Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Expeditious Retreat says

This spell increases your base land speed by 30 feet. (This adjustment is treated as an enhancement bonus.) There is no effect on other modes of movement, such as burrow, climb, fly, or swim.

The fell flight invocation states that the fly speed is your land speed.

FELL FLIGHT Lesser; 3rd When you use this invocation, the powers of darkness bear you aloft as you sprout a streaming, winglike cape of shadows. You can fl y at a speed equal to your land speed with good maneuverability for 24 hours.

Does Expeditious Retreat affect the warlocks fell flight invocation? Would the order matter, for example, should the land speed be increased first and then fell flight be invoked?

share|improve this question
    
Similar question here –  Hey I Can Chan Jan 22 at 16:07

3 Answers 3

up vote 8 down vote accepted

I would say no. First of all, expeditious retreat specifies it doesn't affect flying, and secondly, it only lasts 1 minute/level while the invocation lasts all the time. But, it wouldn't be out of line to rule that it does work.

share|improve this answer
    
It's true that it specifically says that it doesn't affect flying, but the fly speed of Fell Flight is equal to the character's land speed, thus short-circuiting the definition. –  Erik Burigo Dec 23 '10 at 18:47
2  
@ErikBurigo -- It really depends on how you interpret "There is no effect on other modes of movement, such as burrow, climb, fly, or swim." You could interpret it as a clarification (i.e. "If the creature has an explicit fly speed it's not increased"), or as a restriction on the spell (i.e. "This spell only works when the creature is on land, and not flying, burrowing, and so on"). Both are valid with DM consent, but the former is definitely the safer interpretation. –  AceCalhoon Dec 23 '10 at 19:06
    
@AceCalhoon: True. I was going by default on the former; the latter didn't come to my mind. Ah! That's the reason because I love the 4th edition formal wording :) –  Erik Burigo Dec 23 '10 at 19:10
3  
Yeah, in the end it is a DM discretion call and isn't 100% clear, which is why I say it's OK to say they stack, but I think the preponderance of evidence on the intent is that they don't and that's how I'd rule. –  mxyzplk Dec 23 '10 at 19:14
1  
From a metagame perspective, Fly already grants a 60' speed, so it shouldn't stack with another spell that grants a speed increase. Since the land speed is used as a basis for warlock flight (normally only 30'), it wouldn't be unbalancing to let Expeditious Retreat have an impact, bringing the warlock's flight up to the same speed as the Fly spell. As far as the restrictions go, it's definiteley ambiguous, and up to DM disrection. –  RMorrisey Dec 25 '10 at 22:32

If you go just by the literal wording, then yeah it does. If you go by what might be the intent, maybe not. Since it modifies your land speed, and fell flight is always equal to your land speed, then I see no reason it shouldn't. If fell flight simply gave you a flat 30 ft flight speed (modified for size), then I'd say no.

share|improve this answer

Sounds to me like the order in which you use the invocations matters. I would rule that if you used Expeditious Retreat and then used Fell Flight, that it would indeed increase your speed. If Fell Flight explicitly gave a speed instead of using your land speed (which is exactly what Expeditious Retreat does affect) then I would say otherwise. If you used Fell Flight and then used Expeditious Retreat, I would say that you do not get to increase your speed because your land speed changed after your flying speed had already been set.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.