D&D 5E On fairies and flying

[Cadence]

Except I'm not dismissing that flying PCs can have advantages in certain challenges. But so too can non-flying PCs in the same situations. It's a wash in my view

Can't the flying PCs land and become land-based ones when that's advantageous?

 

[iserith]

Can't the flying PCs land and become land-based ones when that's advantageous?

Yeah, all characters can do lots of things when it's advantageous. Are we really trying to parse out who has a slight edge across all situations? It's an impossible task.

 

[Cadence]

Yeah, all characters can do lots of things when it's advantageous. Are we really trying to parse out who has a slight edge across all situations? It's an impossible task.

I was probably misreading something as being equivalent to "sometimes it's advantageous to be the character who can fly, sometimes it's advantageous to be the one who can't"... which didn't make sense if the flyer can insta-turn in to something that walks.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

As an aside, does anyone know of a good book that discusses castles that would actually be useful in a fantasy world full of dragons, rock-to-mud, passwall, fly, and teleport, that could actually be built at the levels the owners would have access to by RAW?

Or do denizens of D&D worlds where those things are super rare just all realize they'll have to rebuild a lot whenever they face something that's the equivalent of a coordinated airstrike hitting them? Does that mean the coordinated airstrikes would be pretty rare, or that rebuilding castles is a major driver of the economy?

My first thought is a lot of reinforced domes? And soemthing like feather fall for objects as an enchantment roughly as common as the tactic described.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Can't the flying PCs land and become land-based ones when that's advantageous?

In order to take advantage of flying, the character needs to be a caster or an archer.

I was probably misreading something as being equivalent to "sometimes it's advantageous to be the character who can fly, sometimes it's advantageous to be the one who can't"... which didn't make sense if the flyer can insta-turn in to something that walks.

If you can't fly you are less likely to be sent on alone into a potential ambush.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

What are the classic air based encounters that would go after a flying party, but wouldn't go after them on land?

I don't know about classic, but my players have encountered wyvern riding and winged kobolds, swarms of carnivorous butterfey, sky pirates and living spells whilst travelling by air. And a deadly storm, obviously. There was a red dragon, but as it turned out they decided not to travel by air on that occasion so didn't encounter it. Also avoided - swarms of ravens. In published adventures, there is a potential roc encounter in RotFM if the party try to travel to a certain location by air.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Except I'm not dismissing that flying PCs can have advantages in certain challenges. But so too can non-flying PCs in the same situations. It's a wash in my view and not worth any serious concern. If a DM's challenges are constantly thwarted by a flying PC, that says more about the DM's challenges than the flying PC. What I suspect is that this issue with flying PCs is just mostly forum hyperbole.

Have you played Tomb of Annihilation? If you were to run that as written and your players made an all pixie party....they have broken it from 1st level. The entire adventure path is built around hoardes of undead stalking in a jungle that you are going to be hampered and lost in.

You can certainly adjust the encounters and rules systems presented to challenge an all flying party, but the mere fact that you would have to do so much work to make something usable is a pretty clear indication flying at level 1 as a character is somewhere on the "This option may ruin your game" scale.

I don't run pre-made adventures myself, so I have no issues with flying characters but I could see a new GM running an Adventure Path having a hard time with even a single flying PC.

 

[JiffyPopTart]

My

In order to take advantage of flying, the character needs to be a caster or an archer.

If you can't fly you are less likely to be sent on alone into a potential ambush.

My swashbuckler rogue would benefit from being able to fly. Swoop down, hit with sneak attack, swoop back up.

My Kensai Monk as well....or really any mobile melee type.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

My

My swashbuckler rogue would benefit from being able to fly. Swoop down, hit with sneak attack, swoop back up.

My Kensai Monk as well....or really any mobile melee type.

Then they get hammered by the 30 ft. range monster attacks, like the ankheg's acid spit. And monsters can ready an action too. If they don't keep at least 35 ft. away their is little advantage.

 

[HaroldTheHobbit]

That's a pretty inconsequential distinction, unless you also restrict resting.

Well, I actually do restrict resting to some degree, and I think most DMs do. If you can short rest infinity times per day and long rest every 10 minutes like in some old CRPG, then what's the point of resources at all?

And I can't be the only DM who uses the resource prio as a choice at lower tiers - spell Jump across that chasm and have a slot less for upcoming combat, or take a longer route with a few more combat encounters etc.