I'm not completely thrilled with the fly skill either, but I understand the point of it. It looks to me like a simplified method of controling aerial movement. To be fair, 3.5 rules were pretty complex, and they frustrated me to no end.
If you have wings to fly, it should be like nature
Yeah, I agree, for naturally flying creatures. But what about the character who grows wings (often due to a class feature) or casts 'fly' on themselves? It's not exactly natural in these instances, and I'd have to argue that flying for these types is not an ability that should come without practise (ie: skill ranks).
Ride represents commanding a mount, not yourself
Don't forget, ride also involves controling yourself in order to utilise the mount (eg: DC20 ride check to fast mount). Thus you could argue that the 'Fly' skill is meant to utilise the wings/magic.
Just my 2 cents.
|
I used to play a 3.5 character with a fly speed and now I've played a flying character for the last couple of weeks to compare the two systems. IMO the rules for it are still clunky. Better, but clunky. As it is, it just takes up too much space in the skills section, and most characters will have very limited opportunity to use the skill.
I think the whole thing should be simplified down to costing 1:1 to fly straight/go down and double to go up.
Direction change restrictions are needlessly complicated too and need to be streamlined further. This is the only place I see maneuver class having a place, other than providing the bonus/penalty to the fly skill for difficult/wierd maneuvers. Maybe maneuver class should just be good, average, poor and your direction changes based on that (good=any change is okay, avg=no more than 90 degrees per square moved, poor=no more than 45 degrees per square moved).
The fly skill should be limited to performing difficult maneuvers like hovering, wingovers, staying aloft in tight areas (ie for winged fliers less than 3x the number of squares your body occupies -wings take up room) and staying airborne when you take damage.
Creatures with a climb speed still use the climb skill (with a +8 racial bonus). Creatures with a swim speed still use the swim skill (with a +8 racial bonus). I have no problem accomodating Fly similarly.
Fly skill should be kept, except it should be re-named.
First though, acrobatics should be used in general for magically endowed movement types. It just makes sense that the same movement and thought would apply. Plus why penalize on such a restricted and limited skill.
Second, it should be renamed to Special Movement. So it is treated for not just flying, but magical swimming, and climbing.
Love how the new edition is coming. Keep it up guys!
Just want to chime in that I don't think Fly should be a skill. Here is my thought:
* You don't need a Walk skill to walk. If you have wings to fly, it should be like nature, and rolls should be standard Reflex rolls for maneuverability.
* Ride represents commanding a mount, not yourself, and fly is kind of like buying Ride to move yourself. Again, we don't have a skill for walking. It is Reflex.
Thanks for listening.
I'm impressed at the issues you've brought up over the last few days Neil. So far every one of your concerns were very hot topics when the new rules were revealed. In this particular case quite a few people didn't like the fly skill, but Jason pretty much said it's staying no matter the outcry or not.
I'm with you and feel the fly skill is unneeded. Reminds me of the weird add on rules from the good old days of 1st edition.
I'd prefer some simplified guidelines for flying and manueverability (simplified compared to 3.5 anyway) and let's not have everyone rolling skill checks every time someone moves while flying at high levels when it becomes common.
The way I see it, the Fly skill is what the Scry skill was back in its day: a Tax for spellcasters (much like Perform being a separate skill for Bards).
Still... as a tax skill I think it was better idea to keep Scry instead, after all it's a considerable more useful spell as to invest skill ranks on taking into account the game intends spells to be used exclusively as combat weapons. Travel? Don't make me laugh, whatever distance I can cover with a pathetic 1 min/level is a distance I might as well cover by walking and save myself a spell slot, so the only use spells that allow you to fly in this game have is limiting your opponents' choice for engaging you to ranged weapons, thing for which I don't need fancy flight maneuvering whatsoever.
...and then there's the Overland Float spell, I know (sorry, but if I don't move faster than I'd do by walking I'm floating, not flying), but then it's a spell that won't allow me to move anything faster than I'd do by walking, so whatever form of movement I may do while under that spell is something my ordinary reflexes should be more than enough to handle without needing particular "flight" training (Acrobatics should suffice in the worst-case-scenario).
Still, actually there's a use for that skill, as there was this newbie player that asked me about the skill and, after I told her the waste it was, she refuted it with: "And what if I want to fly using a hang glider I craft?"... so yup, an isolated case, but still a case in which such a skill might still have a reason to exist.
* You don't need a Walk skill to walk. If you have wings to fly, it should be like nature, and rolls should be standard Reflex rolls for maneuverability.
Actually I believe there is a Walk skill, it is just a good chunk of the Acrobatics skill. Successfully walking on a greased surface requires Acrobatics checks as does walking on a ledge, slopes, unsteady surfaces, or icy areas.
Personally, I think Fly should use Acrobatics.
I agreed, but what do you think about keeping fly to allow casters the same maneuverability while using this common spell type?
Personally, I think Fly should use Acrobatics.I agreed, but what do you think about keeping fly to allow casters the same maneuverability while using this common spell type?
I think they would survive taking one cross-class skill, considering how skill system has changed with Pathfinder and that full casters get enough power for themselves.
|
I don't use it, because, I find the 3.5 rules perfectly easy. And because the less people have to roll, check, or keep track of, the better for everyone. And because it introduces weirdness, like for the Favored Soul, or Raptorians. What they are suppossed to waste ranks until many levels later they get the ability to fly? Or wait that long to start putting ranks in so that when they do fly, they are either really bad at it, or are at the point that there is almost no point in actually having that feature. What about the other off classes that somehow get the ability to fly, is it now a free skill, or a wasted ability because they are not wizards? All in all, just a very bad idea.
I think the whole point of the Fly skill is the same as the Swim skill. You don't use it all the time. In fact, you don't make a swim check unless it's under adverse conditions.
You only need to make Fly checks unless you're in a typhoon or dodging through a swarm of a thousand fist sized hailstones or if a 15 ton dragon runs into you. Yes, if you have wings and you're hit in flight, you need to make checks to avoid problems, but that DC is low enough that it's a gimmie with a half decent Dex.
I suppose I just don't see the problem unless it's a problem with the Swim skill too.
|
|
I can see why it was thought to be a cool idea. But from the few examples above, it still screws most characters/npcs/monsters that are not core who should be able to do things that new rules don't really allow.
Just off the top of my head, Favored Souls had, at 17th level, a Fly speed of twice their land speed, Good Manuverability. How should a DM handle this for them. They are suppossed to be pretty good at it, not the best, but better than a great many monsters and animals that can fly.
Do they just get free ranks? Do they basically have to lose skill points to do what they should be able to do for free anyway? How does Good Manuverability translat to Ranks? Is 10 ranks about the same thing?
|
Just off the top of my head, Favored Souls had, at 17th level, a Fly speed of twice their land speed, Good Manuverability. How should a DM handle this for them. They are suppossed to be pretty good at it, not the best, but better than a great many monsters and animals that can fly.
Do they just get free ranks? Do they basically have to lose skill points to do what they should be able to do for free anyway? How does Good Manuverability translat to Ranks? Is 10 ranks about the same thing?
From PFRPG Beta, page 63. A favored soul gets a +4 bonus on his/her Fly check. Enought to move less than half speed and remain flying, or to have a decent possibility of hovering.
As Drakli said, it's not a skill you use at all the time. You use it when you need it (flying in a thunderstorm, making a sharp turn...).
I actually found that this skill, especially at high levels, has more opportunities to be used than Swim. ^_^
...and then there's the Overland Float spell, I know (sorry, but if I don't move faster than I'd do by walking I'm floating, not flying)
You can move effectively 2x foot movement speed. You can hustle without nonlethal damage from fatigue. They list it that way to fit the regular movement rules.
Well, if I have to take another skill to fly, I'll save the bother, learn Acrobatics, and invest in an Immovable Rod, a Ring of Feather Falling, a well trained hawk familiar and a couple trapeze wires. That will get me a speed of 60, and while I may look like I'm trying out for Peter Pan, I'll get to the sabbat faster than all the witches on their speed 40 broomsticks.
Of course once I'm higher level and rich, I'll just take ride and make a gold dragon wyrmling effigy and cruise in style at speed 200, or 400 if I turn up the throttle and have it hustle which doesn't have any downside since it's an effigy and doesn't tire by definition.
Let's say your Favored Soul has a Dex of 12, so... +1. Not unreasonable, I hope? With a fly manaeuverability of good, he gets a +4 to Fly checks. For the low price 1 rank into the fly skill... which I'm going to recommend becomes a class skill for any class that allows you to Grow Wings(!), you get another +1 with a +3 for it being a class skill. 1+4+1+3= a +9 bonus. On a check of 1 or better, he retains manaeuverability when struck in flight. Not so resource-intensive, really.
If he doesn't put any ranks in it, he can still fly, and has a bonus of +5 when called upon to do manaeuvers
I understand the context that creatures who don't swim for a living sometimes have to whether they like it or not, while creatures who don't fly... just don't. Still, I don't think it's a work of illogic for a creature or character to be more skilled at flight than another (and for there to be a way of representing it,) nor that it's a flying resource hog. And I think it's good character development for a character who suddenly sprouts wings to need to learn to use them well. We could say the knowledge insta-beams into their head too, but where's the fun in that? ^-^