Looking at your vehicle/monster, I see that it has multiple stations, so I'm guessing these are less like an F-16 Fighting Falcon, and more like an AC-130 Spectre?
While I've not used them myself, I note that there is anUnearthed Arcana dealing with Naval operations and ship-to-ship combat. This sounds like an excellent starting point for rules which you could modify. The UA even covers things like fogbanks ( clouds ), and attempting to be stealthy.
The rules seem to assume the use of a battlemap and counters. You could use a 2D battlemap, and place a spare d20 on top over each counter, indicating altitude ( where each number represents some multiple of feet: 50' ? ).
I'd add 5 stats to an airship/glider in this situation: Climb Rate, Dive Rate, Emergency Climb Rate, Emergency Dive Rate, and Emergency Maneuver Saving Throw Modifier. The first two are the maximum "safe" speeds for changing altitude, and I'd make the Dive Rate slightly higher than the Climb Rate ( easier to go down ). I'd also have the speed decrease/increase (climbing/diving) for one round after performing an altitude change ( possibly two, if it's an emergency version of the maneuver). And I'd have the crew make a saving throw for the aircraft, which is has to make after the Emergency versions of the maneuvers, or the aircraft takes hull damage.
This could lead to cool maneuvers like an aircraft diving for speed to catch up to an opposing aircraft, then pulling up hard behind an opponent, or at least close enough for the Wizard to get off a Lightning Bolt spell :D
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I wasn't aware of that UA, thanks for linking it! That'll come in very handy for something else I'm working on.
Otherwise I based the vehicle (with stations) off of the Infernal Machines that are present in Descent into Avernus, so it's very similar styling. I had originally had climb rates and dive rates, but decided that micro-managing it too much may over-complicate things seriously. Still, it seems almost necessary for dog-fight style aerial combat. The idea of it being a glider means limited control, but I did work in a pilot maneuver for lining up shots. I'll keep working on it!
Though truly my mental picture wasn't any of the fighter jets, though I'd be lying if the B-25's package gun concept didn't sit in my mind (I wonder if I want to work on a bomber concept as well lol).
If you don't want to micro-manage position and altitude like that, there is another approach that occurred to me, but I didn't include it as it would require a lot more work up front - and it only really works effectively for two fighting aircraft. It would work, however, for theater of the mind style combat.
The exact position of the aircraft isn't important. What is important is the relative tactical position of the two aircraft. With the case of fighter aircraft, important tactical situations are: A is behind B; A & B are fighting for tactical position; A is breaking away; etc.
If you could figure out all these relative tactical arrangements, and figure out which ones can become which other ones ( A & B are fighting for tactical position can easily become A is behind A, or B is behind A ), then each pilot can choose which tactical position they want to work towards ( clearly A wants the first outcome, B wants the second ). Then it's down to a contested "piloting roll" ( however you want to judge that ), to see who gets the tactical position they wanted. I'd allow keep this relative position to be a choice as well.
If the gunner wants to snap off a shot, then I'd impose a modifier based on the relative tactical position of the two aircraft. E.g. A is behind B gives A advantage to the attack roll ( but B might get a +2 if the design of the glider has gun turret design! ).
It's an approach which is easier to mange in game - but it requires a lot more work from the GM up front, and it's really limited to 2 aircraft.
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Could use some feedback - any particular rulesets or encounter ideas you've tried with success?
Also working on a homebrew glider (can't do vehicles yet so I made it a construct), could use some thoughts on that as well (assuming the link works): https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/549642-clockwork-glider
Looking at your vehicle/monster, I see that it has multiple stations, so I'm guessing these are less like an F-16 Fighting Falcon, and more like an AC-130 Spectre?
While I've not used them myself, I note that there is an Unearthed Arcana dealing with Naval operations and ship-to-ship combat. This sounds like an excellent starting point for rules which you could modify. The UA even covers things like fogbanks ( clouds ), and attempting to be stealthy.
The rules seem to assume the use of a battlemap and counters. You could use a 2D battlemap, and place a spare d20 on top over each counter, indicating altitude ( where each number represents some multiple of feet: 50' ? ).
I'd add 5 stats to an airship/glider in this situation: Climb Rate, Dive Rate, Emergency Climb Rate, Emergency Dive Rate, and Emergency Maneuver Saving Throw Modifier. The first two are the maximum "safe" speeds for changing altitude, and I'd make the Dive Rate slightly higher than the Climb Rate ( easier to go down ). I'd also have the speed decrease/increase (climbing/diving) for one round after performing an altitude change ( possibly two, if it's an emergency version of the maneuver). And I'd have the crew make a saving throw for the aircraft, which is has to make after the Emergency versions of the maneuvers, or the aircraft takes hull damage.
This could lead to cool maneuvers like an aircraft diving for speed to catch up to an opposing aircraft, then pulling up hard behind an opponent, or at least close enough for the Wizard to get off a Lightning Bolt spell :D
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.
I wasn't aware of that UA, thanks for linking it! That'll come in very handy for something else I'm working on.
Otherwise I based the vehicle (with stations) off of the Infernal Machines that are present in Descent into Avernus, so it's very similar styling. I had originally had climb rates and dive rates, but decided that micro-managing it too much may over-complicate things seriously. Still, it seems almost necessary for dog-fight style aerial combat. The idea of it being a glider means limited control, but I did work in a pilot maneuver for lining up shots. I'll keep working on it!
Though truly my mental picture wasn't any of the fighter jets, though I'd be lying if the B-25's package gun concept didn't sit in my mind (I wonder if I want to work on a bomber concept as well lol).
If you don't want to micro-manage position and altitude like that, there is another approach that occurred to me, but I didn't include it as it would require a lot more work up front - and it only really works effectively for two fighting aircraft. It would work, however, for theater of the mind style combat.
The exact position of the aircraft isn't important. What is important is the relative tactical position of the two aircraft. With the case of fighter aircraft, important tactical situations are: A is behind B; A & B are fighting for tactical position; A is breaking away; etc.
If you could figure out all these relative tactical arrangements, and figure out which ones can become which other ones ( A & B are fighting for tactical position can easily become A is behind A, or B is behind A ), then each pilot can choose which tactical position they want to work towards ( clearly A wants the first outcome, B wants the second ). Then it's down to a contested "piloting roll" ( however you want to judge that ), to see who gets the tactical position they wanted. I'd allow keep this relative position to be a choice as well.
If the gunner wants to snap off a shot, then I'd impose a modifier based on the relative tactical position of the two aircraft. E.g. A is behind B gives A advantage to the attack roll ( but B might get a +2 if the design of the glider has gun turret design! ).
It's an approach which is easier to mange in game - but it requires a lot more work from the GM up front, and it's really limited to 2 aircraft.
My DM Philosophy, as summed up by other people: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rN5w4-azTq3Kbn0Yvk9nfqQhwQ1R5by1/view
Disclaimer: This signature is a badge of membership in the Forum Loudmouth Club. We are all friends. We are not attacking each other. We are engaging in spirited, friendly debate with one another. We may get snarky, but these are not attacks. Thank you for not reporting us.