Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GnomeWorks" data-source="post: 3877192" data-attributes="member: 162">I do, and they're really not that bad.In the game I'm currently running, I have two characters in mechs capable of flight. It comes up in every combat, and after awhile, you learn the table. It's really not that complex, and it provides granularity that I find appealing. For the most part, the players have a vague idea of what their mechs are capable of, and they only look things up on the table when they want to try something awkward (just like we look up bullrush, trip, and grappling).It would be nice if other aspects of aerial combat (for instance, you can AoO squares around you - what about the ones above you? Below you?) were cleaned up and actually written somewhere, rather than needing to be ad-hoc'd into existence, but it's not that much of a mental drain to do so. Not only that, but we have rules for movement along two axis, but none for three - again, I ad-hoc'd something that works, but it would be nice to have some written rules to rely on. The system is only lacking due to its unfinished nature, and that it's not integrate well into the rules - and those gaps are easily filled by extrapolation or ad-hoc judgments. It's not a perfect system, but it works.Aerial combat only really becomes a pain when distances need to be figured out on the fly. I just wing it, but it's still frustrating.</blockquote>