Falling onto a swarm


Rules Questions

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.

A bit of a funny this one ...

What happens if I fall 20' onto a swarm of spiders?

I know I take 2d6 damage, how much damage do the spiders take?

Richard


According to the rules, none. Swarms can only be harmed by spells and area of effect stuff. Which is pretty lame IMO. But you can always talk to your dm about it


Well, if it were up to me I'd apply real world physics here. If two cars hit each other, the damage doesn't depend on which one is moving, it's the same energy transfer either way. So the damage depends on which one squishes more easily. A spider swarm has an AC of 17. If yours is the same I'd have them take the same damage. If yours is less, then I'd have them take less damage, if more, more. (If yours was an AC of 12, I'd give them 2/3 the damage.) It ought to matter how big you are too, (you'd squish more of them), but I don't have a clue how to quantify that so I'd ignore it. This is just what I'd do though; if there's a rule I don't know it. :)


It's a swarm. It takes no damage, just as if you hit the swarm with a you-sized mace. (Unless the GM decides this beggars belief and treats the hit as an area effect.)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Swarms are (mostly) immune to weapon damage but a falling PC is not a weapon but a falling object so I would apply the falling objects rules to the swarm.

Dark Archive

I thought falling objects were an area affect, hence should do 1.5x damage, though I'm not sure.

A medium object does 3d6, possibly halved since its not a boulder (might have armour though). Could give the swarm a DC 15 reflex save for half damage?

Richard


But would you then not give an NPC the same advantage i don't see swarms being any better at avoiding falling objects than other things.

Dark Archive

A rat swarm isn't immune to weapon damage, but a spider swarm is. If it's a swarm of tiny creatures, I'd say half damage.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Mergy wrote:
A rat swarm isn't immune to weapon damage, but a spider swarm is. If it's a swarm of tiny creatures, I'd say half damage.

But neither are listed as immune to damage from a falling object, If we're talking RAW.


gourry187 wrote:
Swarms are (mostly) immune to weapon damage but a falling PC is not a weapon but a falling object so I would apply the falling objects rules to the swarm.

Good to know that at your table I can harm swarms by dropping my weapon onto them instead of just swinging it.

Goznaz wrote:
Mergy wrote:
A rat swarm isn't immune to weapon damage, but a spider swarm is. If it's a swarm of tiny creatures, I'd say half damage.
But neither are listed as immune to damage from a falling object, If we're talking RAW.

By RAW characters/creatures aren't objects either so they deal no damage when falling on other creatures.


Nah that could be argued either way to be fair. They either are not because they are not specifically called out as an object or they are because there description gives them mass and dimensions. I'd go with the latter personally.


Also as a gm I would require your weapon to be medium sized (aprox 5' by 5') as opposed to being sized for a medium sized creature. So yeah if your a huge creature wielding a warhammer feel free to rename it fly swatter.


To clarify; falling damage is something YOU take when YOU fall. If you pushed the swarm off a 20 foot ledge I would expect there to be some damage. If I fell into a 10 foot by 10 foot pit full of critters I might crush a few, but not a meaningful amount. Especially as I have a habit of trying to land on my feet and not my face.

Dark Archive

The thing I find difficult to get my head around is the idea that you are not an object.

Presumably if you were dead, you would be.

If you were unconscious ... don't know.

If a dead you would count as a falling object then it would do crushing damage to everything in a 5' square (i.e. area effect, effects swarms x 1.5), so why not an unconscious you or normal you?

Does RAW state specifically somewhere that a living creature is not an object?

Richard


Had the spider been a tiny swarm, I would make it take full damage, just like how you do full damage to tiny swarms with bludgeoning weapons.

But the spider swarm is not a tiny swarm.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

It seems to me that when they gave swarms immunity to weapon damage, they were thinking about traditional melee attacks (swords and whatnot) and not medium creatures belly-flopping onto them.

That being the case, I don't think a slavish adherence to RAW is the best way to handle this situation.

I think same damage as taken by falling creature is a fair way to run it. I might even convert a d6 of the damage to nonlethal damage for both parties, to account for the "soft" landing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

"If an object falls on a creature (instead of being thrown), that creature can make a DC 15 Reflex save to halve the damage if he is aware of the object."
That suggests that anything in the square automatically takes damage. It sounds like an area damage effect to me.


richard develyn wrote:

The thing I find difficult to get my head around is the idea that you are not an object.

Presumably if you were dead, you would be.

If you were unconscious ... don't know.

If a dead you would count as a falling object then it would do crushing damage to everything in a 5' square (i.e. area effect, effects swarms x 1.5), so why not an unconscious you or normal you?

Does RAW state specifically somewhere that a living creature is not an object?

Richard

Objects are treated differently then creatures for a host of spells and effects. For instance objects take half damage from energy and ranged attacks. Certain spells only effect objects. If creatures were objects then you could use shrink item on them.

Goznaz made the point that by RAW falling objects aren't weapons, I was merely extending that logic. In any event using falling creatures as a method of dealing damage is a slippery slope.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Lord Vukodlak wrote:

Objects are treated differently then creatures for a host of spells and effects. For instance objects take half damage from energy and ranged attacks. Certain spells only effect objects. If creatures were objects then you could use shrink item on them.

Goznaz made the point that by RAW falling objects aren't weapons, I was merely extending that logic. Using falling creatures as a method of dealing damage is a slippery slope.

And where do you imagine that slippery slope ending?


Benchak the Nightstalker wrote:
Lord Vukodlak wrote:

Objects are treated differently then creatures for a host of spells and effects. For instance objects take half damage from energy and ranged attacks. Certain spells only effect objects. If creatures were objects then you could use shrink item on them.

Goznaz made the point that by RAW falling objects aren't weapons, I was merely extending that logic. Using falling creatures as a method of dealing damage is a slippery slope.

And where do you imagine that slippery slope ending?

Falling earth elementals.


Lets also consider that falling damage is calculated assuming you're trying actively to not kill yourself (i.e. bellyflop). If you're trying to deal a lot of damage by falling on something you're making yourself more vulnerable, thus letting the ground crit you.


Trying not to injure yourself while falling is covered in the Acrobatics rules. You don't take a critical hit for falling while unconscious.

A falling object and the thing it lands on take the same amount of damage. It wouldn't be unreasonable to apply the same rule to a falling character. So if you used Acrobatics to reduce the falling damage you took, it would also reduce the damage you inflicted on the target.


But here they're trying to do the opposite; instead of landing as normal, they're maximizing the pain they're taking in an attempt to also be an AoE.


Hm... If a player said he wanted to take & inflict maximum damage from falling, I might allow them to add 1d6 to the roll.

I think I'm biased towards allowing this kind of dumb tactic to work. Caster-martial disparity is pretty bad in swarm encounters.


Don't really care about RAW in questions like this... At my table I would rule 1 damage per HD of the swarm. You kill some, but no way you can squash them all...

Dark Archive

Can I just backtrack a little bit here because there are two issues.

Issue 1: If I drop a medium sized object (not a person) from 10'+ onto a swarm, does the swarm take 3d6 x 1.5 damage?

Issue 2: Should a falling person treated as an object in this case (conscious or not)?

Richard

P.S. Gm Fiat notwithstanding, of course :-)

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Lord Vukodlak wrote:


Falling earth elementals.

Doesn't seem like a terrible outcome. If you can set up a situation where Earth Elementals are in a position to fall on an swarm (remember, you can't summon them up there), I think its fair to get some benefit to that. You could alternatively be using huge boulders (which, with shrink item, are easier to carry into position anyway).

And remember, DR doesn't apply to falling damage, so you're janking up your earth elementals in the process.


I've seen a few posts mention "won't kill all the swarm". You don't need to once a swarm hits 0 hps it doesn't die it disperses.
As far as the earth elemental goes, if you can do that you can cast or summon something with good aoe damage more than likely.
Also I think position on the matter comes from people thinking that immunity to weapon damage means immune to all physical damage. If the npc was large to huge I think we would see people arguing more severe damage as opposed to immunity.


falling items are an area effect. They don't use attack rolls. Should kill the swarm.

Shadow Lodge

This actually begs the question, why don't bludgeoning weapons affect swarms?

Surely it's the same principle if you're hammering them or falling on them? I can understand slashing/piercing not working.


Avatar-1 wrote:

This actually begs the question, why don't bludgeoning weapons affect swarms?

Surely it's the same principle if you're hammering them or falling on them? I can understand slashing/piercing not working.

Slashing and piercing do half damage if they're tiny or above, whereupon to my knowledge bludgeoning works normally. Below that is fine and diminutive where i guess a hammer just wouldn't cover enough area.

Dark Archive

A huge hammer wielded by a Storm Giant should hurt them though, shouldn't it.

I guess the answer is that once the bludgeoning weapon gets big enough it should be counted as an area effect (albeit for just a 5' square).

Richard

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Falling onto a swarm All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.