Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 4017136" data-attributes="member: 704">You balance these things based on the following:1)  you consider only the ramifications as they relate to combat2)  you consider how often the ability can be used in a game situation3)  you consider how that ability interacts with the rest of the PC party.4)  you consider when you want that new ability to enter the gameIn the case of Flying vs Extra Damage, here is what i would take into account.-  Flying will negate terrain based obstacles and allow the combatant to avoid melee with non flying opponents     - Flying does not make you invincible, ranged weapons still matter     - Flying does not help you if you are indoors     - Flying only offers a direct tactical benefit in combat if you are retreating, or if you can engage in effective long ranged combat     - The combat advantages of flight can be negated by the same things that negate the combat advantages of ranged combat.  You need a line of sight (or useful area of effect) to be effective.     - If the effect is tied to a duration, it can be defeated by a retreat and regroup on the part of the enemy.- Extra damage for a fighter is something that fighter can use essentially every time he makes an attack.     - Negating extra damage can be achieved if the damage is tied to a particular weapon or mode of combat.  If your facing a character with weapon mastery, disarming him can cause significant problems.     - That aside, having extra damage is something that will essentially always help.     - Otherwise, you can negate extra damage by any means that negates the ability of an opponent to attack.     - The signifigance of the extra damage is dependant on how often the fighter can hit you, and how much that extra damage impacts your hitpoints.     - The presence of extra damage on the part of a particular opponent generally will not force you to alter the way you combat that opponent, unless his attacks are likely to prove deadly to you.     - If the an opponents attacks are going to 1 shot you anyway, extra damage is not really worth worrying about.Conclusion:Flying is primarily effective as a defensive means, and as a means to force an opponent to use potentially suboptimal tactics to fight you.  The advantage can be negated with some effort, and can be greatly exploited if the means are available.  Balancing that against extra damage that is nearly always going to be useful is not too difficult if your have some idea of exactly how useful flying will be.  As a flat out general case, I would place flying as being comparable to a damage bonus of +3 or +4 (assuming similar durations).Is that balance going to be meaningful in every game of D&D ever played?  Hell no!  But it is a starting point.  Flying is the sort of thing a clever player can use to make a DM's life very difficult.  But once the DM starts throwing archers with composite bows and weapon specialization against it, the irritation goes away.  But Damage is the sort of thing that does not really take too much creative thought to exploit.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

Verification