The same thing that would happen if a human affected by feather fall was carrying a cat. The human floats to the ground along with everything he's carrying (the cat)
in this case the mount floats to the ground along with everything it's carrying (the rider)
- Torger
Is the rider mounted? The mount is falling based on the rules of Feather Fall, so if the rider keeps hold of the mount then he'll be fine. As for falling damage, I'd say that so long as the horse lands feet down the rider will also take no damage. If it hits the ground upside down, then the rider will probably get smashed by the mount.
Is the mount a flying creature?
If so, the RAW states that feather fall does not work on it.
Feather Fall:Feather fall works only upon free-falling objects. It does not affect a sword blow or a charging or flying creature.
Now, I'm guessing that the RAI here was that a flying creature with a magical item of feather fall equipped somewhere does not prevent the flying creature from descending at a rapid rate, should they choose to, so they can still charge from above, etc. However, it doesn't change the fact that the spell itself says what it says.
So a bird not flapping it's wings is considered flying?
So a bird not flapping its wings is considered flying?
Well the birds in this video aren't flapping their wings, and I would certainly describe them as flying.
Also, nowhere in the fly skill does it say anything about flapping or not flapping wings. As far as the game is concerned if you have a fly speed listed you can fly.
This is of course where the RAW gets a bit wonky. The Fly rules say that if a flying creature fails a Fly check by 5 or more, or just fails the DC 25 check as part of a collision, the creature "plummets" to the ground, and takes the appropriate falling damage. Of course it also says that a flying creature can "descend at any angle" at their base fly speed. Which would mean they could use a move action to go straight down (a movement that many would say is the same thing as falling, if earth-physics were applied). So technically a "flying creature" could be going straight down, and still be consider "flying."
I would imagine that a flying creature that was unable to arrest its own descent rate by normal means could use feather fall: wings wrapped up or tangled in something, you were casting the spell on an unconscious flying creature, etc.
I totally agree, and in fact, were I GMing any situation like this, I would say you could cast Feather Fall on any "flying creature" that was "descending against its will or without its consent." :) I just like pointing out how the rules are a bit strange at times. :) I suppose that makes me contrary and cantankerous; I guess I feel like I've earned the right to be so, after so many years playing this game.
I'll just mention that "flying creature" could be read to mean "a creature that is currently flying" rather than "a creature capable of flight" or "a creature with a fly speed." That's how I would read it, anyway.
Tar-Tar, I totally get that and agree. My problem is the fact that a flying creature has the option to "fly" straight down, which is essentially the same movement as falling. This is why the rules need a GM, because the GM knows when a creature is moving straight down out of the sky because it wants to (descending), and moving straight down out of the sky but it doesn't want to (falling).
I think the "flying creature" citation means "a creature who is currently flying", not "a creature who is capable of flight"
I'll just mention that "flying creature" could be read to mean "a creature that is currently flying" rather than "a creature capable of flight" or "a creature with a fly speed." That's how I would read it, anyway.Tar-Tar, I totally get that and agree. My problem is the fact that a flying creature has the option to "fly" straight down, which is essentially the same movement as falling. This is why the rules need a GM, because the GM knows when a creature is moving straight down out of the sky because it wants to (descending), and moving straight down out of the sky but it doesn't want to (falling).
The reason the rule against Flying creatures was put in was to prevent spell abuse on enemy flying creatures(Cast it on a Dragon to force it out of the air for example)
Define Flying.... Wing flapping?
What about creatures that do not have wings? (Druid wildshaped into Air Elemental for example)..
Also Fall Speed was measured at 500 feet per round.. with that doubling every round...
So First Round is 500 Feet (6 seconds).
Second Round is 1000 feet, ect..
There are no rules governing if falling is a move action or not... so a Wildshaped Druid Elemental can technically move 500 feet in one round and do a standard action (but I assume most DM's would put in some sort of fly skill or reflex save if the fall was close to the ground,ect).
I just wanted to add that sometime some people that do FLY WOULD INTENTIONALLY Fall
If you are using wings and you fail a Fly check by 5 or more, you plummet to the ground, taking the appropriate falling damage (see Environment).
You are not longer flying if you change from flying to falling due to a failed Fly check.
Everytime you would get falling damage a feather fall ring or spell saves you and it doesnt matters that you can fly or not.
If a falling mount is affected by Feather Fall but its rider is not, what happens RAW ?
I'd say the rider needs to succeed at a ride check to stay on top of the mount.
I'm pretty sure the mention about flying creature was to prevent people from casting it on a flyer to keep them from ever reaching them. "oh you're 600 feat above us and going to dive bomb us" good luck with a fall speed of x"
This. As I said before, this is why the game needs a GM (or just people playing it) because if a flying creature chooses to fall out of the sky as part of a divebombing tactic, and an opponent caster casts feather fall on them to prevent such a thing, somebody has to be there to adjudicate how that works.