Right now I'm running a Tiefling monk and while I don't think it would be particularly useful to sprout wings, while I was researching feats I found out there are feats specific for tieflings that give them wings (Fiendish Bloodline and Outsider Wings).

However, those feats are for 3.0 and in 3.5 the first feat has the prerrequisite of being able to cast 1st level spells without preparation, so even if there was a feat that required the first one, non-caster tieflings would not be able to get them. So, as the title says; is there any combination of feats in 3.5 that can give wings to a tiefling?

  • \$\begingroup\$ It's a hypothetical, really \$\endgroup\$
    – Karrion42
    Commented Jun 20, 2020 at 9:15
  • \$\begingroup\$ Well, the hypothetical was more of a "is there a racial way in 3.5 for a tiefling to get wings", but I specified feats because of the ones I found in 3.0. \$\endgroup\$
    – Karrion42
    Commented Jun 20, 2020 at 12:37

2 Answers 2


Feats that grant wings

Discussed below is the feat Outsider Wings (Races of Faerun 167). However, in addition to that feat, there are several feats that grant wings that allow flight not just to a tiefling monk but to any creature, even if that creature can't cast spells.

  • The domain feat Animal Devotion (Complete Champion 54–5) 1/day for 1 min. causes "[i]ntangible, luminescent wings [to] grow from your back" that initially grant an effect like the overland flight spell. The feat has no prerequisites and can be used again if the creature expends turn undead attempts or taken multiple times for multiple uses per day.
  • The general feat Dragon Wings (Races of the Dragon 100) grants a creature that possesses the subtype dragonblood wings that allow gliding. This can be improved to full-on flight with the feat Improved Dragon Wings (100).
  • The wild feat Eagle’s Wings (Complete Divine 80) allows a creature to spend a use of the supernatural ability wild shape to "grow [for 1 hour] feathery wings [that] allow [the creature] to fly at a speed of 60 feet (average maneuverability)." With enough gp a creature can buy the ability wild shape (see here).
  • The aberrant feat Starspawn (Lords of Madness 181), in addition to other benefits, causes the creature to "grow membranous wings" that grant "a fly speed (with average maneuverability) equal to one-half [the creature's] base land speed… [that can be used] for a number of consecutive rounds equal to 1 + [the creature's] Constitution modifier (minimum 1 round); between these uses [the creature] cannot fly for 1 round." The feat has as its prerequisite two other feats in the same vein.

I suspect the epic feat Divine Infusion (Epic Insights Web column "Epic Divine Feats") becomes available too late and even then might not be useful because it requires the ability to turn undead. Note that this list ignores feats that can grant wings that don't allow flight (e.g. Thousand Faces Jutsu (Dragon #342 85), Vestigial Wings (Fiendish Codex I 87)).

On the feat Outsider Wings and its prerequisite

This DM would allow a tiefling to take the feat Fiendish Bloodline (Races of Faerûn (Mar. 2003) 162) then the feat Outsider Wings (167) despite the existence of the feat Fiendish Bloodline (Dragon Compendium Volume 1 (Oct. 2005) 98–9). Likewise, this DM would allow an aasimar to take the feat Celestial Bloodline (Rac 162) then the feat Outsider Wings despite the existence of the feat Celestial Bloodline (Dragon Compendium Volume 1 93). Let me explain why.

Before I do, though, let me explain why another DM may not allow this. The Dragon #336 (Oct. 2005) Sage Advice column "Official Answers to Your Questions" says, "Unless stated otherwise, any time that a rule appears in two different sourcebooks (other than the [Player's Handbook], [Dungeon Master's Guide], and [Monster Manual]), the most current sourcebook is considered correct and all previous sources are superseded" (95). The Sage at the time is 3.5 revision architect Andy Collins. The exchange is repeated in the Main FAQ (41–2). (Issues with the Main FAQ are addressed here. Also see here and here.) And it's with this ruling in mind that a DM may rule that the Races of Faerun feats Celestial and Fiendish Bloodline are superseded by the Dragon Compendium Volume 1 feats of the same name.

However, the original source for Compendium's version of the feats is Scott Carter's article "Arcane Ancestry: Bloodline Feats for Sorcerers" (Dragon #311 (Sept. 2003) 33–40) that presents the feats Celestial Bloodline (34–5) and Fiendish Bloodline (36, 37) alongside several other feats with the new and unique-to-Dragon-material type bloodline. These Dragon magazine feats are totally different from the Races of Faerûn feats of the same name from Races of Faerûn that were published less than half a year earlier.

Neither that Dragon article nor the Dragon Compendium Volume 1 mentions the feats of the same name from Races of Faerûn. In fact, so far as I can tell, none of the folks who worked on Races worked on that issue of Dragon or were directly involved with the Compendium. (The Compendium "features the design" of James Jacobs, but he's not listed in big type, and the Dragon issue doesn't mention him.) Also, this RPG Geek page doesn't list Scott Carter as a contributor to Races of Faerûn.

Further, both Dragon #311 and the Compendium were published by Paizo, albeit the former with a cover blurb saying, "100% Official Dungeons & Dragons" (see here), and the latter's back cover bearing the Wizards of the Coast seal labeling it an officially licensed product (see the middle image here). In other words, there are two different companies releasing material for the same game at, essentially, the same time. (A less-than-6-mo. gap is an eyeblink in treeware publishing.) Given the tightness of publishing schedules, some overlap is to be expected. (As will be seen shortly, sometimes that overlap occurs even within the same company.)

To sum up, then, less than 6 mo. after Wizards of the Coast published an innocuous pair of feats in Races of Faerûn, Paizo published a pair of feats with the same names in that Dragon article "Arcane Ancestry" that appeared to supersede those relatively recent (from a publishing standpoint anyway) feats from Races or Faerûn. While it's possible to view the article's feats as a correction or to stand firmly behind Collins's recommendation, to this reader the near-parallel publication issue seems accidental:

  • The feats in the "Ancestry" article are utterly different from the feats in Races in type, prerequisite, and benefit. There's simply no relationship but the names between the feats from Races and the feats from "Ancestry."
  • The feats in the "Ancestry" article were presented alongside new feats with similar names, many possessing the identical bloodline type and similar prerequisites and benefits (cf. Air Bloodline, Anarchic Bloodline, Penumbra Bloodline, for example). Other feats in the article never appeared in a sourcebook published by Wizards of the Coast.

Thus I allow creatures to take either or both Celestial Bloodline feats or either or both Fiendish Bloodline feats. I believe it an honest mistake for Paizo to have published these same-named feats and that the Dragon Compendium that eventually compiled those feats compounded the mistake when it failed to change or even acknowledge the duplicate names.

Giving a feat the same name—probably accidentally—as another totally different feat happens sometimes, so talk to the DM when it does

There are several feats with the same name that I suspect share names accidentally.

  • The feat Animal Affinity (Dragon #315 (Jan. 2004) 76) was published after the feat Animal Affinity (Player's Handbook (July 2003) 89), but if the Player's Handbook takes precedence as per Collins's ruling, the newly published feat was immediately superseded by the earlier feat, making it so it was technically never available.
  • If the epic feat Axiomatic Strike (Player's Guide to Faerûn (Mar. 2004) 135) supersedes the general feat Axiomatic Strike (Complete Warrior (Dec. 2003) 96) then the poor monk loses another option. (I mean, it's not a good option, but still…)
  • Dwarves shouldn't lose out on the possibility of the actually decent bonuses from the feat Battle Hardened (Races of Stone (Aug. 2004) 137) just because tucked in the back of Dragon #343 (May 2006) is the terrible feat Battle Hardened (93).
  • Should the feat Blooded (PG 35) that's a Forgotten Realms regional feat supersede the feat Blooded (Dragon #315 51) that's a Greyhawk regional feat therefore making the Blooded feat unavailable in Greyhawk?
  • My favorite is the regional feat Fleet of Foot (PG 38) superseding the general feat Fleet of Foot (CW 99), yet the two feats having totally different prerequisites and benefits, and, unlike the Axiomatic Strike feats, both feats might actually see play (here and here). I wasn't on the Wizards of the Coast messageboards during this time, but I can imagine a lot of angry players scratching their heads over this.

My personal list of suspicious feats goes on and on. I use a document that I compiled of the 3,000-plus official and licensed 3.5-inclusive feats, and I counted about 40 more feat names that are shared by two or more feats but each is markedly different from the other (q.v. the feat Quick Change in this fine answer). To be clear, all but, like, five of these same-named are from either Wizards of the Coast or Paizo rather than other publishers of licensed products like Arthaus, Kenzer & Co., and Sovereign Press.

So the game's not perfect, and as a cohesive legal document it's seriously lacking. On some finer points, DM intervention is required, and the Compendium's bloodline feats superseding the Races of Faerûn feats of the same name is one of those points.

In short, talk to the DM about allowing a tiefling monk to take the Races of Faerûn feat Fiendish Bloodline then the feat Outsider Wings. Good luck, and may you make a convincing case in in fewer words than I've done here.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Woah, this is so incredibly detailed. Sorry @KRyan, but I'm going to accept this one. \$\endgroup\$
    – Karrion42
    Commented Jun 20, 2020 at 19:39

Generally speaking, the best solution here is the feathered wings graft from Fiend Folio. They cost 10,000 gp—roughly the minimum value of a feat, per Arms & Equipment Guide—and they are permanent, infinite-use, non-magical flight for anyone. A tiefling’s Evil subtype even protects them from the maddening effects that a fiendish graft can have on the non-Evil. This is almost-certainly your best option.

But if you really want to use feats, well, there are a few options, but they aren’t very good. I can only find two routes and both require three (!) feats.

Magical Training from Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting or Player’s Guide to Faerûn allows you to cast three cantrips as either a sorcerer or wizard, so if you pick sorcerer, you qualify for Fiendish Bloodline and thus Outsider Wings. Three feats is a lot though, and one doesn’t do much and another does literally nothing for you.

You could also take Dragontouched from Dragon Magic, Dragon Wings from Races of the Dragon, and Improved Dragon Wings also from Races of the Dragon. Problem is, Draconic Wings can only be taken at 1st level, and requires the Dragonblood subtype that Dragontouched offers—so you need some way of getting two feats at 1st for that to work (so unless your game is using the Flaws variant, your options are... dragonfire adept for Dragontouched as a 1st-level bonus feat, I guess?). A dragonblood tiefling would be a bit weird, too.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Is Outsider Wings 3.5-compatible? I know there is an official relation of compatible/reworked feats from 3.0 to 3.5 (such as how Circle Kick got reworked into Snap Kick), however I found it once and never again. \$\endgroup\$
    – Karrion42
    Commented Jun 20, 2020 at 2:42
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Karrion42 I would have to check that. Also, absolutely nothing anywhere says Snap Kick has any relation to Circle Kick—both feats continue to exist in 3.5e. There are cases of that—like Ambidexterity being removed completely, or exotic weapon master replacing weapon master (which is dumb cuz they’re totally different)—but Circle Kick/Snap Kick isn’t one of them. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Commented Jun 20, 2020 at 4:08
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Karrion42 You may be interested in this question. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Jun 20, 2020 at 4:09

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .