3.xth Edition: Flight

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:11 pm

Flight options are all well and good but I'm more looking for flight mechanics to work with. I'm going the skill route for giving non casting characters pseudo flight abilities (and am batting around a few feats to do the same) but what I originally had in mind for this thread was a flight skill that would cover flight mechanics. barring a flight skill I'd like better mechanics to use for flight based encounters.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:51 pm

MGuy wrote:Flight options are all well and good but I'm more looking for flight mechanics to work with. I'm going the skill route for giving non casting characters pseudo flight abilities (and am batting around a few feats to do the same) but what I originally had in mind for this thread was a flight skill that would cover flight mechanics. barring a flight skill I'd like better mechanics to use for flight based encounters.

Fly Skill(none)
There is no check for the fly skill. You just gain a fly speed equal to 10' per rank in the skill. Maneuverability is based on character level:
1-4: Worse than clumsy. You can fly, but cannot take standard actions in flight. This is basically just a really sweet jump.
5-6: Clumsy.
7-10: Average
11-15: Good
16+: Perfect

Special: Because we're not retarded, only classed creatures can put ranks into this skill. No, that doesn't mean that a great wyrm sorcerer 1 can put ranks in fly. Don't be retarded.

CatharzGodfoot · Post by **CatharzGodfoot** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:40 pm

ubernoob wrote:
MGuy wrote:Flight options are all well and good but I'm more looking for flight mechanics to work with. I'm going the skill route for giving non casting characters pseudo flight abilities (and am batting around a few feats to do the same) but what I originally had in mind for this thread was a flight skill that would cover flight mechanics. barring a flight skill I'd like better mechanics to use for flight based encounters.
Fly Skill(none)
There is no check for the fly skill. You just gain a fly speed equal to 10' per rank in the skill. Maneuverability is based on character level:
1-4: Worse than clumsy. You can fly, but cannot take standard actions in flight. This is basically just a really sweet jump.
5-6: Clumsy.
7-10: Average
11-15: Good
16+: Perfect

Right, so big things (which tend to have more HD) are more maneuverable than little things (which tend to have fewer HD).

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:46 pm

CatharzGodfoot wrote:
ubernoob wrote:
MGuy wrote:Flight options are all well and good but I'm more looking for flight mechanics to work with. I'm going the skill route for giving non casting characters pseudo flight abilities (and am batting around a few feats to do the same) but what I originally had in mind for this thread was a flight skill that would cover flight mechanics. barring a flight skill I'd like better mechanics to use for flight based encounters.
Fly Skill(none)
There is no check for the fly skill. You just gain a fly speed equal to 10' per rank in the skill. Maneuverability is based on character level:
1-4: Worse than clumsy. You can fly, but cannot take standard actions in flight. This is basically just a really sweet jump.
5-6: Clumsy.
7-10: Average
11-15: Good
16+: Perfect
Right, so big things (which tend to have more HD) are more maneuverable than little things (which tend to have fewer HD).

Most monsters are flat out given a fly speed and maneuverability. This was pretty much for "martial" humanoids. Sort of like JE's idea of giving 1/encounter of flight, but more wuxia.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:10 pm

ubernoob wrote:Most monsters are flat out given a fly speed and maneuverability. This was pretty much for "martial" humanoids. Sort of like JE's idea of giving 1/encounter of flight, but more wuxia.

Might want to make that explicit.

Since somewhere people are always going to have to deal with DMs who think that a CR 20 easy fight for a level 20 party is a CR 20 dragon with feats subbed out for Darkstalker, horde treasure spent on a +30 competence item, Change Shaping into a Small size creature, and rolling Hide checks of +200.

I fucking hate DMs who think that their job is to abuse the CR system just to claim to prove that no character is overpowered because CR can always make something stupidly more Broken.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:14 pm

Kaelik wrote:
ubernoob wrote:Most monsters are flat out given a fly speed and maneuverability. This was pretty much for "martial" humanoids. Sort of like JE's idea of giving 1/encounter of flight, but more wuxia.
Might want to make that explicit.

Since somewhere people are always going to have to deal with DMs who think that a CR 20 easy fight for a level 20 party is a CR 20 dragon with feats subbed out for Darkstalker, horde treasure spent on a +30 competence item, Change Shaping into a Small size creature, and rolling Hide checks of +200.

I fucking hate DMs who think that their job is to abuse the CR system just to claim to prove that no character is overpowered because CR can always make something stupidly more Broken.

That's a good point. Time to edit the post.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:18 pm

Ok let me ask like this:
How are things like flight maneuvers covered?

What should be the DC for a barrel roll?

What should be the damage threshold per hit before you start falling/plummeting?

How does it scale for smaller/bigger creatures/objects?

What kind of bonuses/penalties do you get based on size?

Should fighting at different altitudes produce differing effects?

What about dogfights? Do windy conditions fuck up your flying checks?

What kind of advantages (bonuses/penalties) do you get for different flight maneuvers/abilities/skill checks?

Should maneuverability be tied to bonuses?

Should it be relegated by size/propulsion (whatever is keeping you airborne)?

I'm not worried (at this time) about how to make everyone fly but more how should flying work?

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 pm

MGuy wrote:I'm not worried (at this time) about how to make everyone fly but more how should flying work?

Flying is just an "are you this tall to participate in combat?" ability. It doesn't do anything complicated except let you ignore people or not get ignored. Since D&D is a round based game, dynamic flight (dogfights as you'd call them) is REALLY hard to model. Before you start modeling dogfights, try and make the 3.X ground movement work like real time combat. Then move from there.

Seriously, until you make ground based combat have stuff like counter charges (and not this readied action crap) and covering fire from behind a phalynx modeled effectively (just to give two easy examples that 3.X does NOT model easily), don't even try to make flight dynamic because you have the ground problems+more.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:35 pm

Setting a weapon to counter a charge or simply making charges provoke would give you a counter charge.

Cover fire with anything less than a group of ranged attackers or access to repeating weapons shouldn't need to even be looked at and could be covered with something simple like a designated area is now rough terrain and any attempt to move through it deals xdy damage Ref halves.

That aside Dog Fights can be turn based/not exist, it doesn't really matter to me it was just a question to steer people away from the "how can we make flight available to everyone?" idea box and onto the "How should flight be handled?" arena.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:38 pm

MGuy wrote:Setting a weapon to counter a charge or simply making charges provoke would give you a counter charge.

Yeah, those rules suck ass. Rewrite them so they don't and get back to me.

Cover fire with anything less than a group of ranged attackers or access to repeating weapons shouldn't need to even be looked at and could be covered with something simple like a designated area is now rough terrain and any attempt to move through it deals xdy damage Ref halves.

Good, now design a complete ruleset to make land based combat dynamic.

That aside Dog Fights can be turned based/not exist, it doesn't really matter to me it was just a question to steer people away from the "how can we make flight available to everyone?" idea box and onto the "How should flight be handled?" arena.

Yeah, that's because there isn't actually a problem with 3.X flight aside from not everyone getting it. Flight maneuverability might actually be MORE granular than you want in a game. You don't need to make the flying mechanic any more complicated just like you don't need to make the "walking" mechanic any more complicated.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:39 pm

MGuy wrote:Ok let me ask like this:
How are things like flight maneuvers covered?

What should be the DC for a barrel roll?

What should be the damage threshold per hit before you start falling/plummeting?

How does it scale for smaller/bigger creatures/objects?

...

This stuff is getting way way too complicated. Most people never even use the maneuverability charts in the DMG already because they're just a pain to keep track of. Ideally you want to keep it as simple as possible. You know instead of the whole "For every 45 degrees I turn, I have to travel 10 ft" and all that, you might as well just increase a creature's space to accommodate for turning radius and that sort of thing.

I mean if you're playing a game of fighter pilots you may want to consider this stuff, but for a fantasy sword game, it's probably not all that important. You don't have to worry about complex dog fighting tricks and stuff like that, and worrying about them will probably mean that the majority of the rules just get ignored in actual play.

As ubernoob said, this game isn't real time, and trying to simulate a real time dogfight probably isn't even worth the trouble.

Of course, you could go the extreme option and toss the battlemap entirely and go to a more arbitrary positioning system, where people roll flight skills or reflex saves to get on someone's tail or something and that lets you launch attacks against that person. Of course, that's going to be something that more resembles airplane combat as opposed to fantasy sky battles. But if you really wanted to, you could toss the battlemat. I mean you kinda do that anyone when everyone can fly. Sorta pointless to bother drawing terrain when nobody cares about it anymore. Which is really my main beef with the "Everyone flies" paradigm. It modifies the game but in a bad way, because it just removes terrain, and basically any effect the battlemap might have had that you cared about.

A possible fix might be to introduce some kind of complex aerial combat system to bring a little more tactics to flying characters. But if you do that, keep in mind that you're basically totally rewriting the combat system.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:45 pm

@RC: A good portion of the tactical type stuff still works in flight last I checked:
Stinking Cloud
Charging
Walls (yes, people can be behind walls of stone to block charge lanes)
Cover (assuming you're flying low enough to be near some trees)

The only stuff you lose wholesale is difficult terrain and effects that need anchors (web, EBT).

Am I missing anything?

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:55 pm

ubernoob wrote:@RC: A good portion of the tactical type stuff still works in flight last I checked:
Stinking Cloud
Charging
Walls (yes, people can be behind walls of stone to block charge lanes)
Cover (assuming you're flying low enough to be near some trees)

The only stuff you lose wholesale is difficult terrain and effects that need anchors (web, EBT).

Am I missing anything?

Stuff you lose from flight:

Ability to push people into pits (lava, spiked or otherwise)
Ability to control a zone and protect the back line. I mean it's hard enough to even provide cover to your allies by standing in front of them.
Any kind of difficult terrain, bridges or other strategic points. Effectively you take the whole map and replace it with a featureless plain. The walls are about all that remain.
Area effects become a lot less relevant since it's easier to spread out, and really you might as well spread out because zone control no longer becomes an issue. It does of course give people a total headache trying to calculate it.

Now, wizards don't get that badly hosed, fighters basically lose most of their shtick. and given that wizards are gaining tons of new options with each level and the fighter isn't, removing options and tactics the fighter had is probably a bad idea. In fact, it feels that at high levels, fighter types lose options faster than they gain them.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:08 pm

@RC: Hopefully any changes/rewrites don't turn out any MORE complicated then the RAW for current flight. If I can make/find something less complicated then that'd be great. However you point out most of my reason for wanting a flight mechanic. When everyone flies into the sky the only movement that matters is how far you can move and whether or not you have a ranged weapon. Difficult terrain, persistent area effects, etc are a non factor when you're off the ground and I'd like to then get alternate strategies for people who wanna fly. What's more I want effective flying to be harder to do. Sure anyone can get off the ground at some point but I want actual flying to be a viable option that is, at the end of the day, hardly any better than ground combat.

Edit: In addition to being as strategic as being on the ground.

@UN: Walking does =/= flight I don't care how you look at it. If your argument against flight = walking then there is no reason for me to even respond. If your argument against a flight mechanic is ground fights aren't exciting enough then that is a matter of taste because it seems obvious to me that fights on the ground are dynamic enough as it is. There are enough pratfalls, obstacles, terrain effects and various skills, modifiers, maneuvers, and conditions that only work out if you're on the ground. Where is all that in flying?

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:09 pm

RandomCasualty2 wrote:
ubernoob wrote:@RC: A good portion of the tactical type stuff still works in flight last I checked:
Stinking Cloud
Charging
Walls (yes, people can be behind walls of stone to block charge lanes)
Cover (assuming you're flying low enough to be near some trees)

The only stuff you lose wholesale is difficult terrain and effects that need anchors (web, EBT).

Am I missing anything?
Stuff you lose from flight:

Ability to push people into pits (lava, spiked or otherwise)

Ability to control a zone and protect the back line. I mean it's hard enough to even provide cover to your allies by standing in front of them.

Any kind of difficult terrain, bridges or other strategic points. Effectively you take the whole map and replace it with a featureless plain. The walls are about all that remain.

Area effects become a lot less relevant since it's easier to spread out, and really you might as well spread out because zone control no longer becomes an issue. It does of course give people a total headache trying to calculate it.

Now, wizards don't get that badly hosed, fighters basically lose most of their shtick. and given that wizards are gaining tons of new options with each level and the fighter isn't, removing options and tactics the fighter had is probably a bad idea. In fact, it feels that at high levels, fighter types lose options faster than they gain them.

Well, environmental hazards stopped being relevant at like level 5 (ignoring rider effects like knockback where it's simply a bonus). AoEs and Chokepoints are valid complaints though. I guess that's why I tend to think of high level D&D as more wuxia and less european fantasy though. In wuxia, choke points and big AoE effects tend to be smaller players than the "pair off and duel it out" of Bleach.

So yeah, you're right. Flight does take away some interesting tactical options. I just forgot about them because I don't use them very often.

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:17 pm

MGuy wrote:@UN: Walking does =/= flight I don't care how you look at it. If your argument against flight = walking then there is no reason for me to even respond. If your argument against a flight mechanic is ground fights aren't exciting enough then that is a matter of taste because it seems obvious to me that fights on the ground are dynamic enough as it is. There are enough pratfalls, obstacles, terrain effects and various skills, modifiers, maneuvers, and conditions that only work out if you're on the ground. Where is all that in flying?

Let me look at your list again:

How are things like flight maneuvers covered?

How are things that aren't straight lines covered?

What should be the DC for a barrel roll?

What should be the DC for moving in any way that isn't straight?

What should be the damage threshold per hit before you start falling/plummeting?

What should be the damage threshhold per hit before you start losing move speed?

How does it scale for smaller/bigger creatures/objects?

How does it scale for smaller/bigger creatures/objects?

What kind of bonuses/penalties do you get based on size?

What kind of bonuses/penalties do you get based on size?

Should fighting at different altitudes produce differing effects?

Should fighting in different weather produce differing effects?

What about dogfights? Do windy conditions fuck up your flying checks?

What about chase scenes and mobile combat? Does difficult terrain fuck up your walking check?

What kind of advantages (bonuses/penalties) do you get for different flight maneuvers/abilities/skill checks?

What kind of advantages (bonuses/penalties) do you get for different footwork maneuvers/abilities/skill checks?

Should maneuverability be tied to bonuses?

Should footwork be tied to bonuses?

Should it be relegated by size/propulsion (whatever is keeping you airborne)?

Should it be relegated by size/strength (whatever is moving your legs)?

I'm not worried (at this time) about how to make everyone fly but more how should flying work?

I'm not worried (at this time) about how to make everyone walk but how should walking work?

So, a couple of those have ground based equivelants. Most of them straight up don't have the parallel rules for ground combat.

SRD wrote: Perfect: The creature can perform almost any aerial maneuver it wishes. It moves through the air as well as a human moves over smooth ground.

RandomCasualty2 · Post by **RandomCasualty2** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:22 pm

ubernoob wrote:Well, environmental hazards stopped being relevant at like level 5 (ignoring rider effects like knockback where it's simply a bonus). AoEs and Chokepoints are valid complaints though. I guess that's why I tend to think of high level D&D as more wuxia and less european fantasy though. In wuxia, choke points and big AoE effects tend to be smaller players than the "pair off and duel it out" of Bleach.

So yeah, you're right. Flight does take away some interesting tactical options. I just forgot about them because I don't use them very often.

Yeah, I mean it's possible D&D might be better off adopting some kind of Wuxia fighting mode instead of the traditional battlemat. It always seemed to be odd how D&D tries to be two things at once. Like they can't decide if they want it to be a tactical wargame, or a crazy go nuts Wuxia action battle.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:40 pm

@UN Lets look at something I said:

Walking does =/= flight I don't care how you look at it.

Now lets look at what you've "analyzed"

How are things that aren't straight lines covered?

Seriously how is this an argument? You could ask this same question for why there are rules on anything.

What should be the DC for moving in any way that isn't straight?

So DCs for tumbling, jumping, climbing, swimming, don't exist when you play? What about differences between crawling, squeezing, directional restrictions for charging, running, diagonal movement?

What should be the damage threshhold per hit before you start losing move speed?

So things that fuck up your movement (caltrops, blindness, etc) don't exist when you play? Tripping doesn't work? Prone doesn't happen?

How does it scale for smaller/bigger creatures/objects? / What kind of bonuses/penalties do you get based on size?

Bigger creatures don't move farther when you play? They aren't harder to perform maneuvers on?

Should fighting in different weather produce differing effects?

Good question should it?

What about chase scenes and mobile combat? Does difficult terrain fuck up your walking check?

See earlier statement that walking does not equal flying.

What kind of advantages (bonuses/penalties) do you get for different footwork maneuvers/abilities/skill checks? / Should footwork be tied to bonuses?

Foot work comes in the form of maneuvers/abilities/skill checks.

Should it be relegated by size/strength (whatever is moving your legs)?

See earlier statement that walking does not equal flying.

I'm not worried (at this time) about how to make everyone walk but how should walking work?

See earlier statement that walking does not equal flying.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Thu Sep 03, 2009 11:49 pm

Mguy.

The point is that you are retarded.

The rules for being hit so hard you fall are called trip rules. The rules for how weather and wind affects flying is in the weather section. The rules for how you move in non straight lines, or perform maneuvers are in the descriptions of maneuverability. The rules for avoiding AoO are in the Tumble section.

All the things there should be rules for, there are, and they work just damn fine. The fact that you want to pretend that it's really hard for Ghosts and Hummingbirds to fly is weird and totally not cool.

We have everything we need for good flight combat.

If you can't find the rules for how being bigger affects maneuverability, it's because you are retarded. It's in the descriptions. Look at a goddam Dragon from CR 5-25, see how it gets faster but with lower maneuverability as it gets bigger?

It's not our fault you hate flying and want to make it hard for no reason.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:23 am

Maneuvers like trip, bull rushing, overruning, trample, only work on the ground to any satisfying effect. What does being prone mean if you're 100ft in the air? Nothing. You get bullrushed in the air. What does that do to you? Nothing (at least on the ground you could push someone into a pit). So what does bringing up ground based maneuvers that only ever do anything on the ground actually mean in this context? What does bringing up ANY ground based maneuver (like tumble) mean 100ft off of the ground?

I don't know where you got the idea that I want ghosts and humming birds to have trouble flying from but if you're referring to the fact that I don't want them to auto win against grounded opponents then I don't see the harm in wanting that. I hate auto win abilities, in fact I hate any ability or feature that allows you to auto win against someone of equal level who doesn't have the same ability. So part of my future plans to "fix" flight is that I want the advantages that flight gives you to be more tenuous. I don't have perfected ideas for things like ghosts currently (Flight isn't even the thing I'm working on right now) but I know I want a dragon/caster who was hit hard enough to fall out of the air. That doesn't seem like making flight harder to perform just that it has the added danger of falling damage.

For things like being bigger and its effects on flight I have checked my MM and nowhere within does it say that being bigger=clumsier. True the dragon gets that way but that's fixed by feats/spells so then what? He's a big average maneuvering flying dragon who suffers no penalties in flying thanks to a feat or two he picked up out of Races of the Wild. While other huge targets (enlarged Balor who went to the same RotW book) can have perfect maneuverability.

Additionally I don't blame myself for not liking flight. You can agree or disagree with it if you like, but the system, as is, doesn't do what I want it to. So I want to change it to something else. If you don't want to and you like the system fine, more power to you, but showing up and basically saying "well these things work this way on the ground why do we need rules for what happens in the air?" isn't going to change my opinion of the current system for flight. If you think ground rules can work for the air show me how because it isn't in the book. Then at least I would have an idea for how shit in the air could work.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:44 am

MGuy wrote:showing up and basically saying "well these things work this way on the ground why do we need rules for what happens in the air?" isn't going to change my opinion of the current system for flight. If you think ground rules can work for the air show me how because it isn't in the book. Then at least I would have an idea for how shit in the air could work.

Like I just said. The problem is that you are retarded. The problem is not going to be fixed based on changing the rules, because retarded people who don't read the rules are always going to have problems:

Bullrush is better in Flight, since it can be used to stop them from reaching movement and falling, same for grapple. Trip has explicit flying effects that explain how it makes them fall on their damn face.

Weather and Wind rules have very explicit rules for flying that are different than the ones for creatures on the ground. Tumble checks to avoid AoO work when flying exactly like they do when moving on the ground. I can't show you anything that you refuse to read because you are retarded.

Read the actual damn rules for things before complaining that there aren't rules for them. It's not my damn problem that you are retarded, and no one but you needs new rules, because we can all read the actual rules in the actual books that go over all this shit already.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:25 am

I am interested in knowing what play book you're going from. Bull Rush doesn't stop people from moving. It pushes them.

Grappling wasn't mentioned because it does something in the air.

Trip is arguable. It's supposed to make you go prone. If you're 100ft in the air how can you be prone? I'd imagine by falling but there are ways to mitigate that (feather fall, tumble, etc) so then when you fall and you have one of these effects/make the appropriate check are you still prone when you land? Do you get your follow up attack if your opponent just landed 100ft away (for those who have improved Trip)? You lose potential AoO or your melee bonus because your opponent is too far away. Since you just made him go 100ft away after presumably having to chase him into the sky with your melee weapon/attack just to trip him now what? He gets up flies off further out of range so he can fuck you again next turn? Fucking great. I don't see how air tripping is of equal utility in the air as it was on the ground.

Again I didn't bring up Weather and Wind effects. Why bring it up again after I've already said it?

Tumble is good for avoiding AoO and that's all well and good but exactly when would you need to use it in an aerial battle? For flanking? I doubt it since most likely you're using ranged attacks. So what do you use it for in the air?

Edit: For that matter how does tumbling even WORK for aerial opponents with different maneuverability ratings?

So as I said before, these options work well and good on the ground but how often are you going to be using it in the air? How many strategies are lost when people decide that they don't need to walk anymore and that any one with flight and a ranged attack are the new kings?

ubernoob · Post by **ubernoob** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:53 am

MGuy wrote:I am interested in knowing what play book you're going from. Bull Rush doesn't stop people from moving. It pushes them.

Umm, it totally CAN stop people from moving because the only people that use bullrush at the levels where flight is common have knockback and shocktrooper.

Grappling wasn't mentioned because it does something in the air.

Trip is arguable. It's supposed to make you go prone. If you're 100ft in the air how can you be prone? I'd imagine by falling but there are ways to mitigate that (feather fall, tumble, etc) so then when you fall and you have one of these effects/make the appropriate check are you still prone when you land? Do you get your follow up attack if your opponent just landed 100ft away (for those who have improved Trip)? You lose potential AoO or your melee bonus because your opponent is too far away. Since you just made him go 100ft away after presumably having to chase him into the sky with your melee weapon/attack just to trip him now what? He gets up flies off further out of range so he can fuck you again next turn? Fucking great. I don't see how air tripping is of equal utility in the air as it was on the ground.

Rules Compendium outright states that a tripped flying creature with any maneuverability that needs to move a certain speed per round to stay in flight straight up falls for a full round and then can make a reflex save as a move action to halt falling (if it hasn't hit the ground and taken falling damage yet). And no, we don't care about the follow up attack because the enemy is now 100' below without the ability to get back to combat within a round unless they have like 400' fly speed.

Tripping doesn't do anything against creatures that don't need to move a certain number of squares, but tripping does do something.

Again I didn't bring up Weather and Wind effects. Why bring it up again after I've already said it?

Tumble is good for avoiding AoO and that's all well and good but exactly when would you need to use it in an aerial battle? For flanking? I doubt it since most likely you're using ranged attacks. So what do you use it for in the air?

Here is an example of a character of mine. Note the number of ranged attacks. He has the best fly speed in the party to boot.

Edit: For that matter how does tumbling even WORK for aerial opponents with different maneuverability ratings?

You use the tumble skill to get inside a threatened area just like it works on the ground.

So as I said before, these options work well and good on the ground but how often are you going to be using it in the air? How many strategies are lost when people decide that they don't need to walk anymore and that any one with flight and a ranged attack are the new kings?

Seriously, my whole post is pointing out how stupid your questions are. Don't be a dumbass.

MGuy · Post by **MGuy** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:20 am

Umm, it totally CAN stop people from moving because the only people that use bullrush at the levels where flight is common have knockback and shocktrooper.

You have to charge to bullrush but bullrushing doesn't cancel out someone's move action on their turn. How does pushing someone make them not move able to move? IIRC even shocktrooper doens't give you any options for stopping movement.

Edit: Nevermind Kaelik cleared this up.

Rules Compendium outright states that a tripped flying creature with any maneuverability that needs to move a certain speed per round to stay in flight straight up falls for a full round and then can make a reflex save as a move action to halt falling (if it hasn't hit the ground and taken falling damage yet). And no, we don't care about the follow up attack because the enemy is now 100' below without the ability to get back to combat within a round unless they have like 400' fly speed.

Tripping doesn't do anything against creatures that don't need to move a certain number of squares, but tripping does do something.

Thank you for clearing that up (*does not have rules compendium*). I had not heard of that particular ruling cause I don't have that book. So tripping is still a viable option in the air.

Here is an example of a character of mine. Note the number of ranged attacks. He has the best fly speed in the party to boot.

Seems like an aerial charger at first glance. Won't you be spending your time charging and not worrying about flanking/tumbling?

You use the tumble skill to get inside a threatened area just like it works on the ground.

Thank you for clearing this up. However it still seems limited to me. Most people who choose to fly are doing so at a range. Those who do wade into melee are going to be charging in. But I suppose if this is the case then the same thing could be said about how its used on the ground. So I have to concede on this point.

Seriously, my whole post is pointing out how stupid your questions are. Don't be a dumbass.

My questions weren't canon or anything. I just used them to get people to recognize that I didn't start this thread to find ways to get people in the air but to work more on aerial mechanics.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:21 am

MGuy wrote:Bull Rush doesn't stop people from moving. It pushes them.

Which allows you to affect their location such that they may not be able to move the correct minimum distance, causing them to plummet.

MGuy wrote:Trip is arguable. It's supposed to make you go prone. If you're 100ft in the air how can you be prone? I'd imagine by falling but there are ways to mitigate that (feather fall, tumble, etc) so then when you fall and you have one of these effects/make the appropriate check are you still prone when you land? Do you get your follow up attack if your opponent just landed 100ft away (for those who have improved Trip)? You lose potential AoO or your melee bonus because your opponent is too far away. Since you just made him go 100ft away after presumably having to chase him into the sky with your melee weapon/attack just to trip him now what? He gets up flies off further out of range so he can fuck you again next turn? Fucking great. I don't see how air tripping is of equal utility in the air as it was on the ground.

You know what I see here? A whole damn paragraph where you shout "I don't know how to read!" over and over:

"Trip Results: A successful trip forces the defender to stall (even if the tripped creature doesn't have a minimum forward speed) rather than knocking the defender prone."

"Tripping Flyers: A creature flying with wings can be tripped. If the attempt succeeds, the creature stalls and falls 150 feet.

Creatures that fly without wings (and any creature with perfect maneuverability) can't be tripped while flying. If the creature is still in the air after stalling, it must succeed on a DC 20 Reflex save to recover and resume flying. Otherwise it falls another 300 feet. If it hits the ground, it lands prone and takes falling damage."

MGuy wrote:Tumble is good for avoiding AoO and that's all well and good but exactly when would you need to use it in an aerial battle? For flanking? I doubt it since most likely you're using ranged attacks. So what do you use it for in the air?

Your very last paragraph has about melee flyers! Everyone flies. Are you saying that no one uses melee attacks at all? I'm sure Dragons will be very disappointed with that. So will melee fighters who can make a DC 25 tumble check to avoid AoO from CR 25 Dragons in order to actually attack them.

MGuy wrote:Edit: For that matter how does tumbling even WORK for aerial opponents with different maneuverability ratings?

The same way it works for opponents of similar maneuverability ratings. They make a DC X check to avoid AoOs, just like they do on the ground. They don't need to make a rule saying "flying tumble works the same" since the default assumption is that it works the same unless stated otherwise.

MGuy wrote:So as I said before, these options work well and good on the ground but how often are you going to be using it in the air? How many strategies are lost when people decide that they don't need to walk anymore and that any one with flight and a ranged attack are the new kings?

The same number as are lost when people decide that True seeing is better than being bitched by invisibles. The same number as when people decide that EBT doesn't work any more because everything is flying and large or larger. The same numbers as any other set of levels in the game when a new spell level comes online for people.