Fly is out?

[Jhaelen]

IMO a totally unneeded nerfing. Fly was not hard to deal with and it didn't break my game in the slightest.

Emphasis mine. Why does everyone seem to think a change is a bad idea simply because they've found their own solution for the problems it caused? Nobody said it wasn't possible to deal with Fly in the past. I still consider it a good thing if I don't have to deal with it for a longer period.

Is a good rule suddenly a bad one because someone else thought of it before?
Is good advice suddenly bad because you no longer need it?

 

[Incenjucar]

Anyone who thinks Fly doesn't completely change things isn't familiar with City of Heroes.

Once you have flight, everything needs flight, or your ceilings have to be low in all of your adventures.

Otherwise it just becomes a game of "drop the boulder."

 

[Falling Icicle]

I agree that Fly needed to be nerfed, but they went too far. 10th level would be reasonable for this spell, and as an encounter power rather than a daily, IMHO. Keep in mind, people can get magic carpets and hippogriffs. There's no good reason for a fly spell at that high level to suck so badly.

And what about creatures? Am I supposed to never, ever even consider allowing Avariel or other winged characters in the game?

 

[Scarbonac]

So...flying before 16th level is bad, but teleporting around the landscape at first level is OK?

 

[WhatGravitas]

IMO a totally unneeded nerfing. Fly was not hard to deal with and it didn't break my game in the slightest. The only challenge and I hesitate to call it one, is realizing you have to put in the adventure foes that have flight or decent ranged combat if you want the wizard to be threatened.

That basically shows, that you're ingrained in the D&D-specific assumptions. Last summer, a friend of mine ran a game as DM, but he has played much less D&D than I have.

My wizard (5th-level) flew off and peltered hobgoblins with fireballs, wiping out his encounter with ease.

He was completely overwhelmed, how easy that encounter was for my wizard - because he assumed a more generic fantasy world for D&D, not the specific D&D world - i.e. more Merlin than Elminster.

So...flying before 16th level is bad, but teleporting around the landscape at first level is OK?

That's a presentation problem: Teleporting 5 squares (25 ft.) is much less powerful than flying at 40 ft. for five minutes (which adds up to 4000 ft. of circumvented terrain, about 3/4 of a mile... talk about climbing a mountain and doing that with a fey step). But teleporting is flashier.

Cheers, LT.

 

[Falling Icicle]

It seems to me that 4e is shaping up to be a "No you can't" type of game. Please tell me I'm wrong.

 

[Incenjucar]

So...flying before 16th level is bad, but teleporting around the landscape at first level is OK?

Gravity makes all the difference.

--

Falling: Your wizard can fly plenty for 1000gp.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

It seems to me that 4e is shaping up to be a "No you can't" type of game. Please tell me I'm wrong.

It's "No you Can't" depend on that crappy munchkin playstyle.

 

[Darth Cyric]

So...flying before 16th level is bad, but teleporting around the landscape at first level is OK?

Once per encounter and 5 squares if you're an Eladrin.

3 squares only if you're a Warlock with Fey Pact, and you have to set it up pretty well.

Neither of those is in any way comparable to 4e Fly.

 

[hong]

It seems to me that 4e is shaping up to be a "No you can't" type of game. Please tell me I'm wrong.

It's more like "Yes you can" with the proviso that noone is a spellcaster.

What?