Pathfinder 1E Flight in Pathfinder

[Dingo333]

So, this is a bit of a 2 parter thread, first, I wanna know if people agree with me or my DM on a disagreement of a spell I used. And second, how people conceptualize flight (3D movement) with tabletop miniatures (a mostly 2D environment)

First part. My druid casts ball lightning summoning 2 balls of lightning. (it acs like flaming sphere, except they fly through the air, speed flying 20 (perfect)). I say I am having them fly up to the enemy (was a huge sized something or other). I estimate it is 15ft tallish and that I want the balls to zap him near his head. My DM says that the balls can not fly. I pull out the book, show him the Flight speed, pull out another book, show him the fly skill, pull out a third book show him the rules on flight speeds, and is still denied. his words "because it has a flight speed does not mean it can ascend or descend." It then goes on that our melee heavy party gets damaged by the lightning balls, even though it is not an area effect, and they keep to the other side of the guy. My DM "the balls zap everything within 5 ft of them" at which point, I dismissed the spell, didn't bother to argue that that was not the spell as written and we proceeded to be slaughterer. Mine being the first to die.

My main problem is I was thinking in a 3 dimensional grid, where you have 6 directions you can go, and anything that takes up a square, fills a cube+

This has happened a few times as I try to implement aerial tactics in my DM's strictly 2D games. I wild shape into a bird and fly over the battle field (60ft up), somehow am caught in an antimagic field, revert, and fall, painfully. Same encounter, the sorcerer is allowed his lightning bolt spell, but my call lighting is stopped by the barrier that has somehow shrunken so it is no longer 30+ feet high and thus, my spell works, but the lightning can't pass the barrier

Is this all just me epic failing to understand flight and other rules in pathfinder, or is it my DM, misinterpreting the rules I am reading to him

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Totally your DM being less than astute.

 

[IronWolf]

The DM seems to be making some less then stellar calls regarding some of your spells.

Have you approached him outside of the game to get more clarification on his rulings? Also, be wary of your own attitude and approach when trying to get an accurate ruling. Sometimes if someone is approached aggressively with three rulebooks and a player aggressively trying to show them the error of their ways the DM will react much more defensively than necessary and defend faulty rulings.

So I would suggest bringing it up outside of the game and see you can't work through the rulings.

 

[aboyd]

Sometimes if someone is approached aggressively with three rulebooks and a player aggressively trying to show them the error of their ways the DM will react much more defensively than necessary and defend faulty rulings.

I agree. I used to be sorta difficult when a DM broke a rule that he allegedly followed. I'd break out the book, and rules-lawyer him a bit. Nowadays I'm waaaaay more relaxed. In our last game, the DM had someone take a move action and then delay. A player turned to me and said, "Can he do that?" And my response was that sure he could, if this was a house rule for him. Otherwise, he probably meant to have his NPC "ready" (standard action) rather than "delay" (full action). I left a big out for the DM to assert whatever he wanted, and I'd have gone along with it too. But I managed to mention what the official rule was, and the DM interrupted, "No, no, I want to play by the rules, so I must have meant ready."

Being relaxed and acting as if you don't care actually helps you to get it right more often than if you act like you do care. Many DMs can get defensive.

My druid casts ball lightning summoning 2 balls of lightning. (it acs like flaming sphere, except they fly through the air, speed flying 20 (perfect)). I say I am having them fly up to the enemy (was a huge sized something or other). I estimate it is 15ft tallish and that I want the balls to zap him near his head. My DM says that the balls can not fly.

It's true that nowhere in the description of Fly does it state "You can move in 3 dimensions." However, Fly does list "Fly up at a greater than 45° angle" amongst the skill checks, which implies that flying up at an angle that is not greater than 45° should be possible without any skill check at all.

It's also true that the Fly skill does state that having ranks in Fly does not mean you can fly. You need to have it listed under movement as an option. So he may have been confused and tried to apply that distinction to your balls of lightning. Note that I don't actually think that's what he's doing, but I do wish to put it forward as a possibility.

This has happened a few times as I try to implement aerial tactics in my DM's strictly 2D games. I wild shape into a bird and fly over the battle field (60ft up), somehow am caught in an antimagic field, revert, and fall, painfully.

Uh oh. Hmm. It's starting to sound to me like you're playing with a bit of a railroad DM. I mean, he may not be forcing you to do everything he wants, like puppets, but he does appear to have an idea of how combat should go, and anything that surprises him or is too effective will get nerfed on the fly.

That happens in many games, more often than you'd think. I'm in a game with my good friend, and his wife dropped out for a reason similar to what you're experiencing. She said, "When I load my sorcerer up with fire spells, suddenly every enemy has fire immunity. If I have flight, they have flight. If we can deal 100 points of damage in a single round, they suddenly have 300 hit points." That's a bit of a paraphrase; I don't remember her exact words anymore. But the point is that some DMs really really believe that their job is to let you juuuuuuust barely live. Every fight is supposed to be difficult in their way of thinking, even if the rules say that some fights should be easily overcome.

So you may have a DM who has this mindset, and isn't good at handling surprises. How to deal with it? Hmm. Resort to using skills, spells, and feats that are more commonly accepted by DMs (they might even be more effective, but if the DM is used to it, he won't object). Or stop caring so much. If the DM nerfs something, stop using it immediately, no arguments. If the nerf causes you or your party to be in danger of dying, just accept it instead of fighting it. I've found that sometimes the DM nerfs things because he assumes you're are slaughtering (or will slaughter) the enemy, and when the on-the-fly nerfing causes the group to utterly lose, it can be a real eye-opener for the DM. Let the party members die so the DM can scramble to react, and maybe realize (to his surprise) that his actions are based on an inaccurate assessment of the game, and need to be reconsidered. If you struggle to compensate each time he nerfs something, you may be inadvertently reassuring him that the decision was good, because he sees you still valiantly struggling, and feels it's an even match.

Also, get used to retraining your feats, and dropping certain spells for other ones. Get aggressive at saying, "Oh, that doesn't work as the book states? Okay, on level up I drop it and take _________." Or if the DM won't allow you to re-jigger your character, just use the (many) deaths your PC will experience as an opportunity to build something better.

Good luck!

 

[Dingo333]

@ Ironwolf, I didnt exactly whip out the books and throw the rules in his face, I had had them open because I was looking up the spell to make sure I what I wanted to do with it was in the rules, (specifically I had been looking up fly and ball lightning and still had them open as I placed the ball markers and declared my intent). Anyway, that game is over, and no real sense going back and arguing the point now

[MENTION=44797]aboyd[/MENTION], I had been scouting the camp, and was up there to signal the attack (via a lightning strike on the main badguy) DM sat and listened to the plan, I got 1 stroke off to signal the attack, field went up, I went down, which is when I asked how that happened, and looked up what could cancel wild shape. After I fell, I got up and dusted myself off to get into the battle and found yet another problem with his rulings (my lightning couldn't get in)

The DM likes to argue points, as a DM and a player (spent a half hour arguing another players use of cleave, long story). He also doesn't like being wrong and I am not the only one who has put forward alternate rules interpretations. Like shield bashings, cleave, my flight problems, weapons, prestige classes and a host of spells.

anyway, I was mainly asking if I rolled a natural 1 on my KN pathfinder check, or if my DM was mistaken.

Thanks all

 

[aboyd]

You know, something you could do would be to ask him what it would take to get the kind of flight you expected. Describe it, describe what you expect it to do, and then ask, "So, in your game, how do I get this to work?" Put it on him to explain it, because then if you do it his way, he can't complain.

I suggest you do that for another more subtle reason, though. I suspect that if you put it to him like that, and make him explain what it takes in his game to have real, working flight, he will hem & haw and generally be very uncomfortable. Why? Because he doesn't want you flying. That's my suspicion. And if I'm right, then when you ask how to get it, he's going to have a very difficult time explaining clearly how you should go about getting it, because he won't want you to have a recipe that works.

If so, I'd probably bow out of the game... but that's just my personal feeling. Another option is to sigh, give up on flight, and move on to other things the DM can handle.

Hopefully I'm wrong and he is eager to help you achieve your goals.

 

[IronWolf]

@ Ironwolf, I didnt exactly whip out the books and throw the rules in his face, I had had them open because I was looking up the spell to make sure I what I wanted to do with it was in the rules, (specifically I had been looking up fly and ball lightning and still had them open as I placed the ball markers and declared my intent). Anyway, that game is over, and no real sense going back and arguing the point now

I wouldn't suggest arguing the point, I would suggest discussing the issue with your GM. A manner that aboyd suggests below would likely be a good starting point. Otherwise you are going to be continually frustrated at an ever changing rule framework.

The DM likes to argue points, as a DM and a player (spent a half hour arguing another players use of cleave, long story). He also doesn't like being wrong and I am not the only one who has put forward alternate rules interpretations. Like shield bashings, cleave, my flight problems, weapons, prestige classes and a host of spells.

This can be a poor combination with a DM that likes to argue *and* doesn't like being wrong. It can certainly disrupt the game and impact the player's fun. In my group I GM, but there are players that do know certain rules better than I - I typically have no issue in being wrong and adjusting if needed.

We also don't get into in-depth rule discussions at the table, I typically make a ruling and clarify this is how it is for this session until we can determine how it actually should have been played. In table rulings I try to not rule in a manner that has a large negative impact on the player as it is easier to correct later if "the player got away with something" than if I incorrectly limited a player's abilities through my misunderstanding of the rules that led to a death or some other large negative impact.

You know, something you could do would be to ask him what it would take to get the kind of flight you expected. Describe it, describe what you expect it to do, and then ask, "So, in your game, how do I get this to work?" Put it on him to explain it, because then if you do it his way, he can't complain.

Yes - great idea. You want to fly and its part of your character. If it doesn't work as the rules state then you need to know how it *does* work.

Good luck!