D&D 5E Knocked out while Flying

Herosmith14 · Nov 25, 2017

So, last time I played, we found a trap room with a suit of armor in it. Our bard cast Fly on the monk via a Dos Lute(pressure plate evasion), and he went about disarming the traps. He flew by a suit of armor, and it turned out to be an animated defence system, and it knocked him out. This brought up a question, the bard was still concentrating on Fly, but the monk was lights out, so what happened. The spell only cites what would happen if the caster was taken out, but not if someone else is taken out while flying. We played it as a zero grav punch out, but it's an interesting question. What ya think?

mellored · Nov 25, 2017

Most flying thing fall.

But since fly spell is magic, you stay up. At least until it times out.

Tormyr · Nov 25, 2017

The only effect of the fly spell is gaining a fly speed of 60 ft. A creature without the (hover) descriptor on their fly speed falls when knocked prone, and unconscious creatures become prone. So the unconscious monk falls. The bard has no control over the flying of the monk apart from whether or not the spell stays in effect.

EDIT: As [MENTION=6812267]Ganymede81[/MENTION] pointed out, the fly spell keeps the monk aloft...which creates its own problem as the monk is a sitting duck and might be out of range of healing.

Ganymede81 · Nov 25, 2017

Tormyr said:
The only effect of the fly spell is gaining a fly speed of 60 ft. A creature without the (hover) descriptor on their fly speed falls when knocked prone, and unconscious creatures become prone. So the unconscious monk falls. The bard has no control over the flying of the monk apart from whether or not the spell stays in effect.

This is not accurate. The rules note two situations when the flyer does not fall: when it can hover and when it is held aloft by magic.

"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, such as by the fly spell."

Sunseeker · Nov 25, 2017

The Bard is in charge of keeping the magic active, the Monk is in control of his flying movement. So the Monk remains aloft so long as the Bard maintains his concentration (to the duration of the spell) but can no longer move under his own volition.

So tie a string to his toe and make a Monk-balloon!

Harzel · Nov 25, 2017

Ganymede81 said:
This is not accurate. The rules note two situations when the flyer does not fall: when it can hover and when it is held aloft by magic.

"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, such as by the fly spell."

Based on this, it would indeed be difficult to say that RAW is anything other than that the unconscious flyer stays aloft. However, this sort of thing contributes to the dwindling of my respect for 5e's creators. This is the operative part of the description of Fly.

The target gains a flying speed of 60 feet for the duration.

That is quite a nice, clean description. It could make adjudication easy, since it implies that the flyer can simply be treated like any other flying creature. But noooo. We are now informed that Fly 'holds the creature aloft'. What? The spell description says no such thing. The problem I have with this is not the particular specific case covered by the flying rules. Rather the problem is that this now introduces doubt as to extent to which we can treat a Flying creature in the same way as a flying creature. They have, in effect, invented a new concept - Flying creature - where none was needed, but failed to give a full explicit accounting of it.

Am I being hypercritical? Maybe. I certainly have been sensitized recently by observing some of the shenanigans (that people assert are) enabled by the XGtE content, and anticipating, based on past performance, that tweeting at Crawford about them will produce a completely random assortment of (no response), (no that doesn't work), and (sure that works). (By 'random' here I mean not discernibly based on any underlying principles or reasoning.)

I used to think that @CapnZapp was being perhaps a bit whiny. I am coming more to the view, though, that WoTC really does owe us a more carefully considered rule set.

Ganymede81 · Nov 26, 2017

While I certainly agree that WotC needs to do a better job wih their rules, I am fine with this. The creatures without hover are generally those with wings; it makes sense that you fall if you stop flapping your wings. In the case of the fly spell, I buy into the idea that the flyer will just bob there.

Swarmkeeper · Nov 26, 2017

Harzel said:
Am I being hypercritical?....

Not “hypercritical” - I would say the word is “nit-picky”. The rule is in there, it’s just not where you want it to be.

That said, and I’m sure you already know this, if you think the knocked out flying player should fall then make that happen as DM - just be sure to let the caster know that’s how you’re going to play it when they pick the spell. Not really a big deal.

Harzel · Nov 26, 2017

DM Dave1 said:
Not “hypercritical” - I would say the word is “nit-picky”. The rule is in there, it’s just not where you want it to be.

Just to reiterate / clarify - I have much less problem with the particular rule (and where it appears) than I do with the general principle / modus operandi. They have needlessly complicated the world by creating an unneeded concept (Flying creature), and then neglected to fully explicate it. I fully accept that D&D never was and never will be based on an elegant consistent theory / model of how the D&D universe works. (HP, I'm looking at you.

) But some of us like to create at least small islands of coherence so that there are at least some subsets of stuff that have a sort of have a consistent rationale. This makes my DMing experience a little easier and more enjoyable, and to some of my players it is important to be able to predict how things are going to work and, to the extent possible, for things to 'make sense'.

I understand that there are a lot of DMs and players who do not mind approaching the rule set as a collection of essentially unrelated assertions. The type of thing that I am complaining about does not impair them, but neither, as far as I can see, does it particularly benefit them. However, these do chip away, however modestly, at my enjoyment of the game, and so in that light (some downside, no upside) I do wish the devs would contemplate their choices a bit more. (Ok, I guess the effort to do that could count as a downside.)

That said, and I’m sure you already know this, if you think the knocked out flying player should fall then make that happen as DM - just be sure to let the caster know that’s how you’re going to play it when they pick the spell. Not really a big deal.

Correct, not a big deal. Just one more cut of the thousand that it will take to kill my enjoyment of the game. And, again, I would not mind if there were a tradeoff - if someone actually benefited from a less coherent RAW. But it seems like it is just carelessness - like they don't really give a ****.

Maxperson · Nov 26, 2017

Herosmith14 said:
So, last time I played, we found a trap room with a suit of armor in it. Our bard cast Fly on the monk via a Dos Lute(pressure plate evasion), and he went about disarming the traps. He flew by a suit of armor, and it turned out to be an animated defence system, and it knocked him out. This brought up a question, the bard was still concentrating on Fly, but the monk was lights out, so what happened. The spell only cites what would happen if the caster was taken out, but not if someone else is taken out while flying. We played it as a zero grav punch out, but it's an interesting question. What ya think?

The same thing that would happen if the caster stops concentrating. The flyer falls. All fly does is give a fly speed to the target. The target is the one that has to move or hover via a desire to move. Just like walking, if you fall unconscious you are going to fall as the spell does not build in a self-hover aspect to the spell.