D&D 5E On fairies and flying

[iserith]

Maybe the armor rule is about freedom of wing movement instead of weight? I could see a Dm rule it like that.

Then that DM can only blame themselves when flying PCs ferry non-flying PCs across their river crossing challenges!

 

[Bolares]

Then that DM can only blame themselves when flying PCs ferry non-flying PCs across their river crossing challenges!

Meh, there are ways to make that crossing challenging. If I allow flying races in my table, it's my job to challenge them. Make it windy when tey are crossing... Also, all the flying races we've seen are small, and ferrying a big fighter in heavy armor may no be possible because of the carrying rules.

 

[Cadence]

Yes, it's true that they make no distinction, but that just leaves space for a reasonable ruling. Why would a DM rule that the flying PC, despite being unable to wear medium or heavy armor and still fly, can just pick up a cumbersome non-flying PC with no issue, then complain that flying PCs are beating all their river crossing challenges?

Then that DM can only blame themselves when flying PCs ferry non-flying PCs across their river crossing challenges!

Why is it significantly more preferable for a DM to allow a PC race choice, and then turn around and change the rules to nerf one of the main abilities of the race instead of just not allowing it?

 

[Cadence]

Meh, there are ways to make that crossing challenging. If I allow flying races in my table, it's my job to challenge them. Make it windy when tey are crossing... Also, all the flying races we've seen are small, and ferrying a big fighter in heavy armor may no be possible because of the carrying rules.

I can imagine the debate... it's well under a minute to cross that pass, and I can cast reduce a bunch of times and carry all three of you. What's the worst that could happen?

(As an aside, why does reduce give disadvantage on strength checks and weapon damage when going from medium to small, when simply being small to start doesn't?)

 

[iserith]

Meh, there are ways to make that crossing challenging. If I allow flying races in my table, it's my job to challenge them. Make it windy when tey are crossing... Also, all the flying races we've seen are small, and ferrying a big fighter in heavy armor may no be possible because of the carrying rules.

Yes, for sure. This is just an example of DMs ruling in a way that makes flying PCs more effective, then complaining that they're now too effective. This was also revealed in another thread a while back on exploration challenges. When we dig into why people are taking issue with something, we can see a lot of DMs are just very handwavy and loose with the rules, ruling way on the side of making certain things too effective, then pointing the finger at something other than themselves as the culprit.

Why is it significantly more preferable for a DM to allow a PC race choice, and then turn around and change the rules to nerf one of the main abilities of the race instead of just not allowing it?

No rules are being changed here. The carrying capacity rules make no distinction between walking and flying. Fine. But perhaps the matter of carrying a non-flying PC across a river or whatever isn't really one of carrying capacity. Maybe it's just as cumbersome as wearing medium or heavy armor which means no flight is possible. There is space for a ruling here and, if one is inclined to have a lot of river crossing challenges as it seems some DMs in this thread are, then there's a solution - don't rule in a way that makes the flying PC more effective than they already are at certain challenges.

 

[Bolares]

Here's my philosophy (that no one asked for): I don't like saying no to character ideas (unless they are really dissonant with the campaign themes), so if a player wants to play a flier I'd allow it. In the lower levels I'd adapt some of the challanges to account for their flying. I say some and not all because I want the player to feel smart and usefull, so if they trivialize some encounters because of flying, GREAT, the table is generally happy about that. That can't happen all the time, because I have to challenge the characters... but that's true for every player and every character option.

 

[Scott Christian]

I'm not sure what you gain by making a claim nobody disagrees with repeatedly. Yes, some DMs will have a problem with flying PCs outside of thematic concerns - some are even emotional about it by the looks of it. That some DMs have a problem with flying PCs seems to be what the thread is about since the first post. The question is why and what to do about it.

To that I say: The problem is mitigated if the DM works on how to create and present challenges with the possibility of flying PCs in mind. Also, it's worth examining in my view how the DM thinks about challenge and difficulty as concepts in general. Building on what you are saying, is it actually a problem in general that players can position their characters to overcome a challenge with no ability check or resource expenditure?

Why and How, indeed.
This is where we actually disagree. I have stated that for some campaigns, your "how" to deal with it might lead the player to think it is a game of tit-for-tat where they feel targeted. This is especially true if only one PC is able to fly. That is why I gave the examples. But, let me try one more time.
Party of four. One flying. Searching for some lost tomb in the desert.

• Scene 1: Navigation of desert terrain to find the canyon that the tomb is in. Much easier with a flyer.
• Scene 2: Bizarre sand trolls that hunt from on top of the chasm. They toss big rocks down. That's how they kill their food. Pretty easy for a flyer to stay above them.
• Scene 3: Crazy sand worm or scorpions that burrow into the sand and pop out. Flyer stays out of range.
• Scene 4: A steep canyon wall climb to get to the hidden door. Flyer does it no problem.
• Scene 5: Small cave entrance with an iron door. Party huddled inside the door which is trapped. The flyer is just hanging outside the cave.
• Scene 6: Inside finally. The flyer's potential in an Egyptian style tomb is negated for the next four or five scenes.

So the flyer can dismiss half of them. That is a lot. Now, of course any DM can make sure there are stirges next to the scorpions, and the trolls have small rocks too (for whatever reason), and there is always a sandstorm in the distant that makes navigation by air impossible, and the door explodes with gas that just happens to reach the flyer. But, if a DM did do all of that, the flyer might feel targeted.

I don't know. This is just a quick example. But, it demonstrates my point. The "how" a DM handles the flyer, even when doing it right, might still come out as negatively perceived.

 

[iserith]

Why and How, indeed.
This is where we actually disagree. I have stated that for some campaigns, your "how" to deal with it might lead the player to think it is a game of tit-for-tat where they feel targeted. This is especially true if only one PC is able to fly. That is why I gave the examples. But, let me try one more time.
Party of four. One flying. Searching for some lost tomb in the desert.

• Scene 1: Navigation of desert terrain to find the canyon that the tomb is in. Much easier with a flyer.
• Scene 2: Bizarre sand trolls that hunt from on top of the chasm. They toss big rocks down. That's how they kill their food. Pretty easy for a flyer to stay above them.
• Scene 3: Crazy sand worm or scorpions that burrow into the sand and pop out. Flyer stays out of range.
• Scene 4: A steep canyon wall climb to get to the hidden door. Flyer does it no problem.
• Scene 5: Small cave entrance with an iron door. Party huddled inside the door which is trapped. The flyer is just hanging outside the cave.
• Scene 6: Inside finally. The flyer's potential in an Egyptian style tomb is negated for the next four or five scenes.

So the flyer can dismiss half of them. That is a lot. Now, of course any DM can make sure there are stirges next to the scorpions, and the trolls have small rocks too (for whatever reason), and there is always a sandstorm in the distant that makes navigation by air impossible, and the door explodes with gas that just happens to reach the flyer. But, if a DM did do all of that, the flyer might feel targeted.

I don't know. This is just a quick example. But, it demonstrates my point. The "how" a DM handles the flyer, even when doing it right, might still come out as negatively perceived.

I could write a bunch of examples that prove my point, too. But where would that leave us?

 

[Scott Christian]

I could write a bunch of examples that prove my point, too. But where would that leave us?

I know there are examples on your side. There are also tables where the flying character would expect the DM to go out of their way to target them because they fly. And there are tables where the DM would construct challenges that could be overcome with flying. And in all those cases - the tables would be happy.

But there are tables where thematically it is a struggle. There are tables where the player feels like they are being picked on if the DM adjusts encounters. And there are tables where DMs might not know how to adjust or deal with the flying PC. And, as per carrying rules, there are some players that would find the DM's ruling as immersion breaking. And in all those cases - the table might not be happy.

So when someone says, flying can be problematic. And your rebuttal is: Why are they designing encounters so "flat" or "undynamic," or you come to these types of conclusions:

When we dig into why people are taking issue with something, we can see a lot of DMs are just very handwavy and loose with the rules, ruling way on the side of making certain things too effective, then pointing the finger at something other than themselves as the culprit.

From your tone and words, it seems as if you believe the DM is the most likely culprit of table difficulty concerning flying. But, I just as that you consider that maybe it's not the DM, but the actual rule and power within the low level structure of the game that is the problem.

You see, you keep asking "why" is flying a problem. And when someone points out the dozens of reasons now given, you dismiss them and state they are not problems. So why ask "why?"

What to do about it? That is a good question. Let's try this:
Accept the fact that it is a problem for certain tables thematically. What to do about it if there is a player that really has their heart set on a flying PC?
Accept the fact that some DMs use resource management as a way to increase the tension in the game. Yet the flying PC allows those drained resources to keep the tension low. What to do about it?
Accept the fact that the DM has now adjusted several encounters in a row. They are clearly tweaked to make sure the flying PC can't get away with their fly up and shoot arrows stunt. Now they feel as though their PC is targeted. What to do about it?

 

[Mecheon]

So the flyer can dismiss half of them. That is a lot. Now, of course any DM can make sure there are stirges next to the scorpions, and the trolls have small rocks too (for whatever reason), and there is always a sandstorm in the distant that makes navigation by air impossible, and the door explodes with gas that just happens to reach the flyer. But, if a DM did do all of that, the flyer might feel targeted.

The problem is moreso we're getting into the deeper mess of player character specialities

Like, let's take this tomb example. In the tomb there's writing that can onyl be read by one player, so only they are able to do the typical tomb puzzles to get through, and anyone else is just going to flounder about. Its the same situation, someone having something that lets them completely negate challenges. In the temple you've just switched who's potential is being shown from "The flier" to "The one who put all of his points into knowledge skills". Likewise the moment you get into town and oh no, its politics time, flier and knowledge guy aren't very useful, but the Diplomancer who has every charisma thing possible and also went into Changeling for more mischief? Oops, literately every possible challenge here is also negated. Or you're in the wilderness? Oops, the Ranger, Druid or Outlander just negated everything to a debatably worse degree.

Problems really should be designed around the party they're being thrown at. We're playing D&D here, not Skyrim, so stuff can be edited. Just because you've heard some super optimised team can take down the Tarrasque at level 1 doesn't mean you'll start throwing Tarrasques at every group

(Also just saying, on point 5? The party's not making good decisions if they're huddling around the door not expecting a trap. Sounds like the flier's the only smart one in the party by not hanging around the kind of obvious trap. Iron's a bit of a dead giveaway in the desert. You send up the scoutiest character to set the line and check for the trap, then everyone else comes up)

Accept the fact that some DMs use resource management as a way to increase the tension in the game. Yet the flying PC allows those drained resources to keep the tension low. What to do about it?

Consider it the party's resources, not the player's resources. If someone's plonking away with arrows at a distance, it means the rest of the party is spending more resources to deal with that.