| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I have a hippogriff which has listings for light medium and heavy loads. But what I cannot nor my GM cannot find is if the creature or any creature can fly at medium or heavy load. We are currently assuming only light load.
I think they are reduced in speed for medium loads and cannot fly with heavy loads.
There is no rule against a flying creature carrying a heavy load. The only rule regarding flying and armor/carrying capacity is barding.
Flying mounts can’t f ly in medium or heavy barding.
Some people have tried to draw a line from this to medium/heavy encumbrance but the fact remains that it is a specific restriction.
- Gauss
Gauss that implies that fly operaes on the same mechanic as normal movement is that written someplace.
|
Flying creatures can't get off the ground with heavier than light barding and a medium or heavy load counts as medium or heavy barding.
The only workaround I've found is that Flight can be a Supernatural or Spell-like ability, in which case (I'm assuming) it would follow the rules for the Fly spell. However, that only helps creatures that fly without the use of wings.
It has always been my understanding that all movement modes use the armor/encumbrance rules for speed. The main exception is the rules for barding. The general statement of 'speed' is what covers this since fly speeds are a form of speed.
- Gauss
Velcro Zipper:
The first link you provided is referencing what I already quoted.
The second link does NOT make the statement you just made. Nowhere in that link does it state that a medium or heavy load count as medium or heavy barding. Nor does it state that anywhere in the CRB. Can you provide any reference that states that encumbrance = armor = barding?
Can a flying creature wear medium/heavy armor and still fly? Yes. Why? The rules do not state that it cannot.
Can a flying creature wear medium/heavy barding and still fly? No. Why? The rules state that it cannot.
Can a flying creature be at medium/heavy encumbrance and still fly? Yes. Why? The rules do not state that it cannot.
You can try to expand upon the rules for flying by drawing a line from Barding to Armor to Encumbrance but that is an expansion of the rules.
- Gauss
|
|
This is the way I interpret it...
Unfortunately for the hipogriff
Barding is a type of armor that covers the head, neck, chest, body, and possibly legs of a horse or other mount. Barding made of medium or heavy armor provides better protection than light barding, but at the expense of speed. Barding can be made of any of the armor types found on Table: Armor and Shields.
Armor for a horse (a Large non-humanoid creature) costs four times as much as human armor (a Medium humanoid creature) and also weighs twice as much (see Table: Armor for Unusual Creatures). If the barding is for a pony or other Medium mount, the cost is only double, and the weight is the same as for Medium armor worn by a humanoid. Medium or heavy barding slows a mount that wears it, as shown on the table below.
Flying mounts can't fly in medium or heavy barding.
Barding = Armor
And...
A medium or heavy load counts as medium or heavy armor for the purpose of abilities or skills that are restricted by armor.
Flight = an ability restricted by armor
So, yeah. It sucks for anyone who wants a b!&&%in' armored pegasus. Nightmare's, on the other hand, don't use wings to fly...
Velcro, by your logic a mammal is also a monkey.
Armor is the category. Barding is a subset in that category. There is no wider rule regarding medium/heavy armor and the loss of flight.
Regarding Encumbrance, it is also being subsumed into the broader category of Armor. It is therefore NOT subsumed into the subset called Barding.
Like I said, you are drawing a line from Barding to Armor to Encumbrance.
Also note: There are more winged creatures than just hipogriffs that fly. A hippogriff in heavy barding cannot fly. An angel in heavy armor can.
- Gauss
Edit: With all that said, I can easily see someone houseruling that medium/heavy armor/encumbrance prevents wing based flight.
|
|
I think somebody should subsume a chill pill ^_-
Relax, buddy. Gnomezrule asked a question. I gave him an answer and provided some links to back my answer up based on the rules I know and play by and the answer that comes up pretty much every time someone asks this question.
I took angels and similar creatures into consideration by the way. I didn't look at them all, but the only one I found that comes stock with armor is the Solar and that guy's got three pairs of wings. I figure either all that extra lift must amount to something or else he doesn't even need the wings to fly, the showboat. I didn't find any winged demons or devils listed with armor, but I didn't check every single one of them either. Either way, I gave my answer and I feel it's a good one. You don't like it, that's cool ^_^
|
|
Actually, I find Velcro's argument to be pretty good.
Medium or heavy encumbrance results in the same restrictions as medium or heavy armor does. Barding is merely the name given for armor for some creatures. Those creatures who wear barding are wearing armor as much as a humanoid is. Therefore, restrictions on based upon armor applies to those wearing barding. Fight is restricted by the barding (armor) that is worn. Since encumbrance acts as armor, and by inclusion, barding, flight is limited by encumbrance.
This isn't saying that all mammals are monkeys. Rather, it is saying that all rules that apply to mammals also applies to monkeys.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding the 'chill pill' I was not upset. Just logical.
Regarding the argument: Pathfinder is a game of exceptions. When an exception is made it is specific and cannot be used to infer greater exceptions. Armor is the rule, barding is the exception. While it might make sense on a real world physics level PF doesnt use real world physics in any consistent sense.
Howie: Your statement about all mammal rules applying to monkeys or any other mammal is correct. But if you try to take the rules about egg laying mammals (platypus for example), infer that back to mammals as a general rule, then try to apply that to monkeys you wind up making an error. The same is true here. You are taking a specific quality of barding, infering a general rule about all armor, and then extending that back down to encumbrance rules.
Anyhow, while it might make sense that fliers are restricted by all medium/heavy armor or encumbrance it is not in the rules. That is just how the rules are. Anything else is inference.
- Gauss
gnomersy, are you saying I am difficult to understand? :D Actually, I know I can be sometimes. Oh well. Thanks for the re-interpretation.
- Gauss
|
|
Howie: Your statement about all mammal rules applying to monkeys or any other mammal is correct. But if you try to take the rules about egg laying mammals (platypus for example), infer that back to mammals as a general rule, then try to apply that to monkeys you wind up making an error. The same is true here. You are taking a specific quality of barding, infering a general rule about all armor, and then extending that back down to encumbrance rules.
I thought I went out of my way to show that barding is a type of armor, so rules that apply to all armor also apply to barding.
You did, and I absolutely agree with you Howie (that Armor rules apply to Barding). The problem is all the rules that apply to barding do NOT apply to Armor. That is 180degrees the opposite direction.
Armor => Barding
Barding /=>/ Armor
The rules regarding flying in Barding apply only to barding. Not armor as a whole.
- Gauss
|
|
Agreed. All rules that apply to barding do not apply to armor. Barding is a subcategory of armor.
Let's suppose that there is a skill or feat that is limited to being used in only light armor. (I'm sure that there are, and in 3.5, I'd use the Tumble.) If someone were wearing medium armor, they couldn't use it that skill or feat. If a mount had the skill or feat and was medium armor (called barding), he couldn't use it. If a person had medium encumbrance, he couldn't use it. If the mount had medium encumbrance, it couldn't use it.
If a mount is under medium encumbrance, he cannot do things that are prohibited when wearing medium armor. That we agree on.
If a mount is wearing medium barding, he cannot do things that are prohibited when wearing medium armor. (I think we agree on that)
If a mount is has medium encumbrance, he cannot do things that are prohibited when wearing medium armor (as we agree). Barding is a type of armor (we agree on this). I believe that what you are saying is that since the flight prohibition is on barding (but not on, say, humanoid plate or other types of non-barding armor), that this is not captured by the treating medium encumbrance as medium armor for what is prohibited. Is that correct?
Note: about to head out for an evening of gaming and will be away from the convo until about 2am Eastern Time.
|
I reckon if a flying creature was affected by medium loads as suggested, then most characters wouldn't be able to get them as mounts any way. The average character would put them over this limit on weight alone. Never mind gear.
I'm guessing the average strength 18 fighter weighs close to 100kg solid muscle (big assumption, please bear with me). Thats 220pounds of weight. Well and truly over the medium load of most critters. Chuck gear into that equation and you really aren't going to get many mounts that can carry you.
We just hand wave that stuff, cos having a b!@%~in' mount is far more important to our gameplay than working out encumbrance values.
If someone casts weakeness or some such ont the creature, I merely have a suitably cool narrative effect ready, depending on how big the effect is. This can range from gradual loss of altitude with the creature struggling to stay aloft, all the way to crash and burn.
Sometimes we gamers analyse too much I reckon.
Cheers
Agreed. All rules that apply to barding do not apply to armor. Barding is a subcategory of armor.
Let's suppose that there is a skill or feat that is limited to being used in only light armor. (I'm sure that there are, and in 3.5, I'd use the Tumble.) If someone were wearing medium armor, they couldn't use it that skill or feat. If a mount had the skill or feat and was medium armor (called barding), he couldn't use it. If a person had medium encumbrance, he couldn't use it. If the mount had medium encumbrance, it couldn't use it.
A skill or feat that is prohibited in heavier than light armor. Check. This applies to Armor, Barding (a subset of Armor), and Encumbrance (which is in effect a subset of armor according to the encumbrance rules). I think we agree here.
If a mount is under medium encumbrance, he cannot do things that are prohibited when wearing medium armor. That we agree on.
Agreed
If a mount is wearing medium barding, he cannot do things that are prohibited when wearing medium armor. (I think we agree on that)
Agreed
If a mount is has medium encumbrance, he cannot do things that are prohibited when wearing medium armor (as we agree). Barding is a type of armor (we agree on this). I believe that what you are saying is that since the flight prohibition is on barding (but not on, say, humanoid plate or other types of non-barding armor), that this is not captured by the treating medium encumbrance as medium armor for what is prohibited. Is that correct?
I think you have my point of view correctly stated.
I am saying the flight prohibition is ONLY on barding. Not armor or encumbrance in general.Note: about to head out for an evening of gaming and will be away from the convo until about 2am Eastern Time.
And alas, I wont be on when you return and wont be back on until monday.
- Gauss
As gnomezrule's DM, I'm going to go with Velcro on this one - the links provided for the following argument seems pretty clear to me:
Flying creatures can't get off the ground with heavier than light barding and a medium or heavy load counts as medium or heavy barding.
Also, Pathfinder came from 3.5e and 3.5e's ruling was that creatures could not fly if they were carrying anything other than a light load.
When the history of the game aligns with the best defended argument, it seems like a pretty clear way to go for me. Thanks for the links velcro and thanks to everyone else for the constructive discussion.
Gauss' first post is absolutely correct.
*munches popcorn*
I checked google for a few dictionary references barding is armor for horses. If your horse has barding it has armor. So if the rule applies to armor it applies to barding and vice versa.
Gnomezrule, a shame PF (and D&D) doesn't use dictionary definitions on many things. It has its own logic and definitions which real world definitions may or may not apply.
Your statement 'If your horse has barding it has armor' actually proves my point. Barding is Armor. But that does NOT state that Armor is barding. If there is a rule specific to barding it does not follow that it applies to all armor.
Anyhow, as the OP you have made up your mind and for your games that is fine. But, the way PF is designed is from the general to the specific. You cannot take a specific rule and apply it to general rules. That is exactly what you are trying to do.
- Gauss
MechE_:
You are correct, 3.5 stated that anything over a light load prevented a flying mount from flying (DMG p204-205).
However, 3.5 also stated that while fliers are limited to light loads medium armor does not in itself constitute a medium load (Monster Manual 1 p312).
In any case PF is not 3.5. Perhaps they intentionally removed those lines. Perhaps they realized that it prevented most characters from having flying mounts since the light load of a pegasus or griffon is only 300lbs (50lbs of barding, 175lbs of naked human =225lbs, only 75lbs of gear which is not alot). We simply don't know. But what I do know is that it is not present in the rules and the specific cannot be extended to the general.
However, I am also a home GM and I agree with your decision to do what you want in your own game. I have a number of houserules myself because I don't like the way certain things work.
- Gauss
Wow. You people are too serious on a Friday night. You're forgetting the most important question/factor:
Is it an African hippogriff, or a European hippogriff? You have to know that before you can even begin to calculate it's air speed velocity or fully laden carrying capacity.
Its a rules forum of course Im serious. Then again, Im usually serious. It a blessing and a curse. :D
- Gauss
Just to be clear my character has no husk.
Gauss is correct. Barding is a specific subset of armor. One could craft normal armor that fits an animal or other nonhumanoid creature without it being barding. That's just the way it is. Doing so reduces the creatures' fly speed, but does not prevent it from flying.
Now I'm not really sure what the point of barding is, unless it was intended to be the armor that animals got proficiency in when trained for war. That would make some sense, as it is armor that has great restrictions, but at the same time it's still doesn't add much to the game.
As most others have pointed out though, carrying capacity has little to nothing to do with flight. A hippogriff could be in its heavy load and still fly. It just flies at a reduced speed as appropriate.
As has been pointed out, while barding is armor, armor is not necessarily barding. Loads are treated as ARMOR, not barding. A winged creature in light barding could fly with a medium or heavy load at reduced speed. The issue with flying in barding isn't the weight. It's the design of the barding itself. Any barding that grants high enough protection to move into the medium/heavy barding category is simply going to be bulky enough to restrict wing movement.
That said, as a GM, I would ignore that entirely. This is a fantasy game, and I'd like to have a clan of dwarves flying on hippogryphs with their own full plate, thank you very much. It just seems an unnecessary and silly exception to the movement rules.
To be clear I see both sides of the arguement, further I am more than willing to abide by my GM's ruling but his ruling is absence of a clear reading of the rules regarding encumbrance effect on flight.
As to the secondary issue of barding versus armor. My reading of the barding listed from the PFSRD is that barding is armor for a horse or other mount. It says it is a type of armor and then describes it as for a horse or mount. Meaning that armor for a horse or other mount is barding. What makes barding a "special type" is that is made for the mount as opposed to a humaniod.
Gnomezrule, I agree that a mount should not be able to bypass the barding issue by dubbing it 'armor'. However: a Dragon wearing armor is not wearing barding. A Dragon Mount would need to wear barding and thus is subject to the restrictions of barding.
- Gauss