Level Up (A5E) Why is non-magical flying so limited for PCs?

[Micah Sweet]

Those are very valid points, but I also found both as a player and as a DM that concentration spells are often quite bad.
Take Insect Swarm for instance: on paper it's great, but you cannot direct it, so once the enemy moves out (i.e. next round) what's the point of maintaining the concentration? So that the area is "barren"?
Same thing for wall of fire and many others.
Now, if I could move them I'd be ok with them requiring concentration, but like this I find them terrible spells.
Regarding many buffs, I very seldom managed to cast them with a paladin, for instance, since you're supposed to go in melee, and you roll for concentration every time you get hit. Even when I wasn't hit or did manage to maintain concentration, the actual "buffing power" of many of those spells is quite underwhelming given the risk of just burning a spell slot. I got some marginally better use of them with a ranged cleric, but just barely.

My main gripe with many of those buffs is that they often require concentration, have a short duration AND require an action to cast. This combination of factors makes them very unappealing IMO for a melee caster like a paladin, since the action cost is steep, the chances of losing concentration considerable, the duration relatively short (so you can't cast them much in advance), and the buff one gets out of all this is often quite mild.

Yeah, the game is at that point, unintentionally or not, telling you not to use those spells. Seems like that's not a message you want to send.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You hit the nail on the head, at least for me.

Can I deal with innate flight? Yes, of course.
Do I want to deal with innate flight? No, absolutely not.

It makes my job harder, without many positives for the game as a whole. Really, the question should be: how does innate flight make for better gameplay?

To me the main positive is, "beings with flight make sense in the world and are consistent with other creatures with flight from a similar source".

 

[Micah Sweet]

You hit the nail on the head, at least for me.

Can I deal with innate flight? Yes, of course.
Do I want to deal with innate flight? No, absolutely not.

It makes my job harder, without many positives for the game as a whole. Really, the question should be: how does innate flight make for better gameplay?

Gameplay is not the only consideration, or even necessarily the most important one in every circumstance. At this point it's just a matter of preference.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Or uses many monsters or animals. Take a look at the MM, there are LOTS of things in their that have neither a ranged attack nor the ability to fly.

So why force the dms to use only a fraction of the book in order to challenge their PCs? The answer simply...you shouldn't, which is why fly is limited.

Again, why are we assuming every PC has flight?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Permanent house rule in my game, 5th level casters (aka when martials get 2nd attack) can maintain concentration on two spells. One concentration check is made, on a failure both spells are lost.

Used it in 3 campaigns so far, never seen a single problem with it.

Good one. I'm putting it in my house rule book.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I long for a group with only one caster...

Me, after we've done group worldbuilding: OK, so we've decided that magic is going to be uncommon, because the nobility have the legal monopoly on wizard spells and for a very long time have been oppressing all other forms of spellcasters. Except for artificers, which they've allowed to make them magical creature comforts. Take that into consideration when you make your characters.

The Party: Bard, warlock, sorcerer, wielder, rogue.

I'd love to know what your response was to that!

 

[Micah Sweet]

It’s not that there aren’t solutions, it’s that:

1. Some GMs shirk at the idea of always trying to adapt their worlds to negate an advantage a player has because it makes the world seem less organic.

2. It sort of cheats the player out of their bonus if the Narrator is constantly working to negate it, like if a character invests in high AC and then the Narrator constantly uses saving throws instead.

3. Designers have to design with all tables in mind. And as I’ve mentioned before, this is a very different conversation from a designer vs. Narrator point of view.

If flight is common enough amongst the special forces set, folks would design against it. And verisimilitude is maintained.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm with Xiphumor on those answers, Noodohs...

But I'd also like to note that your "Solution" doesn't include problem number 1 or problem number 3 while insulting anyone who has those problems through your dismissiveness over the matter.

I'm glad you're able to perfectly handle and convey 3 dimensional combat to your players without any kind of issues, but it doesn't work that way for everyone.

So that means the game should design against it? I thought Level Up was advanced 5e. To me that means in part an assumption that DMs and players are interested in something deeper than WotC's version.

 

[Steampunkette]

For my part? I'm absolutely fine with one of my players having outright at-will constant flight. I've played Hackmaster plenty.

I don't mind a game with a pixie fairy flying around the entire time, bypassing traps and hazards, finding ways to aggravate enemies, and adding an additional layer of complexity to the game. It's -fun- to allow that and have that at the table. Because the REST of the party still has to get across (usually)

But from a game design standpoint it does make sense to limit things, somewhat, because of the aforementioned points.

For -my- part..? I'd have gone a different way to limiting the power of flying characters by instead:

1) Make carrying stuff really hard.
No bulky items, half carrying capacity, can only carry a willing creature of your size within your weight limit or a smaller creature that is unwilling.

Doesn't really mess up Sneaks and Casters, but we'll get to them soon. It does mean that your flying character can't swoop-n'-drop enemies as a common solution. It also means flying characters can be martial types, but probably won't be the party's pack-mule.

2) Stealth is so hard, you guys.
Disadvantage on stealth checks while flying.

Wingbeats make sound. Constant sound. You can stand still to avoid making noise but hovering still requires lift. Add on any kind of armor and equipment getting jostled by the motions... it's rough. This brings down the utility of constantly flying sneakytypes and casters since they're basically announcing where they are through big wingbeats, humming from their fairy wings, or the wooshy noises that accompany spells keeping you aloft. A flying sneakytype can still use flight to get somewhere to hide, but it's hard to stay hidden while flying.

3) Smallbois only
No medium or large flying heritages.

This alone would stop a lot of shenanigans and weirdness while also creating an expectation for flying characters. Of course a medium or large creature can cast spells that grant flight, but it wouldn't be innate. Though the above two penalties would apply to a character using flying magic.

So that means the game should design against it? I thought Level Up was advanced 5e. To me that means in part an assumption that DMs and players are interested in something deeper than WotC's version.

"Deeper" does not mean "Unbalanced"

Flight carries a lot of perks. Having some downsides to at-will flight to keep flying characters in line with characters who don't have flight while also helping to avoid Narrator overwork is not "Less Advanced" somehow.

 

[Faolyn]

I'd love to know what your response was to that!

A dramatic sigh and a hefty reminder that this is going to be the squishiest party ever.

They're pretty good at remembering to sneak around--I just have to hope that they remember running away is an option.

Again, why are we assuming every PC has flight?

Exactly! At most a party is going to have one, maybe two flying PCs. If everyone in the party can fly, then the Narrator might want to shift to a sky-based game going on, with cloud cities and flying monsters, or at least creatures riding flying monsters, and sky-based exploration challenges.

I don't really think that flying would trivialize exploration as much as people fear it would.

If the party is on a journey, then a flying PC takes the Scout option, leaving the land-based party to do other things. If they use flying to get around exploration challenges, that's also written into the rules--they don't get the XP and they miss out on any potential boons.

At most, the flying person might get advantage on some Scout checks, if the ground below is particularly open, like a desert or grassland. But likewise, they would get disad if the ground was covered, like with a forest.