FormerlyHemlock
Hero
It might be good to bring back AD&D maneuverability classes, and make Aarakocra class C: can turn up to 90 degrees in a round, can climb at up to 45 degrees IIRC, must travel at least half-speed in order to stay aloft.
D&D 5E Flight ability: Does this make the Aarakocra overpowered?
It might be good to bring back AD&D maneuverability classes, and make Aarakocra class C: can turn up to 90 degrees in a round, can climb at up to 45 degrees IIRC, must travel at least half-speed in order to stay aloft.
redrick
First Post
I doubt I'd want to add another rules system to the game as it is, but, on the other hand, if I had a flying PC, for whom this might come up all the time, it probably would be good to codify it a bit more, in which case what you've outlined seems pretty reasonable. That way, the PC doesn't have to look at me for every movement they take and say, "can I fly like this?"
The way I see it, flying matters in two situations.
1) In-combat, staying out of melee reach. While useful, this only works well outdoors or in large chambers, and even then many enemies have ranged attacks (or their own flying ability!), and there's an important downside regarding falling: woe betide an aarakocra who drops to zero in midair and falls, suffering an immediate additional death saving throw failure.
2) Out of combat, crossing pits and scaling walls and not stepping on pressure plates. Again, this is useful, but even low-level adventurers typically have decent ways of dealing with that stuff. Only the broadest, deepest of chasms slows down a motivated 1st-level adventuring party.
No, the real problem with aarakocra is not game balance. The real problem is: I can never remember how to spell
ing "aarakocra." Couldn't they have gone with an easier name, like birdlings or featherborn or half-eagles or something?
1) In-combat, staying out of melee reach. While useful, this only works well outdoors or in large chambers, and even then many enemies have ranged attacks (or their own flying ability!), and there's an important downside regarding falling: woe betide an aarakocra who drops to zero in midair and falls, suffering an immediate additional death saving throw failure.
2) Out of combat, crossing pits and scaling walls and not stepping on pressure plates. Again, this is useful, but even low-level adventurers typically have decent ways of dealing with that stuff. Only the broadest, deepest of chasms slows down a motivated 1st-level adventuring party.
No, the real problem with aarakocra is not game balance. The real problem is: I can never remember how to spell
ing "aarakocra." Couldn't they have gone with an easier name, like birdlings or featherborn or half-eagles or something?
S
Sunseeker
Guest
In older editions, "hover" was also a variant of fly, where a creature with the ability to fly though physical means (dragons, angels, etc..) could stay in one spot while taking actions or fighting. I'm not sure if that type of hovering has been included into "flying". Perhaps I'm just unclear on how 5E differentiates "flying" from "hovering" this time around.
FormerlyHemlock
Hero
To expand on this a bit: in AD&D, only creatures with maneuverability class A or B could hover. Class A (turn on a dime, just like you're on land) was pretty much reserved for air elementals, and class B (can turn 180 degrees in a single round) was for flying insects and hummingbirds, and giant versions thereof. Dragons were class C (good maneuverability, can turn 90 degrees per round), and Rocs were either D or E, I forget which, and could take several rounds to turn 180 degrees.
I figure that anything with "hover" in 5E is roughly analogous to class B, or class A if an air elemental.
redrick
First Post
From PHB 191:
"If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic."
From MM page 8:
"Some monsters have the ability to hover, which makes them hard to knock out of the air (as explained in the rules on flying in the PHB). Such a monster stops hovering when it dies."
That's the extent of the 5e rules on hovering as far as I can find. I never paid attention to flying rules in AD&D, so those hover rules you describe are news to me, but the 5e ones seem very reasonable. (Flying requires movement to stay aloft. Hovering is freaky anti-gravity.) The suggestion that flying creatures have to use their movement to stay aloft is not explicit in the rules, but is a logical and reasonable extrapolation. In my opinion. If players feel the need for more clearly codified rules and what they can and can't do while flapping their wings, the AD&D maneuverability classes seem reasonable to port over.
Personally, as a DM, I probably wouldn't bother with memorizing/keeping those rules handy for my flying NPCs, but the general spirit of them is still helpful.
S
Sunseeker
Guest
I'm not familiar with AD&D rules, but this sounds a lot like the grades of flying that 3.5 had.
Right, the given explanation has left me a little lost. The impression I get is that hovering is a form of flying that utilizes non-physical means, thus why being stunned or prone has a lessened or no effect on it. The ability for a creature to hold in one spot while flying by physical means is part and parcel with the current type of flying.
In 3.5 for certain (I can't really recall if 4th continued it) a creature needed the ability to fly AND to hover in order to be able to flap its wings but not actually move, otherwise it HAD to move a certain amount of its movement every turn to remain flying.
I don't tend to worry about grades of flying in 5th though, if something needs to turn around, it does. I've yet to have the party attacked by a flock of seagulls though, but I might test it out to see how a dive-bomb only attack style works.
redrick
First Post
5th edition does not, per RAW (at least as far as I can find), require flying creatures to move to stay aloft. From a rules perspective, 5e does not distinguish between the flying capabilities of, say, a hummingbird, and an eagle. The suggestion to say flying creatures must move to stay aloft is, in effect, a house rule.
There are very few things that can "hover" by purely physical means, so I think that works. Deal with it on a case by case basis.
No, the real problem with aarakocra is not game balance. The real problem is: I can never remember how to spell
"An all-aarakocra party does not simply walk into Mordor."
