| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
We really need robust flying rules that integrate well into the action economy sequence and other systems like mounted combat.
Some details:
- distinctions between supernatural flying (like wraiths, or fly spells) and wing-based flying. Going straight up or down or hovering in place could be trivially easy for a guy using a fly spell, or a supernatural flier like a wraith, but for a giant eagle or a dragon, not so much.
- fly skill checks and the results of success or failure, or even critical successes or failures, need to be spelled out.
- maneuverability should translate into things like turning radius and dodging missile attacks, or even advantages or disadvantages in aerial combat and strafing runs or flyby attacks.
- facing from one round to the next should be tracked. A critter with poor maneuverability shouldn't be able to do a full 180° direction switch from one turn to the next.
- flying under your own steam and being mounted on a flying creature should yield similar results, but there are a number of specific issues that deserve consideration.
IMHO, this is not a niche issue. Flying in a fantasy game is a frequently used trope that deserves a robust treatment.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flying becomes so ubiquitous at mid to high levels that I'd actually prefer to have the flying rules stripped down to some bare essentials. Making a fly check every single round just to be able to act is a lot of dice being thrown for not a lot of fun in game. Fly checks to do things like turn 90degrees, hover, or anything similar, are all frustrating to deal with round after round. Facing doesn't exist in the rest of the game, and it probably shouldn't exist in flying either.
So: way fewer fly checks, fewer restrictions on flying movement, fewer wing vs. magical flying special cases, and maybe even removing the fly skill entirely (acrobatics can sub in if needed).
I know this eats into the simulationist aspects of the game, but 3d combat is complicated enough already, and this is an easy place to simplify things.
I think I agree with the idea of less rules for this. Especially facing. I worry that this would open up a dangerous precedent for combat, as facing in all regards has always been ignored; Characters have 360 degree vision, and face all directions at once.
So keep it simple, No facing in the game. I do think that maybe removing certain checks for magical flying might work though. Limiting movement actions based on fly type doesn't sound like the right answer, as I would think a level 20 character with maximum dexterity and full ranks (however skills work in this) in "Fly" would be able to do a flip, even if their movement was "poor".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flying made simple:
- fly skill checks and the results of success or failure, or even critical successes or failures, need to be spelled out.
Fly should have never been its own skill. At very most it should have been a function of the acrobatics skill.
I know this eats into the simulationist aspects of the game, but 3d combat is complicated enough already, and this is an easy place to simplify things.
This definitely sounds better to me. 3D combat is already nasty to track, but at the same time it's baked so heavily into the Pathfinder system and culture that it's pervasive at higher levels. Literally any situation in which the roof is 10 feet above the ground can turn into an aerial combat at higher levels. Good aerial combat rules should acknowledge how ingrained it is in the very fiber of the Pathfinder system, and create rules that balance ease-of-use with flexibility.