Swallow Whole and Fly = problem!?

[Creat]

Before I start: we are still using the 3.0 rules, but 3.5 input is still welcome

I had a situation recently where a small character with fly cast on him was swallowed whole after a large froglike creature (with improved grab and swallow whole) grabbed him with his improved grab. Now, he asked me about the creatures weight, which I had to guess (does anyone know where I can find information about weights of creature in general since it's rarely given?). So I set the weight to 1000 lb, which seemed reasonable. Now he started to fly up which he can do since the fly spell allows you to "carry aloft" your "maximum load plus any armor" you wear (quoted text is taken directly from the spells description).
Since his strength was somewhere at least 30 (Barbarian rage + Frenzy + Bull's Strength easily do that), probably even higher it was not a problem.
In the next round he cut his way out (upwards), so when he was through (with that much strength that doesn't take long) the frog fell down taking appropriate damage.

Now in the Main FAQ for DnD 3.0 there is a question dedicated to moving a grappled opponent on page 44 (it's too long so I'm not gonna post it here in the post but you can get it here) that suggest you can move an opponent if you win a grapple check. I've only found this after the gaming session so I didn't consider it then, but also why would winning a grapple check let the frog stay on the ground? After all something inside of him is lifting him up. And, imo after swallowing a character is still considered grappled (after all he can climb to the creatures mouth with a grapple check) but the swallowing creature isn't, right? So the creature can move and act normally. Now with fly should a swallowed character be able to move the creature it is in, even if he can't list it up? The rules presented in the FAQ say you need to be able to drag the creature you want to move around.

Now as far as I know I didn't overlook anything, but is that (supposed to be) possible that way? I know most monsters with swallow whole are larger (this one was given in the adventure I run, so it's kinda special) and therefore probably much heavier, so it would be much harder to carry aloft, but the dragging could still work...

How would you handle this? Would you just not allow it? I'd really like some input, especially if you can find anything in the rules that I missed or that seems to apply here (even though it was probably meant for some other context).

 

[dcollins]

No, that wouldn't work. You can't move something by flying inside it -- physically, the push from the wings is pushing down on the insides as you try to fly.

 

[Corlon]

well, this is magical energy and not wings propelling you.

I'd say yes, this is an interesting way to do things, not to mention cinematic!

I'd say grapple would be required to keep hold of something that was struggling while you were carrying it, so since there wasn't much resistance as the character was inside, I'd allow it.

I thought that you could only fly with your light carrying capacity, but maybe the spell is different...

 

[Creat]

I thought that you could only fly with your light carrying capacity, but maybe the spell is different...

I thought so too, but we looked it up and there it was, suprise on all sides but still

 

[sfedi]

I think you did it right.

Although I find the Swallow Whole rules ridiculous.
It's much more efficient (mechanically wise) to do other kinds of attacks instead of swallowing someone (which should be one of the more effective attacks, common sense wise)

 

[sfedi]

Although I'm not sure if you could take a Move Action while grappled...

 

[Creat]

original post deleted due to accidental double post

new post:

Although I'm not sure if you could take a Move Action while grappled...

Good point, so that's what I could have him do the grapple check for (and yes, you can't move while grappled unless you win an opposed grapple check according to 3.5 rules, and I know I read somewhere official that grappling hasn't changed but was only rephrased for clarification, don't remember where though)!
That's excellent, thank you!

 

[Creat]

I found another argument that would not allow him at all to fly up with the frog:
Let's say you (meaning your character) are in a moving train and cast fly on yourself. You would not expect to fly relative to the surrounding landscape but relative to the train. So casting fly allows you to fly in your current environment, which in this case would be the frogs digestive organs, so he could fly up pressing against the skin form the inside, it just wouldn't move the frog in any way.

at least I think this is reasonable

Although I find the Swallow Whole rules ridiculous.
It's much more efficient (mechanically wise) to do other kinds of attacks instead of swallowing someone (which should be one of the more effective attacks, common sense wise)

No it's alright. Because the moment you swallow someone you have all your natura attacks free again and most creatures who can swallow whole can also hold more than 1 medium-sized creature (usually at least 2). So you can attack the foes around you doing the damage you would've done to the now swallowed one (only if you hit them, of course) and still damage him every round, think of it as bonus damage. Also he usually needs a small slashing weapon to get out of there and can only use only small weapons in genera to attack in there which pretty much incapacitates most characters (spellcasting is completely impossible for spells that have somatic components, which is most spells). In other words: It easily reduces the number of enemies by (almost) disabling them.

 

[Rae ArdGaoth]

Let's say you (meaning your character) are in a moving train and cast fly on yourself. You would not expect to fly relative to the surrounding landscape but relative to the train. So casting fly allows you to fly in your current environment, which in this case would be the frogs digestive organs, so he could fly up pressing against the skin form the inside, it just wouldn't move the frog in any way.

Let's say my character is on a moving train and I cast fly. I would expect to move relative to the moving landscape, I would follow the rules of... well, nature. See, if that were possible, you could get on a train, start your fly spell, and hop off, flying at about twice your normal fly speed. Unless you want to say that the fly spell automatically adapts to your environment whenever it changes. Whatever you choose to rule!

 

[ThirdWizard]

Let's say my character is on a moving train and I cast fly. I would expect to move relative to the moving landscape, I would follow the rules of... well, nature. See, if that were possible, you could get on a train, start your fly spell, and hop off, flying at about twice your normal fly speed. Unless you want to say that the fly spell automatically adapts to your environment whenever it changes. Whatever you choose to rule!

Rotating, revolving planet. Oh wait, fantasy world! Darn that trump card!

But, I would still take inertia into account in the case of a moving object (lest their spell slam them against the nearest wall). I don't think this is a reason to allow/disallow the rules call in question, however, since your relative movement doesn't change how much you can carry.