Plausable for an Ecl 0 flying race?

[Voldrath]

Soarlanti
Medium Humanoid (avian)
alignment: usualy chaotic good

Abilities: DEX: +4
CON: -2
INT: -2

Speed: 20' fly 40'(average)
Bite 1d6+STR
*2 Claw 1d3+1/2 str

weapon familiarity (bola)

Wings (EX): a soarlanti has wings instead of arms and thus no hands, though they can manipulate objects in a crude fashion with their clawed feet.

Inarticulate claws (EX): A soarlanti can grasp objects with it's feet though they are poorly designed for this purpose. they suffer a -4 penalty to skill and dexterity checks made with their feet. they also suffer a -4 penalty to attack rolls with a weapon thet requires a large degree of manual dexterity. exceptions include; crossbows, spears and other polearms, Battle spurs(spiked gauntlet) and a soarlanti variant of the bola.

Skills: +4 racial bonus to spot and search checks

* an earthbound soarlanti must use it's clawed feet for walking. it can not use it's feet to attack or manipulate objects in the same round it moves.





So what do you think? Most people would say that an ECL 0 flying race is crazy but i think the loss of working 'hands' is a suficiant counter ballance.

I am considering either lowering the fly speed to 40' or the maneuverability to poor.

Edit
Fly speed down to 40'
Added Battle spurs

 

[Tonguez]

S exceptions include; crossbows, spears and other thrusting polearms, and a soarlanti variant of the bola.

I agree that the No-Hands penalty is a major handicap and with the over penalties to this race is sufficient to make it ECL 0. I'm still having trouble picturing just how this creature can use thrusting polearms whilst flying and would infact imagine that slashing weapons are more viable

 

[Nightfall]

I think if you change the flight manuvering status to clumsy it might be better...but no real trouble for me.

 

[Coredump]

Hmmmm... I don't agree.

The +4 dex is much better than the loss of Con/Int.

The loss of hands is kind of a pain, but how much really?

They have a built in short sword.

The -4 to skills is kind of a pain, but the +2 from dex will counter some of those. Plus, with the -2 to Int, it will make skills less likely of a focus.

I could see playing a fighter, and specializing in unarmed attacks. Or perhaps a monk. Or a sorcerer. Even a Mage may work alright.

.

 

[Tonguez]

Hmmmm... I don't agree.

The +4 dex is much better than the loss of Con/Int.

The loss of hands is kind of a pain, but how much really?

They have a built in short sword.

The -4 to skills is kind of a pain, but the +2 from dex will counter some of those. Plus, with the -2 to Int, it will make skills less likely of a focus.

I could see playing a fighter, and specializing in unarmed attacks. Or perhaps a monk. Or a sorcerer. Even a Mage may work alright.

.

yeah but that Con and Int penalty is a pain for Wizards & Scorcerers d4-1 (eek!)

Fighters are effected by that -4 to attacks (but that depends on what the DM considers a large degree of manual dexterity - is swinging a all club that hard? (I'd say yes)

Monk could be cool...

 

[Voldrath]

I agree that the No-Hands penalty is a major handicap and with the over penalties to this race is sufficient to make it ECL 0. I'm still having trouble picturing just how this creature can use thrusting polearms whilst flying and would infact imagine that slashing weapons are more viable

Actualy the origional list was all polearms. I'm not shure how it got changed so I'll just fix that.

The loss of hands is kind of a pain, but how much really?

They have a built in short sword.

So we'll just tie shortswords to your hands and watch you muddle through a average day.

This got thrown together in a hurry bufore i went to work so I'll give a little more info. theyre apearance is similiar to that of prehistoric hunting birds except theyre built for flight instead of running( Or if youre a Final Fantasy fan immagine a raptorial flighted chocobo.). they range in collor from dusty-brown to grey, with males having a more redish hue. they live in deseart boardered mesa land with a spiritualistic tribe of gnomes. In return for arial scouting, hunting, and mutual defence the gnomes do things for them that they can't do for themselves. Many form close relationships with their gnomish partners whom they often serve as mounts. there is a larger mountain subspecies with a similiar though more reserved partnership with elves.

 

[Ferret]

What happens when they are stuck in a tunnel? In a fight! They become useless, but outside they are better then usually.

 

[Coredump]

yeah but that Con and Int penalty is a pain for Wizards & Scorcerers d4-1 (eek!)

Fighters are effected by that -4 to attacks (but that depends on what the DM considers a large degree of manual dexterity - is swinging a all club that hard? (I'd say yes)

Monk could be cool...

The -2 Int would be a pain, but the Con isn't really (wiz/sorc) they would not have d4-1, rather have d4+1 instead of d4+2. Now, being able to fly is really cool early/mid level. But is almost mundane at higher level.

The fighter would just choose to use a polearm or similar non-penalized weapon. And not sure how the lack of dexterity balances with a +4 dex bonus...

Now, how is a polearm used??? It is two handed, but they only have two feet? How do they weild a polearm, and still stand up?

Or as a fighter, I may just stick with using the beak. Sure only d6, but always out, etc.

.

 

[Tonguez]

The -2 Int would be a pain, but the Con isn't really (wiz/sorc) they would not have d4-1, rather have d4+1 instead of d4+2. Now, being able to fly is really cool early/mid level. But is almost mundane at higher level.

The fighter would just choose to use a polearm or similar non-penalized weapon. And not sure how the lack of dexterity balances with a +4 dex bonus...

Now, how is a polearm used??? It is two handed, but they only have two feet? How do they weild a polearm, and still stand up?

Or as a fighter, I may just stick with using the beak. Sure only d6, but always out, etc.

.

I agree that polearms are going to be more of a hindrance than anything for this creature - especially if its ever caught anywhere it can't fly (underground or amongst dense forest) - polearms are only really possible if it has open terrain and can dive (it HAS to fly to fight)

However modified gauntlets, daggers and even shortswords might be an option. I have a image in my head of this bird-like creature leaping off the ground and doing a backward sommersault with its slashing blades of death!

Actually some beleive (myself included) that Velociraptors (Deinonychus in the MM) et al were early avians (not true reptilian) - so imagine that this race is an evolved raptor and attacks accordingly (leaps up with slashing claws/daggers/swords etc) - maybe even allow them to take Pounce as a Feat

 

[Sir Whiskers]

A few points:

1) I recently allowed a player to run a flying character. 60 ft fly is far, far too good, as I found out to my dismay. I would suggest 30 feet, to keep him with the rest of the party. At most, 40 ft.

2) The race, as listed, cannot hover. This means that a flying character must take a move action every round. No full-round actions while flying, including spells that take more than one action to cast. This is a serious limitation if the character is going to be flying in combat.

3) As written, can this character even be a wizard or cleric? How would it handle components? What about handling other items, such as wands, rods, potions, etc? The more I look at it, a monk with Vow of Poverty may be the only really viable choice. A rather limited fighter (given the limited choice in weaponry) might also work.

4) Even if you end up with a balanced LA 0 flying race, it's a real pain to GM them - go into it with your eyes open.