D&D 5E (2014) On fairies and flying

[Paul Farquhar]

Do you find that PCs have a tougher time against more mobile enemies?

Some of them do, certainly. It depends on how good they are at tactics and anticipation. Not all players are good at tactics.

When I'm a player (which isn't very often) I try to plan for "what happens if the enemy does X", but that is me.

 

[Argyle King]

Two thoughts I had while reading through this thread:

1) What thoughts do people have when one race has a swim speed in a naval campaign?

2) I think an interesting experiment/adventure would be a series of rooms which have various effects on movement.
•Room A: Zero-Grav, everyone can move as though they can fly/hover in 3 planes of movement.
•Room B: 2D Room; everyone is restricted to one plane of movement - either the width or depth of the room.

For Room B: Perhaps there's some method for an individual to change which plane their movement can exist in. Minor-Action to make either a Charisma-based Arcana or Charisma-based Athletics check to push your 3-Dimensional self through a 2D room. If successful, you can change which aspect of the room's area (width or depth) you can use for movement. Ranged attacks and spells are likewise limited.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

In my game it's fairly common for PCs to move "up a tree" if the action takes place in a forest. I see a lot more climb speed PCs than flying PCs. I've only seen one flying PC (a variant tiefling) and they didn't get past 1st level, as they flew up into the attic of the Saltmarsh House and got swarmed by the stirges that live there. As pointed out early on, being a flyer is a dangerous occupation.

My players have recently been to the Astral plane, where everyone can move in 3 dimensions. It really didn't make much difference.

 

[Argyle King]

My players have recently been to the Astral plane, where everyone can move in 3 dimensions. It really didn't make much difference.

That's odd to me.

I believe it, but I find it to be odd. Part of why it's odd to me is because (on a personal level) I find mobility to be both useful (from the PC side of things) and highly undervalued (from the monster and CR side of things). Another part of why it's odd to me is because of the group I'm accustomed to playing D&D with; over the years flight (as well as teleportation) has been involved in a lot of borderline-gamebreaking schemes.

On the other hand, I remember being in an AL game -in a group with one of the other guys from the home group- and working in tandem with both characters on a horse to pretty easily handle an encounter. IIRC, it was against some sort of plant creatures in the Strahd adventure.

We also came up with ideas like using crossbows as a 2-man team to speed up loading and firing.

Both seemed to be frowned upon by the DM.
I had thought both were reasonable tactics -as well as being within the realm of what's possible in real life, even before magic and fantasy are added.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I believe it, but I find it to be odd.

When everyone can move in 3 dimensions, no one can. Same as underwater. You only have mobility advantage if you are more mobile than whatever you are fighting.

Most PCs have mobility advantage over a gelatinous cube. Unless the room is 20 ft. square or less.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

We also came up with ideas like using crossbows as a 2-man team to speed up loading and firing.

I would certainly allow a fighter to attack twice if he had a squire hand him a second crossbow pre-loaded.

 

[Remathilis]

Because it’s fun. Because it’s a challenge. Because it’s there. Because it’s what your friends are doing. Because it lets you be creative. Because it’s a puzzle.

It feels unearned. I guess I still have my head in the old-school way of gaming. It’s about the risk and the challenge and seeing if your character can survive despite the low stats and hit points. Zero to hero.

If your PC isn't trying to kill giant rats with a rusty dagger and then dying of disease 1d6 hours later, are you REALLY playing D&D?

 

[overgeeked]

If your PC isn't trying to kill giant rats with a rusty dagger and then dying of disease 1d6 hours later, are you REALLY playing D&D?

If I have to choose between incredibly harsh challenges coupled with random, arbitrary death and "LOL! Faceroll! Nothing's challenging and I win again"...I'll choose the harsh challenges every time.

 

[Mind of tempest]

If I have to choose between incredibly harsh challenges coupled with random, arbitrary death and "LOL! Faceroll! Nothing's challenging and I win again"...I'll choose the harsh challenges every time.

would not something between be far more tasty and satisfying?

 

[Scott Christian]

It's not tit-for-tat, because those things where always there. The nazgul always had access to flying mounts, Saruman always had a dungeon, the dark lord always had crebain, giant vampire bats and who knows what other flying minions he could have thrown at a flying fellowship.

If the party travels by land the have land-based encounters, if they travel by sea the have sea based encounters, if they travel by air they have air based encounters.

It's no different to a dungeon, where the party can choose the left passage, the right passage, or straight ahead. Whatever they choose they will likely have different but roughly equivalent encounters.

I hear you, and you are correct. But you are leaving out the mix of encounters, and that's where it becomes tit-for-tat.

If you have a party travelling by air, sure they encounter flying things. You build encounters around that. You have sea encounters on the water. But when you have one that can fly and the others can't, constantly throwing a wrench at the single flying party member so they too have an encounter looks like tit-for-tat. It does not look like a natural encounter.
Here are some examples:

• A party travelling encounters a gelatinous cube in the swamp. Now, in order to make it fair, there just happens to be a tree full of stirges as well. The stirges just happen to be at the same location.
• A party travelling through a desert encounters a sand golem. Now, in order to make it fair, the sand golem is modified and able to throw sand-hands or something just as silly at the flying PC.
• The party travelling across a fjord are ambushed by a sahuagin patrol. Now, in order to make it fair, there just happens to be a priest with them, so they have a range over 60'.
• The party travelling through the forest comes across jackalweres. Now, in order to make it fair, the DM extends the jackalware's sleep gaze to 60 or 100 feet.
• The party travelling through a huge, high cavern of some ancient race comes across a large group of grimlocks. Now, in order to make it fair, the cavern ceiling is lowered to 8' so the grimlocks can actually hit the flying PC.

Again, I am not saying it destroys the game or creates a giant imbalance. But all of these examples, which are level one encounters, now look as though they are built for one player, and one player only. As opposed to being more organic or natural. That has a tendency to make the player wish they never would have taken flying in the first place. You could create the same examples for skill checks, traps, and navigation.