Hello, is it useful to take rolling landing feat for a strix because the strix don't take falling damage ?
Perhaps, a strix takes falling damage if the strix has a immobilized condition ?
Thanks for your future answer.
If the Strix is immobilized I don't see how they would make use of rolling landing.
Keep in mind the prerequisite for Rolling Landing is Cat Fall, which would be the thing typically preventing you from taking falling damage. In the case of the strix, they never take damage from falling. Although there's an argument that it's because they can flap their wings, and if paralyzed/immobilized maybe they should take damage. But cat fall has a similar issue, that it could be argued that if you're unable to move that you can't move in the way Cat Fall describes to soften your landing.
Anyways, if you were immobilized and the GM didn't remove your ability that reduced fall damage, I definitely wouldn't let you move using Rolling Landing, which is what rolling Landing does at all. Cat Fall is the feat that reduces falling damage.
Now where Rolling Landing could be useful, is if your GM let's you fall as a free action you could use Rolling Landing to use your reaction to get some "free movement". Of course, IMO as a GM you shouldn't let falling characters fall as a free action and then the whole thing remains as useful as it would be to a character who wasn't flying. Where in theory your character jumps off a cliff (at least one action) and lands in such a way that they turn the momentum from the fall into additional forward movement.
Additionally, if I were a GM who ruled that Strix take falling damage while immobilized I would almost certainly rule that Cat Fall wouldn't work either.
The prerequisite of Cat Fall would be kind of a wasted feat for a Strix.
But I don't see any reason why Rolling Landing wouldn't work as written. The requirement for using Rolling Landing is that you fall more than 5 feet and don't take damage. Strix does that automatically for all falls, so they always meet the requirement whenever they fall more than 5 feet.
The prerequisite of Cat Fall would be kind of a wasted feat for a Strix.
But I don't see any reason why Rolling Landing wouldn't work as written. The requirement for using Rolling Landing is that you fall more than 5 feet and don't take damage. Strix does that automatically for all falls, so they always meet the requirement whenever they fall more than 5 feet.
I guess I was confused by the way the OP wrote the question.
If it's unclear, I see Rolling Landing being as useful for Strix as it might be for anyone else.
But the prerequisite is a waste for Strix. And as a GM I wouldn't allow a Strix to fall (as a free action) to then allow the reaction for "free" movement.
Personally I don't think spending a feat on cat fall to maybe sometimes get a movement advantage (again assuming you don't allow free action deliberate fall) to be worth it.
If your GM does rule you can fall as a free action, you could definitely abuse Rolling Land to get extra movement, assuming you don't want to use reactions for anything else. Which honestly, you can probably find something better to use reactions on.
Overall, the utility of rolling landing would depend on what class/build the OP is planning to play.
If they're wanting to play a flying archer...rolling landing doesn't really seem all that useful at all.
I think we are pretty much in agreement on this.
I don't think that Drop Prone would count as falling more than 5 feet. Certainly not to Drop Prone, but not actually go prone - instead use Rolling Landing and then remain standing afterwards. That sounds like shenanigans.
Jumping off of a ledge would be a move action of some form.
If you are already dangling from a ledge, then I would allow Release as a free action to drop from the ledge. I don't think that would come up often enough to be abused. Deliberately getting into that position would cost movement actions at some point.
Is it possible to have only the immobilized wings ?
The Immobilized condition isn't that specific. In fact, it doesn't even refer to being unable to move your body at all. Immobilized means that you can't use actions with the Move trait. It would be hard to Escape from Entangling Flora if you were unable to move any body parts.
Immobilized is not the same as Petrified, but without the 'turned to stone' flavor.
Is it possible to have only the immobilized wings ?
Being immobilized has no effect on Strix taking falling damage. They won't, even if petrified.
If you want to "fall" for free, just end your turn without taking a Fly action. Or have a Geomancer caster move you with the Sky power up. You would then fall at the end of that caster's turn (unless you have a fly speed), allowing you to use your Reaction to Step/Stride without triggering reactions.
That is an important point, immobilized doesn't equal paralyzed and I was conflating the two because I was (erroneously) thinking that paralysis gave you immobilized but it doesn't.
To the above poster point, immobilized probably shouldn't impact Cat Fall or Strix ability to negate fall damage. If you got paralyzed (or petrified) while flying, as GM I would rule it does negate Cat Fall or Strix's racial ability.
However, immobilized would prevent you from using Rolling Landing (because all rolling landing does it let you move, and immobilized prevents movement).
If you want to "fall" for free, just end your turn without taking a Fly action. Or have a Geomancer caster move you with the Sky power up. You would then fall at the end of that caster's turn (unless you have a fly speed), allowing you to use your Reaction to Step/Stride without triggering reactions.
But this bit is exactly what I'm saying a GM shouldn't let a flying player do with Rolling Landing. Getting extra movement, especially (potentially) extra movement that doesn't provoke for "free" (spending a reaction) is too good to be true in my opinion.
But this bit is exactly what I'm saying a GM shouldn't let a flying player do with Rolling Landing. Getting extra movement, especially (potentially) extra movement that doesn't provoke for "free" (spending a reaction) is too good to be true in my opinion.
If you want to "fall" for free, just end your turn without taking a Fly action. Or have a Geomancer caster move you with the Sky power up. You would then fall at the end of that caster's turn (unless you have a fly speed), allowing you to use your Reaction to Step/Stride without triggering reactions.
As described, it isn't 'for free' though.
For 'not flying any more' at the end of your turn, the Strix has to have a Fly speed and spent actions previously on flying.
For Geomancer, the Strix character might not be paying much for it, but it is at the cost of the other character's ability usage. So it isn't any more too good to be true than Psychic's Amped Message, Kineticist's Four Winds or the upcoming Commander's Form Up.
To be clear, I don't have a problem if another character has spent actions to lift you up and then you would fall, or otherwise if a character is spending actions to enable movement on your part.
I only have an issue with a player who would intentionally "fall" while flying to get movement without spending an action. I simply don't accept the concept of "I'll do 3 other actions, then fall, and get some free movement" as an intended operation with the feat.
I mean it does work with the rules as written, but I don't think Rolling Landing was written taking into account how a flying character might try to use it.
I think that's how these things are intended to be used; for what other purposes would Rolling Landing be good, if you already have Cat Fall?
Similar to how a caster can intentionally fall so he can use Blastback: nobody learns/prepares that spell thinking "Oh, golly, this spell can be handy if I just so happen to fall today by chance and enemies are near my landing zone by chance as well."
It's an interesting feat for those taking the flight ancestry feats: the first few give you a fly speed and say "If you aren't on solid ground at the end of this movement, you fall." So as long as you spend 10' of movement going up [it's difficult terrain to fly up] or start on a cliff or something, they'd auto fall and trigger Rolling Landing.
To be clear, I don't have a problem if another character has spent actions to lift you up and then you would fall, or otherwise if a character is spending actions to enable movement on your part.
I only have an issue with a player who would intentionally "fall" while flying to get movement without spending an action. I simply don't accept the concept of "I'll do 3 other actions, then fall, and get some free movement" as an intended operation with the feat.
I mean it does work with the rules as written, but I don't think Rolling Landing was written taking into account how a flying character might try to use it.
Your table your rules, but personally I’d allow it. Turning off gravity when a player uses it tactically seems a little petty - dive bombing is common enough in real life flight that it has a name, and any pc with a fly speed can already tuck, fall up to 500 feet, and reaction Arrest a Fall anyway. If they have cat fall, the strix ability, or another similar ability, all they have to do is not fly on their turn to get “free” movement by falling. If they want to invest in two skill feats to add an extra step or stride for their reaction, I’d let them.
Also remember the flip side of not allowing them to fall when they want to - since a flying pc falls after not using a fly action on your turn, the easiest way to fall intentionally on your turn is to just not use a fly action. If you said I didn’t get to, I’d jump for joy - the action tax of using Fly each turn just got thrown out the window.
The problem I have is exactly getting rid of the action tax of flight. I'm not turning off gravity, I'm just saying they wont get the free movement.
Rolling Landing was written in mind of someone having to physically move themselves into a position where they could jump and fall more than 5ft. If you only have ground based movement, you maybe get that once per combat (and probably not even most combat) without deliberately going out of your way to make it happen. But a flying creature could basically utilize it every turn. If you don't have any other reactions, this is extremely an attractive option.
And personally I would say dive bombing requires spending an action. It's not simply a free fall. Birds that do dive bomb attacks are very much doing specific things to set themselves up to do it that do not translate to the turn based 3 action system that PF2 runs on.
I guess ultimately what I'd say is, if you want to intentionally fall and use rolling landing I'd make you spend an action.
My inventor uses Rolling Landing in conjunction with Cat Fall and Explosive Leap to great effect.