Finally, in PHB2, WINGS!

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I understand the reasons given for the changes. I still find it amusing that basic game elements that players have been enjoying for over 30 years suddenly become "broken" and removed from the official game.

Well, I think these abilities are usually _always_ broken, regardless of game. I am thinking of quite a few Shadowrun mages that cast their Telekinesis and Invisibility spells. At least in SR has hand grenades and automatic rifles that are available event non-spellcasters - grenades don't need to see you to kill you...

 

[MrMyth]

Its still as useless as wings on a penguin. 16th level and still no option for air support in a tactical situation? I'll pass thanks.

And that's exactly why they are so reluctant to hand it out. They don't want a flying ranger or rogue who spends every fight sniping the enemy from 30 squares up, and is immune to basically everything non-flying enemies can do.

So, instead, they have allowed player-based flight to fall into the following categories:

-Limited Use, such as the Fly spell, which is less abuseable since it draws upon a limited resource.

-Limited Power, such as the ability to fly on your turn as long as you land at the end of it, which gives the ability to bypass dangers but still keeps you present in the combat.

-Non-Combat Functional, such as Overland Flight, which lets you have a character fully capable of flight - but not one who can abuse that ability in combat.

 

[Estlor]

I don't think it's a bad ability as written. For a 12th level utility power your dragonborn PC can:

• Ignore difficult terrain
• Not need to make Athletics checks to jump
• Not need to make Athletics check to climb short distances

It's not the 3.Xe fly spell, but there are some times it'd come in real handy (and it's a freakin' at-will power). Why, just last session my party's dragonborn warlord was neutered by difficult terrain keeping him away from the fighter. All his, "Do this and make someone adjacent better," powers were thrown out and he was reduced to just swinging away with his longsword.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Well, I think these abilities are usually _always_ broken, regardless of game. I am thinking of quite a few Shadowrun mages that cast their Telekinesis and Invisibility spells. At least in SR has hand grenades and automatic rifles that are available event non-spellcasters - grenades don't need to see you to kill you...

I haven't played a lot of SR so I'm not informed enough on those rules to comment about that. I know that there are some abilities such as invisibility that were not particularly broken at all. Combat rules for invisibility were pretty much summed up as -4 to hit unless you could detect invisible. Simple.Easy, and not_broken at all. 3E came along with hordes of fiddly rules and inability to target crap thus making the ability far more powerful that it was ever designed to be, while simultaneously not changing its level/availability and made it "broken". In comes 4E to save the day and nerf into oblivion an ability that was perfectly fine until the 3E era. All this nonsense about "broken" abilities makes my head hurt sometimes.

 

[ExploderWizard]

And that's exactly why they are so reluctant to hand it out. They don't want a flying ranger or rogue who spends every fight sniping the enemy from 30 squares up, and is immune to basically everything non-flying enemies can do.

So, instead, they have allowed player-based flight to fall into the following categories:

-Limited Use, such as the Fly spell, which is less abuseable since it draws upon a limited resource.

-Limited Power, such as the ability to fly on your turn as long as you land at the end of it, which gives the ability to bypass dangers but still keeps you present in the combat.

-Non-Combat Functional, such as Overland Flight, which lets you have a character fully capable of flight - but not one who can abuse that ability in combat.

I understand the balance issues and where they are coming from and I didn't mean to suggest that actual flight should be available to everyone for the cost of a feat. I don't think the answer to the flying issue should be let everyone have it but make it next to useless to compensate. It bothers me a little when something changes so fundamentally yet retains the name of something the actual effect no longer represents. I do think flying should be a limited resource and never given out as an at-will ability to anything other than creatures than can naturally fly.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I haven't played a lot of SR so I'm not informed enough on those rules to comment about that. I know that there are some abilities such as invisibility that were not particularly broken at all. Combat rules for invisibility were pretty much summed up as -4 to hit unless you could detect invisible. Simple.Easy, and not_broken at all. 3E came along with hordes of fiddly rules and inability to target crap thus making the ability far more powerful that it was ever designed to be, while simultaneously not changing its level/availability and made it "broken". In comes 4E to save the day and nerf into oblivion an ability that was perfectly fine until the 3E era. All this nonsense about "broken" abilities makes my head hurt sometimes.

SHadowrun 3E: Firing Blindly is a +8 DC modifier. (You roll a dice pool of 1-14, realistically 6-8, each dice has to reach the DC to count as a success, reroll and add sixes, your enemy might roll against you to reduce successes to avoid getting hit, and will roll to reduce damage)

Shadowrun 4E: Firing blindly is a -6 dice pool modifier. (You roll a dice pool of 1 to 14, realistically 8-10, each 5 or 6 counts as a hit, your enemy rolls against you to reduce successes and avoid getting hit, and will also roll to reduce damage.) Situation got a little better in 4E, but not much. In 3E, dodging required you to spend dice from your limited combat pool per round, in 4E, it is its own skill.

 

[Khaalis]

After looking at it again, I have to alter my tune.

On one hand, yes its written ok, for fitting within the system as it currently exists. However, on the other hand, I don't think this is the way it should be.

I understand the reasons given for the changes. I still find it amusing that basic game elements that players have been enjoying for over 30 years suddenly become "broken" and removed from the official game.

Aye! I wholeheartedly agree here. For the sake of "game balance" we have basically neutered everything that classic fantasy magic has been for decades. Can I say Invisibility too? Its why I complain so loudly in other threads about the ritual system. For 90% of the powers, if you stripped the "flavor text" off of the powers, they're all pretty much the same becoming rather homogeneous.

The game has basically boiled down to only combat mechanics. I personally would have preferred beefing up the 'suffering' melee classes and not nerfed the entire cornerstone of magic. /shrug JMHO.

I understand the balance issues and where they are coming from and I didn't mean to suggest that actual flight should be available to everyone for the cost of a feat.

But here's the KICKER! Its costing you an ENTIRE PARAGON PATH to get crappy flight. As far as I'm concerned, its horribly weak for the cost invested. In this case it should be a natural ability. Either you have wings and can fly or you can't. As I state below too, I'd rather see true flight with an altitude limit (which there currently isn't) and even applying the clumsy modifier, rather than as it is.

-Non-Combat Functional, such as Overland Flight, which lets you have a character fully capable of flight - but not one who can abuse that ability in combat.

I understand the mechanics, but that doesn't make it any easier to swallow. Where is the logic involved that says I can fly for 8-10 hours of the day nonstop (overland flight), but if I start a fight I can't fly for more than 3 sec. at a time? It breaks logic, it breaks immersion. To me, its lazy design. Personally I would rather see just "flight" with an altitude limit and even the "clumsy" limiter applied to 'keep you in combat'.

Besides I see no logic in the argument about being kept in combat. If I'm an Archer Ranger, I'm still going to be firing into melee from the same range (usually 10-20 away) whether I'm on the ground or in the air. It should also be up to the DM to put obstacles in the game to counter the party's abilities. If you have an aerial combatant that rules combat without breaking a sweat, its the because the DM isn't doing their job. Again, JMHO.

 

[Fedifensor]

(Posted from my G1 phone)

So, is the following legal for a 16th level Scion of Arkosia?

* Start adjacent to foe
* Use breath weapon (minor)
* Use Storm Walk to shift 1 and make a ranged attack (standard)
* Use overland flight to go 12 squares straight up (move)

On the following turn:
* Land anywhere within 12 squares of starting point (move)
* Attack (standard)

If a foe gets into melee, use Storm Walk + overland flight to escape again.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

The game has basically boiled down to only combat mechanics. I personally would have preferred beefing up the 'suffering' melee classes and not nerfed the entire cornerstone of magic. /shrug JMHO.

The problem with letting casters have uber utility is it still puts them ahead of non-caster usefulness if everyone is of equal value once initiative is rolled. Wizards would have to be gutted in combat to make up for all their mind reading, teleporting, scrying, dominate/charm, uber stealth capabilities, etc. Unless you want to beef skill based powers up to the point where they duplicate magic effects, and then you'd have all the wizard supremacists whining again.

 

[ExploderWizard]

(Posted from my G1 phone)

So, is the following legal for a 16th level Scion of Arkosia?

* Start adjacent to foe
* Use breath weapon (minor)
* Use Storm Walk to shift 1 and make a ranged attack (standard)
* Use overland flight to go 12 squares straight up (move)

On the following turn:
* Land anywhere within 12 squares of starting point (move)
* Attack (standard)

If a foe gets into melee, use Storm Walk + overland flight to escape again.

I would say no since you are required to land in the same turn as your flight. For overland flight you cannot use any standard, minor, or immediate actions on the same turn that you use overland flight.