Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9033095" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Okay, so flying over swimming because swimming is less common. Why not ground-based movement? There are a bunch of different types of ground-based movement, and it is even more common and even bigger in the game than flight. So it should absolutely be changed to reflect that then, since we must change the rules of flight. But I find your last line interesting. You say the the "bigger issue is not the mechanics of movement but rather being in a substance.." Now, to me, that reads like for flight the biggest issue IS the mechanics of movement... but why is it an issue? I've been running these flight rules for nearly ten years without a single issue, so how is it an issue?So a knight with a lance is also a strafing run, because of the mechanics of a galloping horse. You can't just stop, and your weapon is pointed forward. In fact, have you ever once seen a galloping horse charging in a straight line, then just immediately stop without slowing down? Now, have you ever seen that happen in a DnD game? In fact, you could have your horse dash and gallop, hit someone, then immediately take a 90 degree turn to avoid trampling an innocent child and continue moving at full speed. At least, in DnD, I wouldn't recommend trying it IRL.But this whole argument misses the point. Again, strafing runs aren't the only possible thing you can do while flying. They are one of many techniques, and your rules do not offer any benefits for strafing that do not already exist, they offer penalties for not strafing.Two things. 1) If you can hit the dragon, then the strafing run was kind of pointless. The point of the strafe was to avoid being hit. If you can still be seen and hit after your strafing run, then you did something wrong.2) Instead of forcing dragons to do strafing runs or they fall out of the sky... um... why not just have the Topple Weapon Mastery which is essentially that felling strike ability? I mean, an ability to knock the target prone with an attack is better than that feat. Also, it was a feat, so just design a feat!Do dragons need nerfed? Because that is what you are talking about here. You are talking about reducing the mechanical abilities of dragons. And this concept of "lining up" sounds to me like "take a turn to..." which means that the dragon is going to have entire turns of doing nothing. Monsters can't afford to waste turns like this. Not for normal combats. Maybe for a cinematic combat where the dragon is 10 levels higher than the party and it can survive that sort of showboating,Really, it sounds to me like you just want an entirely different combat engine, which, I mean, good for you, but redesigning flight as a gateway into an entirely new combat system just seems like a lot of homebrew for little benefit for those of us who are quite happy with how flight is working.And I disagree, because every monster having unique movement mechanics sounds like a DMs nightmare.And some creatures can flyby and others can't, and some can hover and others can't. So we have the same differences in flight. But you want more. If it was just giving dragons the ability to dash while they use their breath weapon, I'd be all for that. But you are talking about a rule set change, not giving them an ability like pounce or goring charge which is literally "move X ft, then make a special attack" Also, horses and elephants can both trample. Do they both move in the same manner?</blockquote>

Verification