Paralyzed winged creatures can no longer flap their wings and fall. (See the paralysis monster ability and the paralyzed condition.). Not sure about things like stunned or grappled.
If you are paralyzed then you can't move at all. If you can't move due to another reason then you might need to list what else is preventing movement.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you are able to move limbs then you should be able to hover even if you cannot make a move action. Failure to succeed in the hover check would probably result in falling (it is not defined).
Here is my take: if you are unable to move limbs then you would fall. Note: paralyzed is the only one that prevents limb movement as if you have a dexterity score above 1 you are assumed to be taking some level of defensive action. This is based on the idea that a helpless creature is immobile while a non-helpless creature is not immobile.
There have been plenty of debates to establish mobility within a square even if you do not move.
Dazed: Not helpless and thus you do not have an effective 'zero' dexterity. Thus you are still able to move enough for defenses so you should be able to remain standing or hover (if you make a fly check).
Stunned: same as Dazed although you lose some dexterity (not zero, just bonuses).
Cowering: same as Stunned.
Paralyzed: Helpless. If you need to move limbs to fly you fall.
Grappled: loss of some dexterity but you are not restricted in limb movement.
Fascinated: same as Dazed.
Confused: same as Dazed.
In short, the concept that you are constantly moving in your square (unless you are helpless) has been well established in previous threads. There is only one condition presented here that results in your being helpless. As a result you can still flap your wings to hover IF you make the skill check.
Note: there is a debate on whether Hovering is an action or not. Cyrus believes it is a "Move" move action while I do not.
Note2: There is no listed penalty for failure to make the skill check for Hover. I would probably rule that if you have no actions available you fall if you fail while if you have actions available you can move to avoid falling.
What reasons can we muster that would prevent movement- feel free to add more as you come across them.
-Dazed (Cannot take actions)
-Stunned (Cannot take actions)
-Cowering (Cannot take actions)
-Paralyzed (Wraithstrike already mentioned. Presumably buoyant or supernaturally flying creatures don't necessarily fall.)
-Grappled (Cannot move)
-Fascinated (assume it fails all saves)
-Confused and "doing nothing but babbling incoherently" (Cannot... do anything?)Any other conditions/spell effects that you can think of? Please add them to the list. For the purposes of the continued debate from the other thread, Grappled would be the most important one, but I am interested in what happens in all these cases.
When PF says you can't move they normally mean that you can not change you location by normal movement. It does not mean that none of your limbs work.
If you could not move(your limbs) at all then you could not escape a grapple or pin.
One case at a time.
The grapple check does not allow you to hold a specific limb down.
So there is no reason you could not hover. It is a nonaction.
The rules say "Action: None. A Fly check doesn't require an action; it is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation."
No matter if the check is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation the action is still "none".
I don't see anything in the book saying your wings or any other limb does not work, other than the rule about not being able to use "two hands" for a specific action.
Other conditions/abilities tend to take away actions or stop your entire body from moving such as stun.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Right- one must be able to move about, or one would be helpless. But one assumes (I think) that you must be able to fly in order to hover, and flight implies movement. So, if you can't move, you can't fly, can't hover, right?
This is the heart of your problem. You are assuming that you have to move to fly. The game does not assume that. You can hover which is NOT moving. You do not move and then hover. You are either moving, or you are hovering.
If you fly at 1/2 (or over) your fly speed you have no difficulty doing so. This is a move action.
If you fly at less than 1/2 your speed you have to make an (DC10) fly check. A 5' step is all that is required here to do so as it is less than 1/2 your speed and you moved.
If you have not moved at all then you are hovering and you need to make a DC15 fly check.
There is no action involved for a 5'step or not moving. The fly check is a reaction to the situation that you are not moving at 1/2 fly speed.
Action: None. A Fly check doesn’t require an action; it is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation.
A situation does not have to be externally derived. You can generate a situation where a check is required.
What reasons can we muster that would prevent movement- feel free to add more as you come across them.
-Dazed (Cannot take actions)
-Stunned (Cannot take actions)
-Cowering (Cannot take actions)
-Paralyzed (Wraithstrike already mentioned. Presumably buoyant or supernaturally flying creatures don't necessarily fall.)
-Grappled (Cannot move)
-Fascinated (assume it fails all saves)
-Confused and "doing nothing but babbling incoherently" (Cannot... do anything?)Any other conditions/spell effects that you can think of? Please add them to the list. For the purposes of the continued debate from the other thread, Grappled would be the most important one, but I am interested in what happens in all these cases.
When PF says you can't move they normally mean that you can not change you location by normal movement. It does not mean that none of your limbs work.
If you could not move(your limbs) at all then you could not escape a grapple or pin.
Right- one must be able to move about, or one would be helpless. But one assumes (I think) that you must be able to fly in order to hover, and flight implies movement. So, if you can't move, you can't fly, can't hover, right?
But, to put it back into terms of actions (which are more concrete in terms of the game)... If you can't move, what action are you making the hover check as part of? Or is it a reaction? What actions are legitimate actions to make a fly check as part of them? I have always assumed that the answer is "actions that use your fly speed," but of course I could be wrong.
Hovering is not moving(changing location). If you hover you are using flight to stay in the same spot.
The "move action" should not be confused with "the ability to move limbs", or "change location". The "move action" probably should have been called something else to be honest. It is really just an action that is less than a standard or full round action.
If someone grapples you then you can not move(change location). By the fly rules you must make a fly check because you did not move. Fly checks have no action. Why are you making this fly check? Well it is because you are grappled in this case so it seems like a reaction to the situation. If you were not in the situation of being grappled you could move(change location).
Actions that call for a fly check could involve flying, such as you trying to "Turn greater than 45° by spending 5 feet of movement", but as the book said it also involves situations, such as you getting hit while flying. The act of flying did not cause the check. The damage you took while flying did.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I see no reason to assume that Hover can be performed as a reaction. If you weren't grappled, could you take a full attack, then "react" to the fact that you didn't make any movement by making a DC 10 fly check to move up to half your movement because it's a fly check, and those can be made as reactions to situations? I can think of any number of other situations in which moving half your fly speed as a reaction to "a situation" would be very game breaking. In Pathfinder, reactive effects/checks/actions are generally to very specific circumstances that are spelled out.
I would require the fly action before the full attack since it should take place upon your nonmovement which begins as soon as you start your full attack. As to "reactive situations" being spelled out the game is too opened ended to provide a full list. If you have one then I would like a citation.
The fly skill feels very incomplete to me. Hover - in practice one of the more important uses of the skill - lacks a description completely. The Hover feat, however, says "Benefit: A creature with this feat can halt its movement while flying, allowing it to hover without needing to make a Fly skill check."
If the grappled creature had the hover feat he would not even need a fly check. He could just hover.
Movement is a game term, as in "The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step." Obviously, this it is impossible to move one's limbs except to take a 5 foot step during the full attack; movement in pathfinder is moving from square to square. I propose that if you have no movement to speak of (because you "can't move"), it is impossible to "halt" your movement. The language of the feat implies that it is this (intentional) halting of one's movement that allows hovering.
You can stop your movement at any point while you are flying. That is what the "flying less than half your fly speed" check is for. Hovering is just "not moving".
There is nothing in the rules that says you can only move your limbs to take a 5 foot step. Free actions such as loading a weapon require limb movement. Free actions such as dropping prone require limb movement.That feat means that you can stop making attempts to change you square without further skill checks. In other words you can stay in the air in one spot round after round. Hovering=staying in one spot in the air.
As an example--> If I start and end my round in the exact same place I need to make a fly check for hover.
If I move 10 feet by flying, but my fly speed is 100 then I need to make a fly check for not moving far enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I guess I just don't buy hover as a reaction. Furthermore, I don't buy that a creature that can't propel itself through the air can possibly be considered a "flying creature," based on a standard English definition of "flying" (Pathfinder does not provide a new definition). Thus I see no way for it to use the fly skill at all.
So a hovering hummingbird or helicopter is not flying?
There are uses of fly that mention "situations" in which you are forced to roll a reactive fly check. I see no reason to assume that other uses of Fly can be used as reactions. This would be a blank check- as a reaction to anything you like, roll any fly check, for any reason. "Reacting" to your own refusal or inability to spend an action moving stretches the normal definition of a reaction.
The reaction is when used is normally referring to external simuli. As an example if someone is hiding you get a perception check as a reaction.
At this point, what's to stop you arbitrarily moving around the battlefield (half your fly speed at a time) because you are "reacting" to the "situation" of not being where you want to be? Dodge every area spell- why not, it's a non-action that you can take as a reaction to any situation. Or something?
I never said you could change location. Nothing in the book suggest that. It only says that you get to make a fly check as a reaction. As an example if you get hit by two AoE spells in the same round then you have to make two fly checks or lose altitude.
Of course I don't have a complete list of legal reactions, immediate actions, and AoO's in pathfinder. Heck, at least one is up for grabs right here and now. But, most reactions have clear-cut things that allow them to happen- the most common one of these is probably the provoking AoO's.
When something is not in the book in specific words it is not always clear-cut, but that does not mean it is not the intent. I really doubt that you can force a flying creature to the ground with a grapple check unless you are too heavy for it to support your weight.
Another point is this:
Attacked While Flying: You are not considered flat-footed while flying. If you are flying using wings and you take damage while flying, you must make a DC 10 Fly check to avoid losing 10 feet of altitude. This descent does not provoke an attack of opportunity and does not count against a creature's movement.
A grapple is an attack. It never says take damage so you might only need a DC 10. Personally I am going with the 15 because it makes more sense, but the DC 10 is RAW. How I think the 15 is RAI.
Now if you can make the fly check during the initial grapple, then there is no reason you can not do so during the following round.
But let's say we want to count it as a collision.
Collision While Flying: If you are using wings to fly and you collide with an object equal to your size or larger, you must immediately make a DC 25 Fly check to avoid plummeting to the ground, taking the appropriate falling damage.
You still get a chance to stay up. As you can see when you are affected by an external force there is no way to force you to the ground.
If something that is above your carrying capacity jumps on you then I could see you falling, but other than that, I see no rules that equate a grapple to "you get no fly check".
The hummingbird and the helicopter are able to propel themselves through the air, they just aren't doing it right now. The grappled drake/dragon/manticore/whatever isn't able to do so, because it can't move. Grappled creatures are restrained. The fact that it can't use it's wings to fly implies that it's wings are restrained. It seems unreasonable (to me) that one of the most involved flying maneuvers possible (for a winged creature) would not only be achievable while restrained in such a manner, but also that it wouldn't take any time/effort/action whatsoever to pull off.
Also, do you believe that a Pinned (winged) creature can hover? If not, why not?
If a creature can remain airborne under its own power then it can fly. If I surround that hummingbird with glass it can't propel itself forward anymore than a flying creature that is grappled in pathfinder. That does not mean it is not flying while hovering.
Also the fact that it(a creature) can't use its wings to fly does not mean the wings are restrained at all. It just means they are not strong enough to create movement for whatever reason, just like if you put me in a cage----> My legs can move(and are not restrained), but the cage can still be limited enough in space that I can not change my location. Lack of movement does not equate to restraining of limbs.
Pinned=Can fly.
The extra restrictions in the pin condition do not restrict flying. They restrict movement(changing of location). Hovering is flying. If it made you incapable of taking physical actions or at least limited wing movement then I would say hover would be out of the picture also.
You are going to need to cite some rules if you want a convincing argument. It seems like you are saying "by my logic I don't think this is how it works", not that I that is a bad thing, but the rules don't always agree with logic, even if it makes perfect sense in our world.
Example: Paralyzed creatures get reflex saves despite reflex saves being based on your ability to dodge certain effects.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cyrus, you seem to not have a very strong grasp of the rules. I do not say this to be insulting, but many of your arguments just flatly don't make sense.
Hovering is not really a reaction. Hovering occurs because you didn't otherwise take any movement. The rules make this pretty clear.
If you move more than half your flight speed you don't need to make any fly checks to keep flying. If you move less than half you must make a DC 10 fly check. If you don't move at all (from your cube) you must make a DC 15 fly check to Hover. Hover literally represents not spending an action to move.
The idea that you need to spend an action to hover because you didn't move makes no sense. If this was the case flying creature would never be able to full attack, but they certainly can.
The hummingbird and the helicopter are able to propel themselves through the air, they just aren't doing it right now. The grappled drake/dragon/manticore/whatever isn't able to do so, because it can't move.
Under what real world experience are you declaring any of the listed creatures as being unable to hover in the same manner a hummingbird does?
Also, if a dragon initiates a grapple against a human, both the dragon and the human gain the grappled condition. Do you believe that by so doing that dragon is forcing itself to fall to the ground because it can no longer move (as per the grappled condition)?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cyrus, again, your problem is conceptual rather than with the rules. You seem to have started with a concept (grappled creatures cannot fly because X) and then looked for rules support.
1) There is nothing in the rules that states that a grappled creature cannot fly or hover. However, lets move to the other points first.
2) Hover is clearly in the rules a non-action. All fly skill checks are non-actions as stated in the fly skill.
3) The fly skill has also clearly stated that fly skill actions are part of other actions or reactions to situations.
You have chosen to designate the inability to travel any distance 'not a situation'.
You are flat out wrong in making this designation.
a : relative position or combination of circumstances at a certain moment
b : a critical, trying, or unusual state of affairs :
Is the inability to travel any distance a situation? Yes. It is a combination of circumstances at a certain moment that results in your inability to travel any distance.
The reaction to that situation is to attempt a Hover check.Action: None. A Fly check doesn’t require an action; it is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation.
4) Your definition of flying as being 'in motion' is selective.
Here is another definition:1 a : moving or capable of moving in the air
(bold mine)
Here is yet another definition:
1 a : to cause to fly, float, or hang in the air <flying a kite>
Hovering seems to qualify under either definition. Are you saying a kite is not flying if it is not moving from it's position? Are you saying a hummingbird is not flying if it is hovering?
Back to point 1) Grapple is not a full body hug. It does not interfere with any body part EXCEPT for using two hands together. Earlier editions of D&D were different in this respect and grapple was more of a full body hug.
Summary:
Grapple does not limit you from flying. It limits you from traveling any distance.
Hover does not take an action (if it did then creatures built to full attack while on the wing would not be able to and that is clearly not how things are ran).
a helpless creature fails all checks automatically except fort saves im pretty sure, so it would fail the fly check to hover. if you want to get pedantic then far as the rules tell us no you dont have to fall when paralized but i tihnk most gms would say you do.
if you want the letter of the law far as we can see you dont have to fall when paralized gms just do it cuz that feels right
Can an unconscious creature hover? They are helpless and treated as having a Dex of 0, which prevents actions but does not call out "non-actions," nor does it make the target paralyzed, only "immobile," which, after all, only means that you cannot move.
An unconscious creature using magical flight can hover if it makes the check. Of course it takes penalties to the check because fly is a dex based skill and the unconscious conditions is as follows:
Unconscious creatures are knocked out and helpless. Unconsciousness can result from having negative hit points (but not more than the creature's Constitution score), or from nonlethal damage in excess of current hit points.
A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks get no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.
As a full-round action, an enemy can use a melee weapon to deliver a coup de grace to a helpless foe. An enemy can also use a bow or crossbow, provided he is adjacent to the target. The attacker automatically hits and scores a critical hit. (A rogue also gets his sneak attack damage bonus against a helpless foe when delivering a coup de grace.) If the defender survives, he must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt) or die. Delivering a coup de grace provokes attacks of opportunity.
Creatures that are immune to critical hits do not take critical damage, nor do they need to make Fortitude saves to avoid being killed by a coup de grace.
Which causes -5 penalty to the check.
Those creature using winged flight are unconscious and obviously cannot flap its wings so it would fall.
a helpless creature fails all checks automatically except fort saves im pretty sure, so it would fail the fly check to hover. if you want to get pedantic then far as the rules tell us no you dont have to fall when paralized but i tihnk most gms would say you do.
if you want the letter of the law far as we can see you dont have to fall when paralized gms just do it cuz that feels right
No, they don't automatically fail any checks. They'll take a penalty to all dex based checks and reflex saves. But they don't automatically fail.
Can an unconscious creature hover? They are helpless and treated as having a Dex of 0, which prevents actions but does not call out "non-actions," nor does it make the target paralyzed, only "immobile," which, after all, only means that you cannot move.
If you are unconscious you can not do anything because you are also "knocked out".
Now there is no game definition for "knocked out" so we go to the common English use, and we know that "knocked out" creatures can not fly, hover, or use wings if they require wings to fly.
Pinning could cause a wing flying creature to fall, depending on interpretation.
Grappling does not as it only represents have a hold on an arm or limb, but it doesn't specify a limb so it's difficult to say that it would prevent flight.
Restrained isn't a term. You can really only prevent flight (or rather cause them to fall) if you can prevent someone from using their wings. Otherwise, you can only prevent them from moving from their cube.
...if a dragon initiates a grapple against a human, both the dragon and the human gain the grappled condition. Do you believe that by so doing that [the] dragon is forcing itself to fall to the ground because it can no longer move (as per the grappled condition)?
@Cyrus, I'm still waiting for your response to the above.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
According to Wraithstrike's last post, paralyzed creatures don't automatically fail reflex saves, so helpless creatures don't fail all checks.
Correct. There is more than one type of check. A save is a check that only fails on a nat one so you at least get an attempt unless a specific rule says other wise.
Gauss, the first definition you listed seems to be in my favor, as a grappled creature is not moving or even capable of moving through the air (at least not in any meaningful way). A hummingbird is capable of moving through the air.
Being grappled does not restrict you from being able to fly, only from changing your location. Your problem is that you are trying to assume all flight equals a change in location. Hovering is "flying in place". That is why I brought up the hummingbird and helicopter examples earlier.
The second definition is to cause another thing (not yourself) to fly, as in flying a kite. When I fly a kite, *I* am flying the kite, I am the subject of the sentence.
That is like saying that because you are "walking a dog" that you are walking even though you are in a wheelchair. We both know that in both cases the kite is flying, and dog is walking, and you are doing neither one. You are really just guiding or controlling. In no sense of the word are you flying (moving through the air while airborne) or walking(while "riding" in a wheelchair).
Being unconscious describes the game effects of unconsciousness, including that you are helpless. If being "knocked out" (not a technical term in Pathfinder) via the unconscious condition prevents hovering, why wouldn't being "restrained" (again, not a technical term in Pathfinder) by the grapple condition? I agree that, using common sense, being knocked out should prevent such things. But I also hold the apparently radical belief that, according to common sense, being meaningfully "restrained" prevents the difficult maneuver of keeping oneself in place in midair using wings.
No. Restrain is not a game term and in no way assume that you can not use any specific limbs. In no way does being restrained equate to "you can not use any(as in all are barred) locomotive limbs".
As an example if I tie a chain(10 feet) and heavy weight to an animal that can fly that animal should have no problem reaching a height of 10 feet. Is it restrained per the dictionary term? I would say yes. Can it fly? I am also saying yes since it can become airborne.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cyrus, you keep trying to assign the requirement of being able to move 5 feet (or more) to the definition of being in flight. Where are you getting this? The two have nothing to do with each other as wraithstrike has shown on several occassions.
A thought exercise for you:
Chain a hummingbird to a perch at the ankle. Make the chain 12inches long.
Can the hummingbird fly? Yes, assuming the chain is light enough (we will assume it is).
Can it fly more than 12inches? No, it is chained.
Can it hover? Yes.
Is it flying? YES.
The hummingbird never leaves it's 5x5 foot square and yet it is very obviously flying. This is NO different than being grappled.
Why is this such a difficult concept for you?
Edit: This is what I get for not reading to the end of the thread before posting. wraithstrike posted almost the same thing. LOL
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cyrus, you keep associating grapple with flying.
Once again:
You are on the ground and have two legs. You are grappled. You cannot move. Are your legs grappled to prevent your movement? No.
You are in the earth and can burrow via your claws. You are grappled. Are your claws grappled to prevent your movement? No.
You cannot move. You are in the water and have fins. You are grappled. You cannot move. Are your fins grappled to prevent your movement? No.
You are in the air and have wings. You are grappled. You cannot move. Are your wings grappled to prevent your movement? No.
What do all of these have in common? They are all situations where you are restrained from leaving your square. They have absolutely nothing to do with the locomotive method.
Grapple does not foul legs, claws, fins, or wings. There is nothing in the rules to state that it does.
What grapple is is me grabbing your shirt or armor. This has nothing to do with how you move around in your environment. It is me grabbing you and holding you in place.
Regarding the hummingbird they are both situations where the creature cannot move out of it's square. The inability to change locations is something you have claimed prevents the creature from flying and hovering. Are you ignoring your own statements now?
You seem hellbent on ignoring the facts that half a dozen people provided. Since this is really not going anywhere I think this will be my last post on the topic unless something comes up. My point is made, other people's point is made. You are clearly operating against the rules.
Also, I don't know if you answered this, but why is it okay to hover as a reaction to a situation but not to move up to half one's speed as a reaction? I assume that some uses of the fly skill may be used as reactions and others cannot, and therefore must be part of some other action. Which uses of the fly skill are usable as reactions and why?
When you make the fly check it is to move half your speed, it does not really allow you to move. The fly check is to be able to perform the maneuver correctly. Basically it is a "can I fly well enough to move half my speed and still be airborne check". As an example if you try to make a high degree turn you need to make a certain DC or you can't make that turn. If you fail the fly check to hover then you don't get to hover.
Do you get what I was saying or were you trying to be pendantic, even though you knew what I meant?
As for the hummingbird you used the term "restrained" so we answered it in that manner.
Once again there is no place in the books which specify how you are held so grapple can not restrict the use of wings or legs. Therefore it can not restrict flight. Without a rules citation saying something like "wings are not allowed to be used" or "you can not maintain your position while in flight" you can not prove anything.
As for flying freely vs forcing a hover check, all that is done is making a task more difficult by taken an option away.
Flying forward per the fly skill is normally an option. Hovering is also an option.
All grappling does is remove one of the options.
By your logic difficult terrain should not allow an acrobatic(tumbling specifically) check because if you can't even make a 5 foot step there is no way you should be tumbling around. I am sure tumbling is more complicated than a 5-foot step, but it is also allowed, even in difficult terrain by the rules.
edit: If you decide to reply then remember to have rules citations. Otherwise you won't really convince anyone.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can't cite rules about grappling specifically prevents you from flying (at least, from hovering) - I have said multiple times (though probably mostly in the other thread) that the rules for flying are inadequate. Hover isn't described the way something like "attacked while flying" is, and there is nothing in the rules telling us which fly actions we can use as reactions to situations vs. part of another action (again, presumably an action to move).
The Hover use of the fly skill lacks a description, but the Hover feat says: "Benefit: A creature with this feat can halt its movement while flying, allowing it to hover without needing to make a Fly skill check."
Let's assume that this hovering works just like hovering with the Fly skill, but requires no check (as Wraithstrike seems to suggest above). I have argued that a creature without any movement (a game term) cannot "halt" their movement. According to the feat, a creature can halt it's movement while flying, *allowing* it to hover. This seems to imply that you must have movement to halt in order to hover.
The rules are written with certain assumptions and they don't count corner cases. That is why hover(the feat) is worded that way.
As another example:
Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component.
However:
Blink Dog Sages
A pack's alpha selects the wisest and most intelligent member of the pack to serve as its sage. This blink dog often has sorcerer levels....
Blink dogs do not have hands, and it has no rule to bypass the "hand" limitation. Nagas(also have innate sorcerer levels) don't have hands or a rule that allows them to not use hands.
I propose that only the uses of the fly skill that we are usable as reactions are the ones that tell you when to roll them as reactions in the description of the fly skill, such as "attacked while flying." If hover has to be part of an action (as it does not tell us we can use it as a reaction) that grants movement (as argued in the previous paragraph), and you can't take get that movement, how can you hover?
Acrobatics uses similar language for what action it takes up; "Action: None. An Acrobatics check is made as part of another action or as a reaction to a situation." Does this mean that if I am Greater Bull Rushed by an opponent, I can react with the "move through threatened squares" use of Acrobatics in order to not provoke AoO's from his allies? If not, why not? I propose that the answer is: No, because the Acrobatics skill tells us when to roll reactive Acrobatics checks (such as when you take damage while balancing).
You are being pendantic again. You know you can't move when it is not your turn, just like you can't make that 90 degree turn when in the air it is not your turn and you are not moving under your own power.
Now if you are balancing on a thin ledge and you take damage then I would say you have to make an acrobatics check to not lose your balance and fall, but nowhere does acrobatics or flight equal free movement(changing location).
Basically the checks while taking damage are to "not lose your current position". They are not intended to grant free movement, but I am sure you know that.
Now lets look at some rules.
Action(heal skill): Providing first aid, treating a wound, or treating poison is a standard action. Treating a disease or tending a creature wounded by a spike growth or spike stones spell takes 10 minutes of work. Treating deadly wounds takes 1 hour of work. Providing long-term care requires 8 hours of light activity.
Action: Using Intimidate to change an opponent's attitude requires 1 minute of conversation. Demoralizing an opponent is a standard action.
As you can see when a skill takes multiple actions depending on the situation it is spelled out.
Fly does not have multiple actions. It just has "none". That means anytime you need to use the fly skill it is always none. Maybe you feel like the designers forgot a rule and/or the skill needs errata, but in that case you should start a thread asking for an FAQ/errata. As it stands nothing is stopping a flying creature from hovering by the rules.
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
So in order to hover you have to be able to do something else such as actually use a skill. You can't really do "something else" while you are unconscious. So that means that nobody is nocking a bow or hovering while they are unconscious.
So by RAW unconscious does not prevent non-actions, but they do prevent that "something" that nonaction is a part of, which in turn prevents the non-action.
A tip: You have to know when to read the rules in context. By strict RAW dead people can still take actions, but don't try it at anyone's table and expect for them to allow it.
bbangerter; this is a good point. I seem to recall that in 3.5 you could take some huge penalty on a grapple check to not be considered grappled yourself. According to Pathfinder RAW, something very strange still happens, even if I am wrong about hovering- the colossal dragon can't grab a princess and fly off at anything near full speed. Rather than double-moving each round (or using the Run action, even), it can only move once at half speed by making a grapple check. Yes, this is pretty silly.
Creatures with the grab ability have the option to not gain the grappled condition but take a -20 to their CMD when the grappled creature attempts to free itself.
But even on my reading, so long as it moved up to grapple her, then moved every round (or at least spent some sort of action hovering), it would never have to fall. But when it's not in control of the grapple, it doesn't even have the option to *attempt* to move (in the sense of moving from square to square) without breaking the grapple.
Wraithstrike and Gauss have already sufficiently covered the rules on this, e.g, grappled condition does not prevent taking move actions that don't involve actual movement, nor restrict any specific limbs/appendages. Hovering is of course a non-action, but even if it were a move action, grappling wouldn't prevent it as grappling does not remove a creatures ability to take a move action, only the ability to move from square to square (which hovering does not change).
Also, I don't know if you answered this, but why is it okay to hover as a reaction to a situation but not to move up to half one's speed as a reaction?
Moving requires an action while staying in place does not.
The common definition of hovering is floating/flying in the same spot - i.e. not moving. You make the fly skill check on your turn. If you fail it and are capable of taking a move action to move (not grappled) then you can move instead of falling. If you are grappled and fail your hover check you fall.
The way you've written D in and of itself is not wrong - you must not move in order to hover (which matches the definition of what it means to hover). What is right about D is that if you are not hovering then you must either be falling or moving, so naturally to hover you must not be moving (and not be falling either).
What you've got wrong is combining D & F that without the feat you must move to be able to hover (which makes no sense at all given the definition of hover - since hovering means NOT moving). Or in other words, while you can't halt movement you don't have - since hovering does not require movement, it doesn't matter whether you can move or not in regards to hovering. See examples from wraithstrike and Gauss on chaining a winged creature - it can still fly, even if the chain is only 2.5 feet long - it just can't leave its 5' square. Grappled isn't any different. It's a very confining limitation to where you can 'fly' to (no more than a few feet within your 5' cube), but doesn't remove your ability to fly - which if you aren't moving out of your 5' cube, then in pathfinder terms becomes a hover.
Regarding C. All the feat does is provide an exception to the general rule (lots and lots of feats do this). Normally to hover it takes a DC 15 fly check (note that being grappled does effect this because it applies a dex penalty, which fly is based off of). The exception the feat makes is eliminating the fly check. That exception is the RAW of the feat - plus the whole dust cloud effect that non-feated hovering cannot do.
Note also:
Normal: Without this feat, a creature must make a Fly skill check to hover and the creature does not create a cloud of debris while hovering.
Without the feat all that is required is a fly check. Not movement, not an action of any kind (since a fly check is always a non-action), or anything else.
If your deeper concern is the plausibility of a creature with wings hovering (since few real world winged creatures - humming birds and dragon flies and maybe few others) can hover, consider that the ability to fly is rather abstracted to also include the fly spell, ghosts, and other supernatural effects. Do you think a ghost should be unable to hover if it is grappled?
Bbangerter, thanks for the grab reference. I was pretty sure something like that existed in Pathfinder, but I couldn't recall where. I never argued that grappling prevents move equivalent actions other than the action "Move."
The same thing exist in Pathfinder, if you have the "grab" ability.<--Not really part of this debate, but just
Wraithstrike; The Acrobatics v Greater Bull Rush situation is not like the "fly half your speed" situation I presented earlier. You are being moved out of turn and that movement is drawing AoO's. I'm not asking if you gain out of turn movement to avoid being bull rushed, but rather if can avoid AoO's due to the movement you are being "given" forcibly.
No. The tumbling aspect of acrobatics is due to you moving on your own and trying to avoid an AoE. You moving is speaking of you moving under your own power, not you being moved. Otherwise being hit with Awesome Blow or being sent across the room via Telekinesis(a spell) would allow you to flip and tumble. <---I am sure you don't think this is going to be allowed at table.
A) Without the Move action (which is itself a "move action," of course) you don't generally have movement (you can't change your position) except with a 5 foot step.
B) A 5 Foot Step is not an action, so nothing can be "part" of that action.
C) The Hover feat is the only description we have of Hovering in pathfinder (beyond "DC 15").
D) The Hover feat strongly implies that you must halt your movement in order to hover.
E) You don't have movement when it isn't your turn.
F) You can't halt movement that you don't have.
Which of these premises are faulty?
I already explained to you why the hover feat was worded the way it was, and I also showed how hovering is "not an action". I even compared it to skill that showed various actions for various uses.
I also explained that if you halt your flying you have to make a check for moving less than half speed if that is the case, so obviously since that is a different check than hovering that the feat's explanation can not apply. If you move at least half your speed then no check is needed so that also get rid of the hovering idea as explained in the feat.
If the feat is disagreeing with the skill, for which it is supposed to make easier then the feat flavor is wrong.
Just to make sure my words were not lost again:
If you fly and you stop no hover check is made. You make a check for not moving at least half your speed or no check is made at all. That is per the fly skill.
PS: I may have given less detail this time because I already answered this before, but the general premise of my answer is the same.
There is nothing in the rules that says you have to move in order to hover. If you move then you are not hovering that round. You either use flight to hover or you use flight to move. If you move then you go might have to make fly checks depending on the angle of your turns and how far you move.
Also I will ask a question:
Give me a scenario where you would move(by flight) and make a hover(fly) check?
PS: Running into a solid object is handled under collisions, which has a higher DC than hovering so that one is already out.
There is something in the rules that says that you need movement in order to hover, and it's the hover feat. It's not the flavor section of Hover that I have been quoting, it's the Benefit section. You need to halt your movement (which implies that you have movement) in order to hover, according to a pretty straightforward reading of the feat. You clearly don't need to move (meaning you don't need to change position) in order to hover, because hovering is staying in place. But I assert - based on the wording of the hover feat - that you need to have movement (the currency, if you will, that lets you change position) to hover.
Your previous assertion was that you must come to a stop in order to hover, but we know that is not true since you just admitted that you can hover in place.
Bring grappled does not take away your move speed(currency). It just does not allow you to use it, and there is no rule saying that you have to move or be able to move in order to hover. There is also no rule that says you lose your movement speed in any form if you are grappled. If so, cite the rule.
Also by the RAW and RAI of the fly section hover takes no action, and has not additional requirements. You have yet to state a rule that says "hover requires..." in any form. What you have is a feat saying that you can halt(not fly) and not make a skill check.
edit: Also if you need to halt your movement then you need to halt your movement. So that means that either you do or do not need to be moving.
If you do not need to halt your movement then there is no way to say that you need to be able to move in order to hover.
If you do believe you need to halt your movement, meaning that you must be in motion then tell me why the feat trumps the skill.
What you are doing is ignoring the words "halt" and "movement" as working together because just like me you know that is not the intent. However then you are trying to use the word "movement" because you want it to be true that you can hover while grappled.
The skill is the primary source for how fly works. The feat is not. The general "no action" text applies to all fly check because it does not call hover out. So in order for hover to be different it must be called out.
Also you have not shown the feat to do what you say it does. What it says is you halt movement. What you are saying is that halting is not needed because hovering is staying in one place. You have admitted this.
You can't pick and choose and expect to be right. Either you have to halt movement or you do not.
Question 1:Which is it?
Question 1b: If you are going to say it is movement that must be halted then provide a scenario in which you are moving and halting in the same round?
Question 2: What action can a hover be part of?
Provide a scenario and rules citation for when hover the skill can be used without the hover feat.