I have created, tested, and used these rules in my own campaigns and the campaigns of DMs I mentor. I have seen great success in how these "Rules of Flight" play out, and have thus decided to bring my rules to your attention. For public feedback and discussion. Attached is a poll, if you vote 'No' or 'Yes, with changes' I would love to hear why. If anything is unclear I want to make it easier to understand.
---------------------------------------------
Rules of Flight FLYING Flying is such a demanding task you may not make any attacks or cast spells while flying, this restriction is removed at character level 10.
It cost an action to take flight, and a bonus action to land.
Gaining altitude (height) is considered rough terrain.
FALLING Falling speed is 200ft per round. You take damage for any fall above 10ft, 1d6 per 10ft. The fall damage cap at 20d6 is removed.
FEATS Acrobatic Flight: As a nimble and practiced flyer you may use either an action or bonus action to take flight. You may also either use a bonus action or reaction to land. Taking flight does not provoke opportunity attacks.
Home in the Sky: You spend most your time in the air, eventually growing comfortable enough to use actions and spells while flying. When this feat becomes redundant at level 10 you gain +2 AC while flying.
---------------------------------------------
I have created, tested, and used these rules in my own campaigns and the campaigns of DMs I mentor. I have seen great success in how these "Rules of Flight" play out, and have thus decided to bring my rules to your attention. For public feedback and discussion. Attached is a poll, if you vote 'No' or 'Yes, with changes' I would love to hear why. If anything is unclear I want to make it easier to understand.
I'm fine with the idea of limiting the advantages of flight (especially below level 5), but have to disagree with many of these rules. In particular, I don't like subtracting from the action economy in any way, and falling damage does not need to be uncapped.
Ascending as difficult terrain, I could get behind, especially for non-magical flight and at low level. And I somewhat like the idea of making airborne actions more difficult, but not disalowing them completely. Maybe require a concentration check for spells, and attacks are made with disadvantage.
I guess I'm not really seeing the point of these modifications?
It would be one thing if this were a set of rules to just generally add detail and complexity to flight... possibly to assist in five-on-five magical air battles.
But as it stands, the bulk of these rules just come across as needless crippling of a spell that is (IMHO) in no way overpowered. Personally, I'd see no reason to ever take Fly under these rules.
Could you explain WHY you came up with the rules? Have you had players find a way to abuse Fly, to the point that you've needed to reign it in? Does the spell just not seem "realistic" enough (given the context,) so the rules were to add more true-to-life limitations? Seeing the logic behind the rules would help show a purpose to adding all these extra restrictions on players.
I will add, a feat that adds to AC while flying sounds cool though.
I'd have to agree with the previous posters. I'm not sure I see either the reasoning or the need for these rules.
1) Flying is provided either by natural capability or magic.
In the case of creatures with wings, flying would be as normal and natural to them as walking. They do it from birth. Why would flying then be so demanding that they couldn't take any actions or cast a spell? I think this may come from your personal view of what flying would be like for you rather than for a creature who has flown since shortly after birth and has both the mental and physical elements required to fly.
In the case of a fly spell or winged boots, these items would be designed to make flying as easy as walking for the creature involved. The creator of the spell effect would not make an effect that was so debilitating that they could do nothing but fly when the spell or magic item was active. Consider the breadth and power of the other spells available in the game, I don't think it likely that flying would be so much more difficult than haste (do characters trip all the time because they are moving so fast?) and other similar items.
You are free to use these in your home game and have fun with them but if they are intended to remedy an issue with flight being overpowered in your campaigns at lower levels then there are many other solutions available than nerfing flight.
2) The cap on falling damage really doesn't need removing. 20d6 is usually more than sufficient to deter antics 200' up. From a physics point of view, the speed of a fall is capped in atmosphere due to friction. For typical conditions you reach terminal velocity after about 1500' or 12s though that depends on mass as well as the coefficient of drag which depends on your posture, clothing and other factors. However, the approach to this velocity is exponential so you will have reached a substantial fraction of the terminal velocity long before you finally hit it (several seconds). It may be the game limit is also based to some extent on this concept so there should be some sort of limit the only question is what is a reasonable height to impose a limit.
1. A PC that has flight from it's race and there's only one race that has a natural flight speed. PC's of that race were flying almost from the day they were born like we were walking. They should fly as easily as we can walk.
2. A PC with the Fly spell. That spell already requires Concentration and if you fail a Concentration check you fall and go splat unless you have Feather Fall ready to go. That spell can't be cast until you're 5th level and it already has a built in limitation.
Neither one of those scenarios justifies nerfing a PC flying, especially to the degree that you're proposing.
Not once in any game have I played or DMed has flight ever really posed a problem. It's useful, no doubt about that, but n a game full of ranged attacks, distant area of effect spells, indoor situations with low ceilings (it is DUNGEONS and Dragons after all - how many dungeons have really high ceilings?) and the availablity of anti-flight magic (both as standard rules and DM invention). I played a Winged Tiefling Sorcerer, level 1: never got any real advantage from flying, in another campaign we have an aarakocra and a character with winged boots: never really gained any advantage from flying.
Flying is often granted with limitations: Aarakocra have flying naturally, but not much else in racial traits compared to others while even Winged Tieflings lose their best racial trait (infernal legacy) as a trade-off. The Fly spell has limits too in casting, duration, concentration and vulnerablity to dispel magic, antimagic, etc. Protector Aasimar (what is with Aa races and flying?) can get flying for 1 minute per day, in lieu of the other features the other subraces get (one does a fright effect, the other a small area-damage effect) - and the flight is still magical so still vulnerable to Antimagic.
And all flying is vulnerable to Earthbind, a spell specifically designed to stop flying.
A DM can handle flying in various ways: give enemies ranged options, give them a way to shut down flying (cast Earthbind, for example), put the encounter undeground/indoor, give enemies ways to draw creatures in (e,g, Ropers). Perhaps the big bad has a Lair effect where violent winds thrash above: creatures that are flying are thrown about into walls and they take damage or maybe it's a gravity effect where standing creatures could be rendered prone while flying ones are slammed into the ground with flying speeds reduced to zero until the next lair effect kicks in?). Or perhaps allow flying in all of its glory, but make the encounter more diffcult in other ways to compensate so the enemies can absorb more damage from the range attacks without worry as they slam holy hell out of the melee party members? You could even have a creature immune to ranged attacks or at least be harder to hit with them. Or maybe... You get the idea. There's a lot of ways than your rules which are basically "oh you want to fly? BAM you're now weaker and more vulnerable and effectively close to useless just because!" Flying should be a "fun" thing not something you punish. A caster reaching 5th level taking Fly spell should be filled with the wonder and excitement of this and trying to use it in battle - not feel penalised for doing so.
Just my take on things from yearsof playing and having been a DM too (since you felt the need to declare this twice).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I appreciate all these responses and look forward to responding to them. I am unable to go into great detail until tomorrow, but some things of note:
1. I have created many additional races, quite a few flying ones, eventually requiring clear ground work on how they work. (will provide details on this later) 2. The added feats mitigate most your concerns at a cost, a feat (lvl 4). Most low level characters would not be proficient in flying upon gaining it from whatever the source they gain flying from is. At least not in combat. 3. The majority of the time flying is a major benefit outside of combat. I have not impeded that at all. 4. Flying in combat offers clear advantages. As I'm not a DM to arbitrarily set up encounters knowing I have a flyer, I developed this system. Ei: Just because there is a flyer in the party does not mean an encounter will have ranged/magic opponents.
1. I have created many additional races, quite a few flying ones, eventually requiring clear ground work on how they work. (will provide details on this later)
We are commenting on the rules you have presented here, which are presented in the form of being applicable to multiple campaigns and therefore your additional races are completely and utterely irrelevant to the topic so presented. If you wanted feedback on combat flying in your specific campaign for your specific homebrew races then these details should have been provided and different wording used in the original post and should not be coming up later in some proposed future "defense post".
2. The added feats mitigate most your concerns at a cost, a feat (lvl 4). Most low level characters would not be proficient in flying upon gaining it from whatever the source they gain flying from is. At least not in combat.
And we're saying the benefits of flight is not enough to warrant the nerfs in the first place so, no need of nerfing means no nerfs and no feats to mitigate the nerfs. This is especially the case with casters who only have a limited amount of spells like Sorcerer: oh, I've taken Fly as one of the only 15 spells I will ever get, but have to ALSO take a feat to actually use it without sucking? Nah, **** flying **disappointment ensues**. A band aid to a wound that should not have been, doesn't mitigate that the wound should not have been.
3. The majority of the time flying is a major benefit outside of combat. I have not impeded that at all.
Which is of no relevance to this discussion. You presented homebrew rules about flying in combat and we have provided our opinions based on those rules of flying in combat. We have not discussed flying out of combat or how your rules would affect them outside of combat.
4. Flying in combat offers clear advantages. As I'm not a DM to arbitrarily set up encounters knowing I have a flyer I developed this system. Ei: Just because a flyer in the party does not mean an encounter will have ranged/magic opponents.
It offers a modicum of advantage, certainly, but it is the role of the DM to understand what the player characters can do and create encounters that offer appropriate challenge. If you want to be lazy and just ignore that and nerf the players instead, that is your choice but few DMs will make that choice (or at least none of the ones I have played with, talked to directly, or watched on streamed shows). The don't bother nerfing the players when trying to use a fun aspect (even if they take your feat they are still nerfed by having to waste a feat to use a simple fun thing D&D offers) because building the encounters with an understanding of the player characters gives the DM the control to ensure a fun encounter with the right amount of challenge and without reducing the fun experience of the players. You don't need all enemies to be ranged, there are many options at your disposal: including choosing low-ceilings, flying enemies, effects to draw in, effects that restrain or paralyze, anti-flight magic, lair effects, weather effects that make flying difficult: the air is difficult terrain!, and the list goes on.
If you lack the ability to factor flying in your encounters, then sure use the rules. But you wanted our opinion and we don't have this drawback, so we don't need your rules or see any point in them - we just use the vast options available to handle it (or even encourage it: aerial battles in the plane of air!!). We don't see the need to nerf an already limited option and therefore penalise a fun aspect of the game due to lacking the imagination to handle it. However, even if you lack the imagination for it, I still recommend trying anyway: you'll learn and develop more as a DM that way than by putting nerfs in place. Afterall, as it states in the Dungeon Master's Guide: your job is to build the world around the players' characters and make it fun for them.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I personally find these rules needlessly punishing of low-level characters capable of flying.
Flight is an advantage in combat in a classical fantasy setting, and for good reasons, but not so much as to there be need to make it more of an hindrance than a nice addition to have (and a desirable feature).
I can see a case being made for the altitude increase houserule, but other than that the rest seems to take away fun more than anything, to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
I personally disagree because I love to be Aarockrackra (I always spell that wrong). I want to snipe the kobolds picking off my party with my longbow and Extra attack while they only have melee weapons. While flying, why can’t I cast Fireball to blow up the bar filled with orcs? I was born with it, so why not? Because it is hard to do something you’re born with, apparently. How hard is it to walk? Answer that, and let the reality sink in.
1. I have created many additional races, quite a few flying ones, eventually requiring clear ground work on how they work. (will provide details on this later)
You do come across as a bit aggressive in comment 9, Cyb3rM1nd.
Not that your points weren't valid. I think everyone agrees that these rule go past nerfing to out right crippling flying.
His point were valid and I appreciate them. Thank you for the support DxJxC.
The conversation definitely points to that effect. My intent is not to cripple flying, but if anything make it a more fluidly increased advantage from lvl 1 to 20. The feats give disengage to the flight action, and +2 AC while flying which are intended buffs that would carry well into end content.
Most of the focus tends to be towards needlessly nerfing low level characters. Main featured race being aarakocra. What sort of modification to the system I currently use do you think would be an acceptable beginning state for flying until characters become more advanced in it?
We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't sugar-coat my words, sure, but I see no reason to - I don't do it offline and I'm considered to be very polite. Maybe it's a culture thing? In any case a lack of sugary toppings to words is not the same as being impolite and certainly not the same as making an insult or being sly (i.e. "deceitful") like Vys asserts. We can discuss this further in PM if you want as this isn't really on-topic.
Your words and points were straight and to the point, which I greatly appreciate. Personal attacks are the only problem that could be found in your post, if we can avoid those we will continue to have great conversation. I am also very strongly opinionated and say it as it is, but I will not attack your personal character.
I personally disagree because I love to be Aarockrackra (I always spell that wrong). I want to snipe the kobolds picking off my party with my longbow and Extra attack while they only have melee weapons. While flying, why can’t I cast Fireball to blow up the bar filled with orcs? I was born with it, so why not? Because it is hard to do something you’re born with, apparently. How hard is it to walk? Answer that, and let the reality sink in.
I also love playing flying PCs and aarakocra! And as a DM I would totally allow you to do that against the Kobolds, assuming you had taken the feat Home in the Sky at level 4.
While I understand your analogy about walking, I also would like to expound onto that frame of thought. As with any athlete or trained soldier they are able to walk and run just fine. But when it comes to dribbling a soccer ball, scoring a goal, aiming while under war trauma, etc. these are all skills built on top of the basic ability to walk. Most everyone finds it easy to Yo-yo while standing still, but only those who have practiced are able to do tricks while moving, etc.
That's the concept I am trying to carry through with these rules, that flying while in combat is a skill set to be learned upon and grown in. Maybe the level of 10 is too high and should be moved down to 8 (when druids can fly) or something else can be altered to make it feel like a move natural progression. Do you have any ideas that would potentially help you be open to the concept of advanced flying being something to be obtained?
------------------------------------------------ Thank you all for feedback! Looking forward to my system potentially evolving so that it becomes appealing to a wider population. My intent is not to nerf flying but to rather make it a more thematic progression.
While I see the intent, let me ask a question: why would any walking or swimming race not need the same level of progression?
By your logic, Disengage is something that one would need to learn to do properly, as would, for example, Dash. And what about Dodge?
What I am trying to convey is that you are treating a form of movement in a completely different way than any other, singling it out and complicating it while leaving other methods untouched.
You are also seeing flying from a human point of view, which is not a good term of comparison.
A bird learns to fly in the first few weeks from birth, a human learns to walk after months upon months of being a sluggish, drooling mass of flesh. A cat can run, jump and mess your face up a few weeks after birth, a human [see above].
The fact that there are indeed skills that would need to be learned is already covered by the leveling system, that makes the character better at what they are "training" to do, and Feats should be a mean to make a character exceptionally good at something or giving them completely new abilities they would otherwise not get any other way, not scraping off disadvantages arbitrarily put on a basic function of their physiology.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
Now, does anyone have anything constructive to add about flight rules?
Not much beyond what I have already said that has largely gone without any response to the points I raised.
As for your recent post on it: your house rules are more agreeable for natural flight but feel off for magic-based flight because by nature of the magic it doesn't work to the physics of it with altitude etc. Yet not applying to all flying specifically nerfs Aarakocra and other flying things that use only natural wings. I understand wantng to try a more realistic approach, but if we went realtistic: very few creatures in the monster manual or playable races would be capable of flight. Physically speaking, the form and size of most of things would make flight impossible. There's a reason why birds and bats and all flying creatures in the real world are comparatively small. So, going with realism means: aarakocra, winged tieflings, dragons, etc would be incapable of flight. In D&D such feats are part of the "natural" magic: the magic of the world that isn't weaved like spells,. Flight is therefore in the same vein as dragon's breath attack, or earth elementals moving through earth like it was air, and so on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I think I've come up with a fair nerf to flying for grittier hose rules:
To take off from the ground takes 5 feet of flying speed.
To perform an action while flying takes 5 feet of flying speed.
To gain altitude takes 2 feet of flying speed for each 1 foot of altitude gained.
That's it. These rules reflect the few brief instances where flying takes more effort than walking. You can also use:
Reducing altitude takes 1 foot of flying speed for every 2 feet of altitude reduced.
You can reduce your altitude by 1 foot for every foot of flying speed used to move horizontally without using additional movement.
You might also add a bit about having disadvantage with or being unable to use heavy weapons, as that might unbalance the flier.
Thank you for this feedback, these change do impose much less of a nerf to the action economy; as one of the original responders mentioned my system did too much of. Applying these changes to my system seems very reasonable, would you think the added feats would be of value with this new mixed system between mine and yours?
Also I’d probably take away all those movement costs except altitude being rough terrain at level 10.
A feat that gives an AC bonus and/or advantage on DEX saves while flying will always be cool. I don't think 'acrobatic flight' does anything with non-action based flight.
As for your recent post on it: your house rules are more agreeable for natural flight but feel off for magic-based flight because by nature of the magic it doesn't work to the physics of it with altitude etc. Yet not applying to all flying specifically nerfs Aarakocra and other flying things that use only natural wings. I understand wantng to try a more realistic approach, but if we went realtistic: very few creatures in the monster manual or playable races would be capable of flight. Physically speaking, the form and size of most of things would make flight impossible. There's a reason why birds and bats and all flying creatures in the real world are comparatively small. So, going with realism means: aarakocra, winged tieflings, dragons, etc would be incapable of flight. In D&D such feats are part of the "natural" magic: the magic of the world that isn't weaved like spells,.
I think these rules can be applied to magic based or magic enhanced flight just as well. Even if the lift is provided by magic, that lift has to be increased in order to move upward. And any increase in lift, magic or otherwise, could have been used as horizontal thrust instead, which has fewer opposing forces, so horizontal flight speed should always be greater than upward flight speed.
While I see the intent, let me ask a question: why would any walking or swimming race not need the same level of progression?
By your logic, Disengage is something that one would need to learn to do properly, as would, for example, Dash. And what about Dodge?
What I am trying to convey is that you are treating a form of movement in a completely different way than any other, singling it out and complicating it while leaving other methods untouched.
You are also seeing flying from a human point of view, which is not a good term of comparison.
A bird learns to fly in the first few weeks from birth, a human learns to walk after months upon months of being a sluggish, drooling mass of flesh. A cat can run, jump and mess your face up a few weeks after birth, a human [see above].
The fact that there are indeed skills that would need to be learned is already covered by the leveling system, that makes the character better at what they are "training" to do, and Feats should be a mean to make a character exceptionally good at something or giving them completely new abilities they would otherwise not get any other way, not scraping off disadvantages arbitrarily put on a basic function of their physiology.
Okay, I see and understand this point fully. There are honestly very few natural flier PCs.
It could be argued to me since this is obviously homebrew that Aarcockra would be unaffected by most these effects. Or received the counteracting feats for free.
—————
Swimming as another form of movement also has sever limitations to it, especially from a human POV. Though these limitations are much different than my proposed flight ones... at least they are outline in published works by WotC. Something that I feel is lacking for flight and wished to address.
After observing the conversation in this thread I will most certainly be making adjustments to my originally practiced system. Later today, when I get home from work, I will post the edited version.
—————
Once again, thank you to everyone who is submitting constructive criticism and feedback,
My intent is not to cripple flying, but if anything make it a more fluidly increased advantage from lvl 1 to 20.
But the way you chose to do this was by piling restrictions onto the lower end, rather than adding benefits to the higher end. And the feats you added, while nifty, in no way compensate for the brutal nerfing these rules impose (not to mention, they require one to actually spend an Ability Score Improvement in the first place!)
Basically, these rules say: "Okay, I've made flying into a far weaker mechanic up to character level 10, after which it's just slightly nerfed... provided you choose a feat that keeps it from being worse."
I just don't see how such an arrangement could be beneficial, and you've really not pointed to any issues with the flight mechanic as-is for justification for the changes.
If you think the flight mechanic is overpowered, DxJxC's suggestions that only add movement costs seem quite reasonable.
If you don't think the mechanic is overpowered, then I'd personally recommend leaving the core mechanic alone and just creating one or two feats--completely optional--that would grant greater benefit to fliers, possibly even benefits that scale with character level.
Please refrain from insults, finger pointing, and/or the general off-topic conversation taking place here. Any further reports from this thread will likely result in warnings.
I have created, tested, and used these rules in my own campaigns and the campaigns of DMs I mentor. I have seen great success in how these "Rules of Flight" play out, and have thus decided to bring my rules to your attention. For public feedback and discussion. Attached is a poll, if you vote 'No' or 'Yes, with changes' I would love to hear why. If anything is unclear I want to make it easier to understand.
---------------------------------------------
Rules of Flight
FLYING
Flying is such a demanding task you may not make any attacks or cast spells while flying, this restriction is removed at character level 10.
It cost an action to take flight, and a bonus action to land.
Gaining altitude (height) is considered rough terrain.
FALLING
Falling speed is 200ft per round. You take damage for any fall above 10ft, 1d6 per 10ft. The fall damage cap at 20d6 is removed.
FEATS
Acrobatic Flight: As a nimble and practiced flyer you may use either an action or bonus action to take flight. You may also either use a bonus action or reaction to land. Taking flight does not provoke opportunity attacks.
Home in the Sky: You spend most your time in the air, eventually growing comfortable enough to use actions and spells while flying. When this feat becomes redundant at level 10 you gain +2 AC while flying.
---------------------------------------------
I have created, tested, and used these rules in my own campaigns and the campaigns of DMs I mentor. I have seen great success in how these "Rules of Flight" play out, and have thus decided to bring my rules to your attention. For public feedback and discussion. Attached is a poll, if you vote 'No' or 'Yes, with changes' I would love to hear why. If anything is unclear I want to make it easier to understand.
Thank you darlings,
Vys
Just realized I should have put this under homebrew... Hopefully a mod will move it for me.
Or maybe this is the right place? idk...
- Vys
I'm fine with the idea of limiting the advantages of flight (especially below level 5), but have to disagree with many of these rules. In particular, I don't like subtracting from the action economy in any way, and falling damage does not need to be uncapped.
Ascending as difficult terrain, I could get behind, especially for non-magical flight and at low level. And I somewhat like the idea of making airborne actions more difficult, but not disalowing them completely. Maybe require a concentration check for spells, and attacks are made with disadvantage.
I guess I'm not really seeing the point of these modifications?
It would be one thing if this were a set of rules to just generally add detail and complexity to flight... possibly to assist in five-on-five magical air battles.
But as it stands, the bulk of these rules just come across as needless crippling of a spell that is (IMHO) in no way overpowered. Personally, I'd see no reason to ever take Fly under these rules.
Could you explain WHY you came up with the rules? Have you had players find a way to abuse Fly, to the point that you've needed to reign it in? Does the spell just not seem "realistic" enough (given the context,) so the rules were to add more true-to-life limitations? Seeing the logic behind the rules would help show a purpose to adding all these extra restrictions on players.
I will add, a feat that adds to AC while flying sounds cool though.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
I'd have to agree with the previous posters. I'm not sure I see either the reasoning or the need for these rules.
1) Flying is provided either by natural capability or magic.
In the case of creatures with wings, flying would be as normal and natural to them as walking. They do it from birth. Why would flying then be so demanding that they couldn't take any actions or cast a spell? I think this may come from your personal view of what flying would be like for you rather than for a creature who has flown since shortly after birth and has both the mental and physical elements required to fly.
In the case of a fly spell or winged boots, these items would be designed to make flying as easy as walking for the creature involved. The creator of the spell effect would not make an effect that was so debilitating that they could do nothing but fly when the spell or magic item was active. Consider the breadth and power of the other spells available in the game, I don't think it likely that flying would be so much more difficult than haste (do characters trip all the time because they are moving so fast?) and other similar items.
You are free to use these in your home game and have fun with them but if they are intended to remedy an issue with flight being overpowered in your campaigns at lower levels then there are many other solutions available than nerfing flight.
2) The cap on falling damage really doesn't need removing. 20d6 is usually more than sufficient to deter antics 200' up. From a physics point of view, the speed of a fall is capped in atmosphere due to friction. For typical conditions you reach terminal velocity after about 1500' or 12s though that depends on mass as well as the coefficient of drag which depends on your posture, clothing and other factors. However, the approach to this velocity is exponential so you will have reached a substantial fraction of the terminal velocity long before you finally hit it (several seconds). It may be the game limit is also based to some extent on this concept so there should be some sort of limit the only question is what is a reasonable height to impose a limit.
I agree RodTheBard. I see two scenarios:
1. A PC that has flight from it's race and there's only one race that has a natural flight speed. PC's of that race were flying almost from the day they were born like we were walking. They should fly as easily as we can walk.
2. A PC with the Fly spell. That spell already requires Concentration and if you fail a Concentration check you fall and go splat unless you have Feather Fall ready to go. That spell can't be cast until you're 5th level and it already has a built in limitation.
Neither one of those scenarios justifies nerfing a PC flying, especially to the degree that you're proposing.
Professional computer geek
Why I voted No:
Not once in any game have I played or DMed has flight ever really posed a problem. It's useful, no doubt about that, but n a game full of ranged attacks, distant area of effect spells, indoor situations with low ceilings (it is DUNGEONS and Dragons after all - how many dungeons have really high ceilings?) and the availablity of anti-flight magic (both as standard rules and DM invention). I played a Winged Tiefling Sorcerer, level 1: never got any real advantage from flying, in another campaign we have an aarakocra and a character with winged boots: never really gained any advantage from flying.
Flying is often granted with limitations: Aarakocra have flying naturally, but not much else in racial traits compared to others while even Winged Tieflings lose their best racial trait (infernal legacy) as a trade-off. The Fly spell has limits too in casting, duration, concentration and vulnerablity to dispel magic, antimagic, etc. Protector Aasimar (what is with Aa races and flying?) can get flying for 1 minute per day, in lieu of the other features the other subraces get (one does a fright effect, the other a small area-damage effect) - and the flight is still magical so still vulnerable to Antimagic.
And all flying is vulnerable to Earthbind, a spell specifically designed to stop flying.
A DM can handle flying in various ways: give enemies ranged options, give them a way to shut down flying (cast Earthbind, for example), put the encounter undeground/indoor, give enemies ways to draw creatures in (e,g, Ropers). Perhaps the big bad has a Lair effect where violent winds thrash above: creatures that are flying are thrown about into walls and they take damage or maybe it's a gravity effect where standing creatures could be rendered prone while flying ones are slammed into the ground with flying speeds reduced to zero until the next lair effect kicks in?). Or perhaps allow flying in all of its glory, but make the encounter more diffcult in other ways to compensate so the enemies can absorb more damage from the range attacks without worry as they slam holy hell out of the melee party members? You could even have a creature immune to ranged attacks or at least be harder to hit with them. Or maybe... You get the idea. There's a lot of ways than your rules which are basically "oh you want to fly? BAM you're now weaker and more vulnerable and effectively close to useless just because!" Flying should be a "fun" thing not something you punish. A caster reaching 5th level taking Fly spell should be filled with the wonder and excitement of this and trying to use it in battle - not feel penalised for doing so.
Just my take on things from years of playing and having been a DM too (since you felt the need to declare this twice).
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I appreciate all these responses and look forward to responding to them. I am unable to go into great detail until tomorrow, but some things of note:
1. I have created many additional races, quite a few flying ones, eventually requiring clear ground work on how they work. (will provide details on this later)
2. The added feats mitigate most your concerns at a cost, a feat (lvl 4). Most low level characters would not be proficient in flying upon gaining it from whatever the source they gain flying from is. At least not in combat.
3. The majority of the time flying is a major benefit outside of combat. I have not impeded that at all.
4. Flying in combat offers clear advantages. As I'm not a DM to arbitrarily set up encounters knowing I have a flyer, I developed this system. Ei: Just because there is a flyer in the party does not mean an encounter will have ranged/magic opponents.
With love,
-Vys
We are commenting on the rules you have presented here, which are presented in the form of being applicable to multiple campaigns and therefore your additional races are completely and utterely irrelevant to the topic so presented. If you wanted feedback on combat flying in your specific campaign for your specific homebrew races then these details should have been provided and different wording used in the original post and should not be coming up later in some proposed future "defense post".
And we're saying the benefits of flight is not enough to warrant the nerfs in the first place so, no need of nerfing means no nerfs and no feats to mitigate the nerfs. This is especially the case with casters who only have a limited amount of spells like Sorcerer: oh, I've taken Fly as one of the only 15 spells I will ever get, but have to ALSO take a feat to actually use it without sucking? Nah, **** flying **disappointment ensues**. A band aid to a wound that should not have been, doesn't mitigate that the wound should not have been.
Which is of no relevance to this discussion. You presented homebrew rules about flying in combat and we have provided our opinions based on those rules of flying in combat. We have not discussed flying out of combat or how your rules would affect them outside of combat.
It offers a modicum of advantage, certainly, but it is the role of the DM to understand what the player characters can do and create encounters that offer appropriate challenge. If you want to be lazy and just ignore that and nerf the players instead, that is your choice but few DMs will make that choice (or at least none of the ones I have played with, talked to directly, or watched on streamed shows). The don't bother nerfing the players when trying to use a fun aspect (even if they take your feat they are still nerfed by having to waste a feat to use a simple fun thing D&D offers) because building the encounters with an understanding of the player characters gives the DM the control to ensure a fun encounter with the right amount of challenge and without reducing the fun experience of the players. You don't need all enemies to be ranged, there are many options at your disposal: including choosing low-ceilings, flying enemies, effects to draw in, effects that restrain or paralyze, anti-flight magic, lair effects, weather effects that make flying difficult: the air is difficult terrain!, and the list goes on.
If you lack the ability to factor flying in your encounters, then sure use the rules. But you wanted our opinion and we don't have this drawback, so we don't need your rules or see any point in them - we just use the vast options available to handle it (or even encourage it: aerial battles in the plane of air!!). We don't see the need to nerf an already limited option and therefore penalise a fun aspect of the game due to lacking the imagination to handle it. However, even if you lack the imagination for it, I still recommend trying anyway: you'll learn and develop more as a DM that way than by putting nerfs in place. Afterall, as it states in the Dungeon Master's Guide: your job is to build the world around the players' characters and make it fun for them.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
I personally find these rules needlessly punishing of low-level characters capable of flying.
Flight is an advantage in combat in a classical fantasy setting, and for good reasons, but not so much as to there be need to make it more of an hindrance than a nice addition to have (and a desirable feature).
I can see a case being made for the altitude increase houserule, but other than that the rest seems to take away fun more than anything, to me.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
I personally disagree because I love to be Aarockrackra (I always spell that wrong). I want to snipe the kobolds picking off my party with my longbow and Extra attack while they only have melee weapons. While flying, why can’t I cast Fireball to blow up the bar filled with orcs? I was born with it, so why not? Because it is hard to do something you’re born with, apparently. How hard is it to walk? Answer that, and let the reality sink in.
Extended Signature! Yay! https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/off-topic/adohands-kitchen/3153-extended-signature-thread?page=2#c21
Haven’t used this account in forever. Still a big fan of crawling claws.
Since I promised this I'm going to post an example of a large racial system I've made that has many types of flyers:
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=4F6AEF65C4F2558A!144&cid=-7070576280726453603&app=Word
His point were valid and I appreciate them. Thank you for the support DxJxC.
The conversation definitely points to that effect. My intent is not to cripple flying, but if anything make it a more fluidly increased advantage from lvl 1 to 20. The feats give disengage to the flight action, and +2 AC while flying which are intended buffs that would carry well into end content.
Most of the focus tends to be towards needlessly nerfing low level characters. Main featured race being aarakocra. What sort of modification to the system I currently use do you think would be an acceptable beginning state for flying until characters become more advanced in it?
Your words and points were straight and to the point, which I greatly appreciate. Personal attacks are the only problem that could be found in your post, if we can avoid those we will continue to have great conversation. I am also very strongly opinionated and say it as it is, but I will not attack your personal character.
<3
I also love playing flying PCs and aarakocra!
And as a DM I would totally allow you to do that against the Kobolds, assuming you had taken the feat Home in the Sky at level 4.
While I understand your analogy about walking, I also would like to expound onto that frame of thought. As with any athlete or trained soldier they are able to walk and run just fine. But when it comes to dribbling a soccer ball, scoring a goal, aiming while under war trauma, etc. these are all skills built on top of the basic ability to walk. Most everyone finds it easy to Yo-yo while standing still, but only those who have practiced are able to do tricks while moving, etc.
That's the concept I am trying to carry through with these rules, that flying while in combat is a skill set to be learned upon and grown in. Maybe the level of 10 is too high and should be moved down to 8 (when druids can fly) or something else can be altered to make it feel like a move natural progression. Do you have any ideas that would potentially help you be open to the concept of advanced flying being something to be obtained?
------------------------------------------------
Thank you all for feedback! Looking forward to my system potentially evolving so that it becomes appealing to a wider population. My intent is not to nerf flying but to rather make it a more thematic progression.
Love,
- Vys
While I see the intent, let me ask a question: why would any walking or swimming race not need the same level of progression?
By your logic, Disengage is something that one would need to learn to do properly, as would, for example, Dash. And what about Dodge?
What I am trying to convey is that you are treating a form of movement in a completely different way than any other, singling it out and complicating it while leaving other methods untouched.
You are also seeing flying from a human point of view, which is not a good term of comparison.
A bird learns to fly in the first few weeks from birth, a human learns to walk after months upon months of being a sluggish, drooling mass of flesh. A cat can run, jump and mess your face up a few weeks after birth, a human [see above].
The fact that there are indeed skills that would need to be learned is already covered by the leveling system, that makes the character better at what they are "training" to do, and Feats should be a mean to make a character exceptionally good at something or giving them completely new abilities they would otherwise not get any other way, not scraping off disadvantages arbitrarily put on a basic function of their physiology.
Born in Italy, moved a bunch, living in Spain, my heart always belonged to Roleplaying Games
I think I've come up with a fair nerf to flying for grittier hose rules:
That's it. These rules reflect the few brief instances where flying takes more effort than walking. You can also use:
You might also add a bit about having disadvantage with or being unable to use heavy weapons, as that might unbalance the flier.
Not much beyond what I have already said that has largely gone without any response to the points I raised.
As for your recent post on it: your house rules are more agreeable for natural flight but feel off for magic-based flight because by nature of the magic it doesn't work to the physics of it with altitude etc. Yet not applying to all flying specifically nerfs Aarakocra and other flying things that use only natural wings. I understand wantng to try a more realistic approach, but if we went realtistic: very few creatures in the monster manual or playable races would be capable of flight. Physically speaking, the form and size of most of things would make flight impossible. There's a reason why birds and bats and all flying creatures in the real world are comparatively small. So, going with realism means: aarakocra, winged tieflings, dragons, etc would be incapable of flight. In D&D such feats are part of the "natural" magic: the magic of the world that isn't weaved like spells,. Flight is therefore in the same vein as dragon's breath attack, or earth elementals moving through earth like it was air, and so on.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
Thank you for this feedback, these change do impose much less of a nerf to the action economy; as one of the original responders mentioned my system did too much of. Applying these changes to my system seems very reasonable, would you think the added feats would be of value with this new mixed system between mine and yours?
Also I’d probably take away all those movement costs except altitude being rough terrain at level 10.
Apreciate you for multiple reasons DxJxC,
<3 Vys
A feat that gives an AC bonus and/or advantage on DEX saves while flying will always be cool. I don't think 'acrobatic flight' does anything with non-action based flight.
I think these rules can be applied to magic based or magic enhanced flight just as well. Even if the lift is provided by magic, that lift has to be increased in order to move upward. And any increase in lift, magic or otherwise, could have been used as horizontal thrust instead, which has fewer opposing forces, so horizontal flight speed should always be greater than upward flight speed.
Okay, I see and understand this point fully. There are honestly very few natural flier PCs.
It could be argued to me since this is obviously homebrew that Aarcockra would be unaffected by most these effects. Or received the counteracting feats for free.
—————
Swimming as another form of movement also has sever limitations to it, especially from a human POV. Though these limitations are much different than my proposed flight ones... at least they are outline in published works by WotC. Something that I feel is lacking for flight and wished to address.
After observing the conversation in this thread I will most certainly be making adjustments to my originally practiced system. Later today, when I get home from work, I will post the edited version.
—————
Once again, thank you to everyone who is submitting constructive criticism and feedback,
- Vys
But the way you chose to do this was by piling restrictions onto the lower end, rather than adding benefits to the higher end. And the feats you added, while nifty, in no way compensate for the brutal nerfing these rules impose (not to mention, they require one to actually spend an Ability Score Improvement in the first place!)
Basically, these rules say: "Okay, I've made flying into a far weaker mechanic up to character level 10, after which it's just slightly nerfed... provided you choose a feat that keeps it from being worse."
I just don't see how such an arrangement could be beneficial, and you've really not pointed to any issues with the flight mechanic as-is for justification for the changes.
If you think the flight mechanic is overpowered, DxJxC's suggestions that only add movement costs seem quite reasonable.
If you don't think the mechanic is overpowered, then I'd personally recommend leaving the core mechanic alone and just creating one or two feats--completely optional--that would grant greater benefit to fliers, possibly even benefits that scale with character level.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
Please refrain from insults, finger pointing, and/or the general off-topic conversation taking place here. Any further reports from this thread will likely result in warnings.
Thanks!
Site Rules & Guidelines --- Focused Feedback Mega Threads --- Staff Quotes --- Homebrew Tutorial --- Pricing FAQ
Please feel free to message either Sorce or another moderator if you have any concerns.