Why is flight considered a game breaker?

[Blackbrrd]

Permanent flying on a character using a bow with 50 range counters basically all monsters but flying ones. Most ranged mobs have a range of 5, 10 or 20. Some using a bow has a range of 40.

 

[Kingreaper]

I often hear of game breaking abilities being used in games. Stuff like open ended abilities, vague interpretations and clarifications, or even bizarre combination's of rules that create monstrosities. But there is one ability that leaves me scratching my head whenever I hear it being sited as a game breaker. That ability is flying.

I cannot fathom how people have difficulties with flying, unless for some reason the GM only uses ground-bound melee-only brutes with the mental capacity of an angry chihuahua in wide open featureless planes. It's not like you can't have encounters, puzzles, traps, and even entire "dungeons" in the sky.

Which the party members who CAN'T fly have to sit out, because, well, they can't get to them.

Or just have them indoors or under a canopy with a limited ceiling height.

So, flight isn't a problem when it can't be used?

Well, that was obvious.

Heck, even a few bows or a good old fashioned rock can help get things going in the right direction.

If the flying character has range penalties for their weapons, this can work. If not, then they can just use the same weapons, and stay out of range.

Note: Giving flying characters range penalties for their weapons makes perfect sense, because flying means you can't steady yourself. In fact, that's something I'll probably include if I ever make a homebrew that includes flying.

Actually, it could be an elegant solution to allow flight in pre-existing games.

Is it adapting the metagame that leaves people in a fluster?

Changing the game completely, to accommodate something only one player likely wants? It's a big ask.

Are people put off over climbing and jumping skills not being good enough?

Flying=auto-win vs. encounters other people have to invest resources into. Flying needs to get much more expensive.

Are the rules too much of a headache to keep track of?

Depends on the group, but a lot of the time, yes.

Flying during combat takes a lot of extra tracking. Instead of 2d tracking on a battlemap, you now have 3d tracking.

Is getting from point A to point B without having to get tangled up in the bushes some sort of deal breaker?

Meh, overland flight's not that bad. It's bad in some ways (it trivialises challenges for the flying character that are significant for the other characters) but it's very easily limited. And, if you're not using it in fights, doesn't need special measures to control.

Really, why is flying a problem?

Same reason having a character who can walk through walls, and burrow into and out of floors can be a problem.

 

[Desdichado]

I think that if you run enough superhero games, flying seems like a trivial problem.

That's my main problem with it. It's not tactical. Fly isn't a game breaker.

It's a genre-breaker. I don't play D&D to play Superheroes. That's what I've got my copy of Mutants & Masterminds for.

 

[TheNovaLord]

i thought the flying issue was why monsters lived in dungeons in fantasy worlds rather than in castles/keeps and above ground?

if you take away flying cos it makes the game tricky, it then makes living in dark grimy dungeons plain silly, when most monsters would live outside. Creatures would live in walled compounds as their is no gunpowder either!!

flying creature have lots of issues. for example being unconcious/immobilised/etc equals being dead, cos of the hard ground you hurtle towards (or sea, river, lake volcano, etc you fall into)

i think the issue is that flying doesnt fit the 4e rules very well (where everything is assumed to be on a flattish, battlemat)

 

[RangerWickett]

As an experiment I ran a campaign where the PCs all gained permanent flight (they met an orcish biomancer Santa Claus who was experimenting to make flying reindeer cavalry for a warlord).

If I were to take lessons from that experience and try to balance 'flight' as a game option, I would suggest something like:

• Make hovering very rare. Require fliers to move at least X squares or else descend. If a creature receives forced movement, they must save or else have to descend.
• Impose a significant penalty to attack rolls while airborne, like -5.
• Make flight strenuous. Perhaps it does HP damage each round. Make it a cost-benefit consideration, rather than just a broken power.

 

[Blackbrrd]

RangerWickett is said Orcish biomancer Santa Claus going to be used in your new Enworld adventure path?

 

[Dausuul]

i thought the flying issue was why monsters lived in dungeons in fantasy worlds rather than in castles/keeps and above ground?

if you take away flying cos it makes the game tricky, it then makes living in dark grimy dungeons plain silly, when most monsters would live outside. Creatures would live in walled compounds as their is no gunpowder either!!

So, bears hibernate in caves because they're scared of being attacked by eagles?

Caves are natural fortifications. That makes them a) useful against any type of attacker, not just flying ones, and b) not requiring time, technology, or opposable thumbs to build, which is why monsters from orcs to dragons like living in them. Undead live in crypts and tombs because, well, they're undead and that's what undead do. Drow live in the Underdark because the other elves kicked them off the surface.

There are lots of reasons why monsters live in dungeons. Defense against flying foes is a minor one.

i think the issue is that flying doesnt fit the 4e rules very well (where everything is assumed to be on a flattish, battlemat)

Flying has been a nuisance to me in every edition.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I am an infinitely bigger fan of balancing flight than of forbidding flight. It's a key part of the fantasy genre (pegasus, giant eagles, flying witches, airships, bird-people), and to get rid of it seems shortsighted to me.

Flight needs to be available, but I'm sympathetic to the cries of "it makes you un-hit-able in combat."

That's part of why I prefer a more abstract combat, where things like "reach" and "movement speed" and "range" aren't so codified. In FFZ, forex, flying creatures can be wailed on as much as anyone else, because if they're in the battle, they're in range of melee attacks (though they might not take as much damage from them as other critters). If they fly out of range, they have effectively fled the battle, and can't attack anything in the battle anymore (the battle is over, the flyer fled).

It's a gamist solution, to a large degree, but the simulationist solutions that D&D tries to impose generally don't work because, when emulating the real world, being able to blast something from high in the sky really is a powerful ability, which is why we have an Air Force, and why the flight in myth and legend was so potent (Pegasus or Giant Eagles = WIN).

To keep things playable, I'm okay going abstract on flight, which, in part, means going abstract on positioning in combat. Which I'm really okay with, not being a big fan of representational, simulationist combat to begin with.

 

[Cadfan]

Leatherhead- Its not about whether you "can't" have encounters that are challenging for flying characters. If that were the concern then flying wouldn't be available for characters at any levels at all, instead of the way it is now where flying is available for higher level characters. The issue is that a large category of challenges become irrelevant.

Its a question of how much is bypassed by flight, not whether everything is bypassed by flight. Obviously not everything is ruined. Just some things. For a lot of people, pretty important things.

 

[Dausuul]

I am an infinitely bigger fan of balancing flight than of forbidding flight. It's a key part of the fantasy genre (pegasus, giant eagles, flying witches, airships, bird-people), and to get rid of it seems shortsighted to me.

I find that flight isn't too big a deal as long as a) it's not available to the entire party, and b) it's a limited resource for the PCs who do have it.

If some of the party members can't fly, then the flying PCs can't just auto-win against melee brutes; you may be sailing serenely overhead lobbing spells, but your buddy is still down there getting pounded on. (Although this assumes your buddy can't just sit out the fight.) And if flight is a limited resource - you have to pay something to use it, or you only get X amount of use out of it per Y time period - then it no longer enables the flying PC to bypass whole classes of obstacles at will.