D&D 5E Flying PCs

[Paul Farquhar]

Being the only flying character in a group is extremely deadly. It's easy to get separated and run into a group encounter solo.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I've recently started a campaign with a new group, that's perhaps a bit more character optimisation focused than I'm used to, and with a DM that's a bit more lassiez-faire. Two of the five PCs have turned out to be of races with a natural fly speed.

I'm playing a human artificer, focused on support etc, and honestly, it's not feeling like a level playing field. Flight is such an enormously powerful ability, it makes many encounters non-threatening (so long as you have a ranged attack), and trivialises many exploration challenges. And most races who have it, also have other abilities as well. WotC don't seem to weight it heavily, on the balance scale. Owlin for instance - flight AND free Stealth proficiency AND good darkvision? Honestly, if I were running a game these days I'd be very tempted to put a blackban on it, with a possible exception for things like the protector artificer or hadozee for who it is limited.

What experiences have other player/GMs had with flying PCs. Do you allow them in your games? Do they throw out the balance? Is your PC party full of fairies, aarakocra, owlin, and winged tieflings?

In most of the games I run, I do not generally allow them.
I would generally regard continuous flight as roughly of the same power level as resistance to damage.

 

[Oofta]

In most of the games I run, I do not generally allow them.
I would generally regard continuous flight as roughly of the same power level as resistance to damage.

If you allow them, have you had players with the same issues as the OP? What did you do, if anything, to help alleviate the issues?

 

[ad_hoc]

I don't like having them as PCs. Just doesn't have the right feel for me.

That said, unless the entire party flies encounters are still dangerous because some of the party are vulnerable.

It is similar to having a 25 AC character in a party. They're likely going to be the last PC to die, but they're still going to die when the rest of the party has been wiped out.

I think a great D&D adventure has varied challenges.

One thing I've noticed with "optimized" characters is that they do exceptionally well in their ideal scenario but they're in real trouble when faced with a challenge they weren't built for. To me D&D is all about those challenges and coming up with solutions.

I have noticed on optimization discussions that there is a strong attitude that a DM must cater challenges to the PCs strengths or they are a bad DM. Then they say the game is too easy.

 

[jgsugden]

Having flight is a bit like being stealthy - it is hard to get you with certain attacks, and you end up isolated and easily overpowered at times.

Let's say a monster force is going to come in and attack - making 8 attacks on the first round. If a PC is hidden, those 8 attacks will end up being split amongst the other PCs. The same is true if they are melee attacks and one PC is flying instead of being hidden.

On the flip side, if a PC takes to the sky and is up there by themself, it is entirely possible that their flight may make them an easy target for a group of flying enemies that gang up on the PC because it is isolated from allies that can't get to it to support it. A lone PC flying in the sky that ecounters a group of archer enemies may find an overwhelming number of arrows connecting with them ...

To these ends - I don't think about whether a PC in my game can fly. It has advantages and disadvantages ... PCs need to balance the risks and rewards nd decide how much risk they are willing to take.

Ah, but what about how it trivializes certain types of encounters? No need to leap across a pit. They can scout out wilderness areas, fly over forest fires, etc.... That, my friends, is cool. It makes the PC feel cool and special. Itis one of the things that make them heroes. Similar to a stealthy rogue that can spy, a wizard that can turn invisible, or a barbarian that can shrug off trap damage ... PCs that can do things other PCs can't do should not be lamented - they should be celebrated for the things that make them cool.

So what do I do? I run my party ability agnostic adventures and let the players and their characters celebrate their wins, struggle through the challe nges that him them harder, and feel like people adventuring in a world rather than players in a strategy game designed to balance both sides of the game.

 

[cbwjm]

We've had a bird person in a group I run in with flight, didn't seem all that disruptive, especially when we end up inside. Same with a mini campaign I ran with my home-brewed fairy class. It's actually quite fun as if he scouts a dungeon it means he misses traps that end up catching others.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Overall, I've found that it's largely not a problem. It seems like it should be, but in the end it nearly always isn't an issue. I've seen a few instances where flying was really useful, but in the aggregate, it really hasn't been much better than having a character with Athletics proficiency and a rope.

In general, most flying races have some inherent limitations on natural flight. Several flying PC races have to use their arms to maintain flight, meaning they can't use ranged weapons or cast spells. However, the real limitation is that basically nobody with winged flight has hover while naturally flying. That's potentially a significant limitation.

The first key to remember is that flying makes you a huge target. You can't easily hide, and you have no cover and little concealment. In most cases, flying is incredibly dangerous because it's very much not subtle. Think how often you notice flying insects compared to those on the ground, or birds in the air compared to those in the trees. You're exposed when you're flying.

It can be obnoxious in situations where the NPCs don't have any ranged weapons, but I just haven't seen that that is a big issue very often.

IMO, my biggest dissatisfaction isn't the balance of it. It's the realism. There are no rules on the aeronautical limitations of nonmagical flight. Like this is all it says for fly speeds for players:

Flying creatures enjoy many benefits of mobility, but they must also deal with the danger of falling. If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as by the fly spell.

And this is it for monsters:

A monster that has a flying speed can use all or part of its movement to fly. Some monsters have the ability to hover, which makes them hard to knock out of the air. Such a monster stops hovering when it dies.

Well... how far do they have to move forward to maintain level flight if they can't hover? How quickly can they turn? How quickly can they climb or descend? How much room do they need for their wings? Earlier editions had rules just for this. Yeah, the 3e maneuverability chart sucked, but what do we get instead in 5e? Nothing. The game almost treats it like everything has old-school perfect maneuverability. It's frustrating just how little guidance there is here. It's definitely simple, but it's also pretty dumb.

A strict reading says that all hover does is prevent you from falling if you're knocked prone or incapacitated, but in the past we've ruled otherwise and basically made people average maneuverability. That's significantly more restrictive than the RAW for flight, but I liked it a lot better.

 

[Clint_L]

I don't allow them because they are overpowered at low levels and a pain in the butt, but also because I just think they are kind of dumb looking and annoy me at an aesthetic level.

Edit: note that I use miniatures a lot.