I do it for free (but also take donations!) - https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up