Hi Jason and others,
Assuming that monsters will still get skills/skill points on the basis of their racial HD, I see a potential problem with the Skill Feat as it is.
Debate on the relevance of the Fly skill is already taking place elsewhere, it here just about its current implementation in relation to racial HD.
Under the current rules, an hawk or even better a lantern archon are much much better flyers than Dragons. Under the new system, it seems that older Dragons (which are even worse flyers under 3.5) would always get better at flying and would even have so high HD/Skill ranks that they would easily offset their penalty for manoeuverability and low Dex.
Some quick math:
1) Lantern Archon (1 HD; perfect manoueverability) has Fly +12
4 Ranks + 0 (Dex) + 8 (man.)
2) An Hawk would have +7
3) An Ancient Red Dragon would have +29; while a Great Red Warm would have +35
37 Ranks + 0 (Dex) - 8 (man.)
Even if you rule that Dragons have Fly as a cross-class skill, they still beat the Lantern Archon (which they do not under 3.5 and should probably not).
Plus you find yourself in the situation where you have to consider two elements when designing flying monsters: their maneuverability AND if Fly is a class-skill or a cross-class skill.
I like the Fly skill, but this raises some issues. No suggestions from my side so far, but wanted to raise this! Hopes this helps.
Bocklin
|
It looks bad, but think of it this way: Why would a dragon with HUNDREDS of years of flight experience be a bad flier? With that much experience most of the tricks presented the rules should be common place.
It's because flight speed and maneuverability should be not only independent of HD, but in most cases, should be inversely proportional to HD.
Take a wasp or a fly.
HD 1/1000? (being generous).
Able to hover, turn on the spot.
Even raising to a 1/2 HD bird, the maneuverability drops.
An albatross is less agile than a swallow.
Carry on adding HD till a creature is the size of a barn, and it shouldn't be able to hang in mid-air, it should have a minimum stall speed, etc.
All these things are inversely proportional to a creature's HD, and should not increase.
Exactly: it is not about what Dragons should be able or not to do. It is about the fact that, since Skills for monsters come from racial HD, we now have a strange situation:
Big, bulky and clumsy creatures (i.e. those with tons of HD) are the one best at flying.
Two solutions I thought about:
The rules could say "Fly is always a cross-class skill for creatures with Poor and Clumsy manoeuverability";
and/or
Make the manoeuverability malus be "per HD". But that does not work well to represent the better flying ability of some small, low HD critters...
Some new maths:
If we keep the bonus as they are, but add in that, for all creatures with a Poor or Clumsy manoeuverability, Fly is a cross-class skill, then we get the following results:
Lantern Archon +12
Hawk +7
Will-O’-Wisp +29
Wyvern +2
Ancient Red Dragon +9
etc.
Funny that a Lantern Archon would be worse at flying than a Will-O-Wisp, as they were on par before...
Anyway, the system is still a bit unelequant since it crosses manoeuverability and skills. Me thinks.
Bocklin
I've already houseruled a Fly skill penalty equal to the Hide skill penalty. A Huge dragon takes a -8 penalty on Fly checks due to size. A Tiny fairy gets a +8 bonus.
It's a good point, but think of it a different way folks... "An ancient wyrm dragon should be able to do a lot of things in combat." All the fly skill allows is for manueverability so the creature doesn't have to waste as much movement on turning and it allows hover. Ancient dragons are badasses, the PCs shouldn't get tons of free attacks on them because they are large lumbering flyers!
You should also consider that Dragons by nature are very magical beings, and the older they get the more magic they have that adds to their flying abilities.
Granting that still doesn't count for some other creatures not being able to out fly them like a will-o-wisp, but the suggestion of adding size modifier to the Fly skill as well as maneuver modifier will off set that a bit more.
Also remember the creatures that you are considering to be better or worse flyers, the will-o-wisp is nothing much more then a gas shpere, it might have perfect maneuverability, but also has to acount for gusts of wind, up and down drafts, high and low pockets etc, smaller creatures, like the wasp, is smaller and has to use much more energy to fly then bigger things like dragons, or celestials or fiends, whos nature makes flight easier, the only thing i would really be conserned about is Invisible Stalkers, Air Elements, and monsters that are even more conected to flight.
My $0.02
It's a good point, but think of it a different way folks... "An ancient wyrm dragon should be able to do a lot of things in combat." All the fly skill allows is for manueverability so the creature doesn't have to waste as much movement on turning and it allows hover. Ancient dragons are badasses, the PCs shouldn't get tons of free attacks on them because they are large lumbering flyers!
If the dragon wants to improve its maneuverability or hover, there are feats for both of those. Like it or not, great wyrms, even whites, weigh dozens of tons and are not in the slightest bit aerodynamic. They should NOT be able to fly better than a creature that is essentially nothing more than sentient light (lantern archon) without considerable expenditure of resources (spells and/or feats).
It seemed to me that introducing the Fly skill was a way for Jason to get rid of the need to have a whole bunch of fly-related Feats (in the spirit of "your Feats are precious, use them on something that kicks ass"). The new logic would be for critters to boost their Fly skill instead of sacrificing Feats, but I might be wrong.
Otherewise, again, for some of those posts above, I insist that the point is absolutely not about what a Dragon should be able to do or not (wish I had taken another example).
It is just about the fact that the game rules represent big bulky creatures through HD and this does not fit with the Fly skill (for reasons explained above). Suddenly creatures that were the worse flyers throughout 3rd Edition become the best flyers in the new system. I don't think that this was a conscious design choice.
The suggestion to have a size-related penalty could work...
Would be interesting to hear what Jason thinks about this issue.
Dragons are badasses.
It ain't Dungeons & Monsters. It's Dungeons & Dragons. ;)
Realism or gamism? I choose gamism.
Guys.. size has nothing to do with aerodynamics.
And physics, unfortunately, has nothing to do with D&D. Otherwise the people in Pathfinder couldn't wield 10-ft. swords with blades two feet wide and an inch thick. And no elf would survive childhood without ripping one or both of those ridiculous bunny ears off. And a 6,000-foot fall would deal more than 20d6 damage.
The problem with bringing up real-life physics is that a creature the size of an ancient dragon wouldn't even be able to stand, let alone fly. There's a reason that over-sized terrestrial animals died off - the amount of mass possessed by a creature of gargantuan or colossal size would actually make it much weaker and slower than things that are small, and the idea of creating enough lift with BAT WINGS to make something that size fly is completely preposterous. Here's a couple of helpful links:
Easy to understand: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SquareCubeLaw
With math:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square-cube_law
So, it comes down to magic, which means it can go either way, since D&D magic is pretty damn arbitrary.
I still agree that smaller creatures should maintain their edge in maneuverability. Defending the change by saying "Dragons r teh awesome and they should kick @$$ in the air too!" doesn't really make a lot of sense - Dragons are already disproportionately powerful for their CR and out-maneuvering or out-running them is one of your best options.
Given the way you wrote your post, I can't help be think you didn't read the rest of my post, but instead go on a nerdrage rant.
I read the whole thing, and my main point -- that the laws of physics are usually not reliably incorporated into game rules -- stands. (What you took as a "rant" was meant as a set of examples.)
To be clear...
I not only read it, but understood it as well. I've taken engineering physics. And even passed it. But like I said, physics have never really been thoughtfully applied in D&D.
Lastly, stop whining over Amiri's sword.
I was thinking more of some of the others (like the length of Orik's, or whatever the guy's name was in PF1 -- what's he compensating for, exactly?). Anyway, some of things that pass for "swords" in RPG art would average closer to 100 pounds than 10.
---
Overall, my post was meant to be illustrative and maybe a bit humorous -- not snarky. Sorry if you took it that way. The fact that they're absurd is a reflection on the lack of physics in the game; it is in no way a personal attack on you. So responses accusing me of "ranting," "whining," and "rage" are slightly off the mark.
The problem we have here people is not the fly skill as presented. It the fact that HD creatures always have more skill points than low-HD creatures. This is made worse by the Alpha's all or nothing skill system.
On this point, at least, we agree completely.
Ok
We have got the point. Volume equals size, not mass. But i've got to go with Kirth Gersen on this one. DND is not about real life physics, and this topic is not about how a dragon flies. It is about a problem with the Fly skill as it is in the '3.75' Alpha Test.
Try to focus on fixing that problem (if it is one) instead of wasting precious forum space on explaining D&D creature movement with RL physics. Keep that for discussion around the table or so...
No offense meant with this, of course.
About the fly skill, I haven't really put it through the test yet, as I am converting the PC's sheets and Rise of the Runelords campaign to this system right this moment.
Maybe the size penalty, and cross-class skill method would apply.
I'll make a later post after testing it in different ways.
Again, BM, no offense with this reaction to your physics demonstration. I like such discussions myself a lot, but this is not the thread to do it in.
I actually disagree that there's no place for physics discussions on these threads; incorporating some nods towards realism is not a bad goal -- IF it can be done without making "clunkier" rules (calculating ratios of mass to volume to Strength obviously isn't the way to go, but I really don't think that was necessarily BM's intent).
BM's point regarding volume vs. mass, for example, is quite valid when applied to air elementals and flight -- but the only quick solution I can see would be to make Fly a cross-class skill for massive creatures, and a class skill for air elementals and hollow-boned critters (the latter of which would likely have correspondingly low Con scores).
The point with a size mod is that it doesn't make sense, and effectively undos the only size mod in the fly skill currently, The high winds check.
That's an excellent game mechanics point, and one that convinces me to lose the size modifier. Thanks!
|
I think the original point is valid and worth considering. The more hit dice a creature has, the more skill points (or equivalent) it will have to spend on the fly skill.
Points about size not reflecting mass are also true. While it certainly might make sense to apply a size penalty on flight for creatures like dragons (or other massive creatures) it shouldn't apply to creatures that are huge or larger but not massive (shadow creatures, air elementals, incorporeal undead, etc).
So, the Pathfinder has a problem, and there has been a problem with all the solutions presented so far. That means there is the possibility that the fly skill simply is more trouble than it is worth and should be discarded, or we need to be more creative with our so solutions.
Let's try to the second for a while longer.
Brainstorming here, so this don't expect anything polished here. Okay, let's see.
First of all, swim is a method of movement allowing travel in 3 dimensions and is the most like the fly speed, so the swim skill would be the first place to look for ideas for the fly skill.
I think that for Fly to work, the first thing that should be addressed is the penalty for carrying something. The fact is that if you are flying you are 'carrying' yourself, at the very least. If we could have a weight for every creature with the ability to fly, we could apply their weight against their carrying capacity. Any creature that would be carrying more than a light load couldn't fly. (Not having done any math, maybe we should say Medium load). But, if you fly with a medium load you take a peanlty. Let's base it off speed and say you take a -1 penalty for every 5 pounds you are over your light load. So, let's say you're a pegasus and we determine that you're one pound shy of a medium load, your rider (if you carry one) will cost you a penalty of -1 per 5 pounds of weight. Does someone want to try to run some math with that with creatures in the MM?
If we apply this penalty, we could also use the size modifier that has been suggested before. A creature like a huge air elemental weighs practically nothing, so could still fly while carrying a person or a lot of equipment without a penalty (since they are much stronger relative to their weight). This should work out to smaller elementals flying about as well as larger elementals, since the larger elementals have more HD, but they would take a size penalty.
Depending on how this works out, the maneuverability bonus/penalty is no longer necessary. Most of the smallest creatures will be fine due to the size modifier and the fact that they are a small portion of their light load (since a small creature weighs half as much as a medium creature but has a light load that is 3/4 that of a medium creature). Every reduction in size is a relative increase in carrying capacity...
How does that work?
Edit - Started this before 3 other posts. Not that it makes much a difference.
IMO the Fly skill should be a cross class skill for any non native flyer.
Or we keep the following:
Below average maneuverability translates in penalties on flight, like it is intended in Alpha.
Size gives penalties on flight, except if you are an incorporeal flyer. Creatures that are especially made for flight (light bone structure, etc...) have their size penalty reduced (as if they are a size smaller than they are, or just have their penalty halved).
Size gives penalties on flight, except if you are an incorporeal flyer.
Or an air elemental.
|
|
Also, I thought of another case where being small hurts more than it helps. The being attacked while flying.
If you're hit in the air, you must make a fly check to see if you lose attitude/fall out the sky. Which is more likely to be knocked out of the air if hit with an arrow? A small bird, or a Dragon.
You mean, if the bird survives?
That's the thing about Hit Points. Since they're an abstraction a 'hit' doesn't always mean a hit. So, if you hit a small bird but didn't actually kill it, you probably just caused it to swerve aside in some manner, using up more of its strength than normally flight would do. So, it is somewhat 'weaker' for the rest of the combat.
Of course, most likely the bird is dead if you roll a hit, and if that is the case, than it will fall anyway, so the fact that the small bird has fewer hit points is good to represent the fact that they're more likely to drop if they get 'hit' by an arrow.
DeadDMWalking,
I think your head's in the right place, but trying to calculate mass/volume and then add a penalty to overcome a size penalty is getting complicated.
How's this...
The Fly Skill gets a Size modifier equal to the bonus/penalty to Hide plus a penalty equal to the unenhanced (by spells and items) natural armor bonus of the creature.
The facts is that large creatures tend to have bigger natural armor bonuses and smaller creatures do not. Now, a few creatures should have their natural armor bonuses replaced with deflection bonuses, particularly air elementals and lantern archons, who should be more like will-o-wisps. With this change, dragons are once again the clumsy to poor fliers we know and love.
|
|
DeadDMWalking,
I think your head's in the right place, but trying to calculate mass/volume and then add a penalty to overcome a size penalty is getting complicated.
How's this...
The Fly Skill gets a Size modifier equal to the bonus/penalty to Hide plus a penalty equal to the unenhanced (by spells and items) natural armor bonus of the creature.
The facts is that large creatures tend to have bigger natural armor bonuses and smaller creatures do not. Now, a few creatures should have their natural armor bonuses replaced with deflection bonuses, particularly air elementals and lantern archons, who should be more like will-o-wisps. With this change, dragons are once again the clumsy to poor fliers we know and love.
Good call. I knew that it was too early to give up. This might just be the best idea. I think there is some argument for natural armor making it difficult to fly. I'm going to have to look at a few different flying creatures in the MM and see how it works out. This would then replace the manueverability adjustments, correct?
The fly skill cannot be used to find who is more maneuverable because the range of DCs are to small. The lowest is 10, the highest is 25. Most are between 10 to 20. Once you can generate a 20 on a roll reliably, all things are going to fly the same.
Well, I think that's a problem with the Fly Skill in general. I'd rather just drop the Skill altogether and give creatures the flight abilities they need to work. Why do we need FlyBy Attack, Hover or Wingover? Those should either be a function of maneuverability or a special ability given, not a Feat or Skill.
Either everything gets folded into Maneuverability, or everything should be a Skill. Having both is just confusing.
This is more of a fluff idea than anything else but I don't see a colossal dragon with a +35 fly modifier that much of a problem. I think (and this may only be applicable for the dragon) that the skill wouldn't represent natural ability as much as it would represent the fact that the dragon, by the time he has reached colossal size has learned just about every trick his body could possible do in flight. I'd imagine that a dragon of a thousand years of flight has learned every trick in the book and can do things that are aerodynamically unfeasible. At this point he would be able to do all sorts of fancy maneuvers as he know exactly his limits after years of testing. Plus the ridiculous intelligence will help him to figure out how to o in-flight maneuvers that should be impossible. I think the ability to learn would prove a great help in flight and give a dragon significant advantage over something like a swallow that only flies on instinct.
Just my 2cp.
BM,
I agree that 3.5 Fly is horrible. I'm suggesting that either you just give flying creatures the abilities they should have (in which case no Skill is needed), or you dump maneuverability and make it all a function of the Fly Skill. I'm indifferent as to which.
That said, let's look at my proposed edit to the fly skill:
Here’s what I think the formula for the Fly Skill should be:
Fly + Dex + Size* - Natural armor (sans magical enhancements)
* Use the Size modifier to AC/Attack, not the modifier to Hide or Grapple.
Any creature with a natural Fly speed is automatically proficient in Fly. I think any creature with the air or incorporeal subtype should get a +10 racial bonus to Fly checks, and be able to take 10 on Fly checks even when threatened. Some creatures (such as air elementals, air/steam mephits and lantern archons) should have their natural armor bonuses to AC changed to deflection or dodge.
Given this, most creatures will have a Fly bonus of between -5 and +15. This means that most PCs trained in Fly are going to fly better than all but the best fliers almost immediately. Following are my category estimates and which creatures in the SRD fit which category. Creatures with a “+” are better now than they were in 3.5. Creatures with a “-” are worse. Creatures with a “*” have had their natural armor bonuses changed. Although a lot of creatures have changed categories, I think these categories fit most of them just fine.
True Dragons range from +8 (average) to -5 (clumsy), depending on type and age, which is about right for them. Green dragons, however, due to having the Air subtype, range from +15 (perfect) to +10 (good). I don’t mind having one breed of dragon known for its flying prowess, and green dragons would need it more than others, since they live in dense forests where maneuverability is key.
Clumsy (negative)
Darkmantle- (-1), Nalfeshnee demon- (-2), Nightmare- (-3)
Poor (0-4)
Astral deva angel- (+4), Cloaker- (+4), Griffon- (+4), Manticore+ (+4), Mephit, fire/magma- (+4), Nightwing- (+4), Trumpet archon- (+4), Chimera (+3), Hippogriff- (+3), Vrock demon- (+3), Mephit, ooze/water- (+2), Ogre mage- (+2), Giant praying mantis (+1), Planetar angel- (+1), Sphinx, andro/crio (+1), Succubus demon- (+1), Ghaele- (+0), Lammasu- (+0), Mephite, earth/salt- (+0), Sphinx, gyno (+0), Zelekhut inevitable- (+0)
Average (5-9)
Efreeti- (+9), Erinyes Devil- (+9), Homonculus- (+9), Lantern archon-* (+9), Avoral- (+8), Grig sprite+ (+8), Mephit, steam* (+8), Pixie Sprite+ (+8), Raven (+8), Solar angel- (+8), Quasit demon- (+8), Bralani- (+7), Hawk (+7), Lillend (+7), Owl (+7), Coatl- (+6), Dragonne+ (+6), Eagle (+6), Giant bee- (+6), Giant eagle (+6), Giant owl (+6), Imp devil- (+6), Ravid-* (+6), Gargoyle (+5), Horned devil- (+5), Pegasus (+5), Pit fiend devil (+5), Pseudodragon- (+5), Sphinx, hieraco+ (+5)
Good (10-14)
Planetar angel (+13), Bat swarm (+12), Cockatrice+ (+12), Giant wasp (+12), Harpy+ (+11), Balor demon (+10), Bat (+10), Janni- (+10), Roc+ (+10), Stirge+ (+10),
Perfect (15+)
Will-O’-Wisp (+32), Air elemental, large and up* (+27 and up), Arrowhawk, large (+25), Belker* (+24), Invisible Stalker* (+24), Spectre (+23), Air elemental, medium* (+22), Arrowhawk, medium (+21), Wraith (+21), Djinni (+20), Mephit, air/dust* (+20), Air elemental, small* (+19), Allip (+18), Arrowhawk, small (+18), Shadow (+18), Mephit, ice+ (+16)
Really, the only creature with which I have a problem is the Nightmare. I would give the nightmare a +10 racial bonus, bumping it up to an average flier.
First off to make sure on the same page, what to you mean drop maneuverability and make it all part of the fly skill?
No, I mean drop maneuverability as a modifier, category or descriptor in its entirety. Use natural armor, as I describe above.
The maneuverability modifier adds an unnecessary complication to the game. It also means you cannot have high-HD/Low maneuverability creatures, like dragons. Just dump it.
You're wrong on both these parts. The maneuverability modifier is no different from a racial mod
It's different from a racial modifier because it's arbitrary. There's no easy way to know a creature's maneuverability. Quick, without looking, what's a bralani's maneuverability? A griffon's? A chimera's?
My way, the modifier is easy to figure out. In fact, all the modifiers are right there in the AC line (just change the bonus from natural armor to a penalty). The add HD+3, and if it has the Air subtype, an additional +10. Done. Easy.
The one exception -- in my chart -- is the nightmare, which gets a +10 modifier. But even better would be to drop the nightmare's natural armor bonus to +3 and give it a +10 dodge bonus to AC.
you can have a low maneuverability, HD flyier, by not giving them ranks in the fly skill.
Fly is a trained only skill. Without the training, you are always the equivalent of a Clumsy flier with no chance of making any maneuver. Which means that such creatures are considered flatfooted while flying, cannot use snatch or wingover and cannot avoid falling damage when flying. This makes dragons in the air sitting ducks (no pun intended).
If you make these creatures take Fly cross-class you still don't have high-HD/low maneuverability. Cross-class skills use half the HD. Clumsy gives you a -8 penalty. At 8 HD, the worst that a flier will be is the equivalent of Poor. By 16 HD, you've eliminated the penalty and become an average flier. Dragons have upwards of 32 HD. None of them are going to be poor fliers.
So in this scenario you have three choices:
1) Dragons take Fly as a class skill and are awesome fliers.
2) Dragons take Fly as a cross-class skill and are above average fliers
3) Dragons are untrained in Fly and are dead as soon as they take wing.
Me? I would like dragons to be poor fliers, but still able to grab a cow for lunch without crashing into the ground.
And how is it any more arbitrary than any other racial mod?
When did I say I wanted to modify Fly by racial modifiers? I didn't. I think racial modifiers should be kept to a bare minimum, not made an intrinsic part of ever Fly check.
Also, without looking a griffon has average maneuverability(+0 mod), and a chimera has poor maneuverability(-4 mod).
And the bralani? The earth mephit? The roc?
I mean, I can explain maneuverability as you inherently suck at flying for reason X(you're massive, poor aerodynamics, etc..) or vice versa(very good dynamics, magic, etc). Under your system, you suck at it because.. your skin is tough?... Its more arbitrary from a logic stand point, and is no simplier.
Natural armor is almost never "tough skin". It represents added bulk, often in the form of carapace or scales, which is why natural armor increases as you increase a creature's Size Category. Their skin doesn't get tougher -- they get bulkier. And that's exactly what makes creatures less maneuverable.
Your system:Fly + Dex + Size* - Natural armor
Currently: Fly + Dex + Maneuverability.
How is that any simplier?
The Dex, Size and Natural armor modifiers are already listed on one line in the monster's Armor Class entry, making for easy reference. The Maneuverability modifier requires you to cross-reference the Fly Skill chart. For purposes of backwards compatibility, my way is much simpler, because the numbers are already laid out for you if you use a book that was not made for Pathfinder (such as, say, the Monster Manual or any of Paizo’s pre-Pathfinder publications).
A untrained dragon making a fly skill check(if the fly skill is made to allow untrained checks) as a mod of its dex and maneuverability.
What dragon, demon or devil is not going to get Proficient in Fly even if, for no good reason, it isn’t considered a class skill for dragons? Dragons, devils and demons are not stupid. If you have wings, it is suicide not to learn to use them. Heck, wizards and druids are going to be blowing Proficiencies on Fly and they only have wings occasionally! And once a dragon learns the skill cross-class, the maneuverability penalty becomes inconsequential because it does not scale with level.
In fact, dragons, who are supposed to get clumsier with age, will now get more aerodynamic with age. Let’s take the iconic red dragon. In the MM, the wyrmling red dragon is a poor flier (-4), and the great wyrm is a clumsy flier (-8). But once the dragon becomes proficient in Fly (which he should right out of the egg!), the wyrmling has a -1 penalty to Fly, but the Great Wyrm has a +12!
In contrast, the giant owl, which is an average flier, and probably proficient in Fly, has a +10. So now the “clumsy” cross-trained dragon is better than the average naturally proficient giant owl. So explain again how your system provides for high HD/low maneuverability creatures, because I don’t see it.
In terms of backwards compatibility, I wondered what would happen if I didn’t replace any of the natural armor bonuses, as I did earlier, but maintained the +10 racial bonus for creatures with the air and incorporeal subtypes. This would maximize backwards compatibility.
Doing so, I realized the nightmare and ravid were inappropriately clumsy. I decided to see what would happen if I extended the +10 racial bonus (which I am now changing to +8) to all extraplanar creatures with a fly speed. Turns out almost everybody is within one category of where I think they should be.
So here's the proposed rule:
1) Every creature with a Fly speed listed in their monster entry is proficient in Fly.
2) Creatures with the air, extraplanar or incorporeal subtypes receive a +8 racial bonus to Fly and can take 10 on Fly checks even when threatened.
3) Creatures add their Dex, Size bonus to AC and subtract their Natural Armor bonus to AC.
Here's what we end up with. The "+" after the name means, they are one category better than they were in 3.5. The "-" after the name means they are one category worse than they were in 3.5.
Clumsy (negative)
Darkmantle- (-1)
Poor (0-4)
Cloaker- (+4), Griffon- (+4), Manticore+ (+4), Chimera (+3), Hippogriff- (+3), Ogre mage- (+2), Ravid- (+2), Giant praying mantis (+1), Sphinx, andro/crio (+1), Lammasu- (+0), Sphinx, gyno (+0)
Average (5-9)
Homonculus- (+9), Lantern archon- (+9), Planetar angel- (+9), Succubus demon (+9), Vrock demon (+9), Ghaele- (+8), Grig sprite+ (+8), Mephit, earth/salt (+8), Pixie Sprite+ (+8), Raven (+8), Zelekhut inevitable (+8), Hawk (+7), Owl (+7), Couatl- (+6), Dragonne+ (+6), Eagle (+6), Giant bee- (+6), Giant eagle (+6), Giant owl (+6), Nalfeshnee demon+ (+6), Gargoyle (+5), Nightmare- (+5), Pegasus (+5), Pseudodragon- (+5), Sphinx, hieraco+ (+5)
Good (10-14)
Belker- (+14), Imp devil- (+14), Mephit, ice- (+14), Horned devil (+13), Pit fiend devil (+13), Astral deva angel (+12), Bat swarm (+12), Cockatrice+ (+12), Mephit, fire/magma/steam+ (+12), Nightwing (+12), Trumpet archon (+12), Giant wasp (+12), Harpy+ (+11), Bat (+10), Janni- (+10), Mephit, ooze/water- (+10), Roc+ (+10), Stirge+ (+10)
Perfect (15+)
Will-O’-Wisp (+30), Air elemental (between +26 and +14), Arrowhawk (between +23 and +18), Planetar angel+ (+19), Spectre (+19), Wraith (+19), Balor demon+ (+18), Djinni (+18), Invisible Stalker (+18), Efreeti (+17), Erinyes Devil (+17), Allip (+16), Avoral+ (+16), Shadow (+16), Solar angel+ (+16), Quasit demon (+16), Bralani+ (+15), Lillend+ (+15), Mephit, air/dust (+15)
In terms of backwards compatibility, I wondered what would happen if I didn’t replace any of the natural armor bonuses, as I did earlier, but maintained the +10 racial bonus for creatures with the air and incorporeal subtypes. This would maximize backwards compatibility.
wrecan, I really like the work you're doing here; the comparisons are a huge help in the debate. I wonder why a +10 racial bonus, though, instead of +8 as creatures currently get with Climb or Swim? A few sphynxes and devils would drop a maneuverability rating, but otherwise it wouldn't affect much, and would retain consistency with the other racial movement mods.
There is nothing that indicates that it reprents true flying ability.
I quote "You are skilled at flying... and can perform maneuvers while airborne." Page 24.
Mechanically, it does represent one's flying ability. It tells you exactly what your chance of falling if hit. It tells you your chance of making a sharp turn in combat. It tells you your chance of avoiding damage in a fall. It tells you your ability to remain airborne in harsh weather.
The entirely of the problem you seem to have is that Dragons automatically get full ranks in fly.
Any dragon who isn't a total moron will make sure he is maximized in a skill that could prevent him from dying from collision damage!
This is not the fault of the fly skill. It is the fault of the skill system. A skill system, that is going to be CHANGED.
And I am offering a way to change it.
Can you explain to me how this is a flaw of the fly skill and not the skill system?
They are entwined until we see the new system. Ar eyou saying we should not offer suggestions because Jason is considering changes to the system? Isn't this exactly the time we should be making suggestions?
Do you have any evidence the new system is going to return to the clunky old system where you have to allocate skill points at every level and keep track of Int increases?
I wonder why a +10 racial bonus, though, instead of +8 as creatures currently get with Climb or Swim? A few sphynxes and devils would drop a maneuverability rating, but otherwise it wouldn't affect much, and would retain consistency with the other racial movement mods.
Good question. Ten seemed like a nice round number. +8 is consistent with other racial movement bonuses.