Hm. An interesting interpretation. But, following that line of reasoning, being mounted shouldn't grant a bonus either since an animal's back isn't "ground". Since "higher ground" is made to apply to mounted combat, doesn't it stand to reason that it should be interpreted to mean "higher elevation"?The +1 attack bonus is for "higher ground." By RAW, you don't get it simply by being at a higher base than the foe, you actually need to be on a solid surface. So, if it were a small hill or the back of a horse you would, but not by jumping up or even by using a fly speed to hover over the ground.
That can't be entirely accurate. For instance, what speed rating would you use to calculate how far a character may move/fall in a round; Base, Fly or Swin speed? Wouldn't small characters fall less far than medium characters, while monks and barbarians (with fast movement) or those with the Run feat would fall faster in a round? Kind of throws Galileo out the window doesn't it?So if you don't have enough movement left to finish falling, you fall as far as your remaining movement allows, then finish it at the start of your next turn.
That's why I tried to talk about it in terms of attacking from a higher surface. You have to actually be on an object that's giving you a hieght advantage. If this weren't the case and flight gave you the bonus, why not simply being taller than the other person?Hm. An interesting interpretation. But, following that line of reasoning, being mounted shouldn't grant a bonus either since an animal's back isn't "ground". Since "higher ground" is made to apply to mounted combat, doesn't it stand to reason that it should be interpreted to mean "higher elevation"?
That can't be entirely accurate. For instance, what speed rating would you use to calculate how far a character may move/fall in a round; Base, Fly or Swin speed? Wouldn't small characters fall less far than medium characters, while monks and barbarians (with fast movement) or those with the Run feat would fall faster in a round? Kind of throws Galileo out the window doesn't it?
I would simply say that you must be at the higher elevation for the completion of the standard action that involves your attack.That's why I tried to talk about it in terms of attacking from a higher surface. You have to actually be on an object that's giving you a hieght advantage. If this weren't the case and flight gave you the bonus, why not simply being taller than the other person?