I have always felt that the current falling rules in D&D are too lenient. I understand that the idea behind the rules is to be fast and easy and not to distract from the game, but still, the rules have never sat well with me. So I decided to try and come up with my own alternate rules for falling to make it a little more scary a prospect. Please understand that I still want to keep falling somewhat of an abstract and do not want to delve too far into the realm of realism. I've seen plenty of threads discussing how falling should work physically and am not interested in being that precise. I only wish to make falling more dangerous, not real. So here it is:
First off, the damage from a fall is still 1d6 per 10 ft. fallen. Now with the changes/additions:
One: The damage cap for falling is increased to 50d6. I figure that after 500 ft. one has probably reached terminal velocity, and even if they haven't, I didn't want to stray too far away from the abstract.The reason I changed the damage cap is because I have always been dissatisfied with the 20d6 cap. It seems so small when compared to the kind of HP higher level characters will possess. The current system caps out a maximum of 120 damage. Now, while that certainly is nothing to scoff at, it really isn't very scary after, say, Level 10. While even very high level characters will eventually be able to shrug off this damage, it is likely still high enough to provoke concern.
Two: Institute death by massive damage ruling. I'm not sure if death by massive damage applies to falling or not per actual rules, I decided to enforce it here as follows:
If character takes 50 points of damage or more, they must make a Fort Save DC 15 + 1 for every additional 10 damage taken or die from system shock of the fall. I figure that with the risk of real death, falling becomes a lot more scarier.
I do recognize that this scaling of the Fort save may be a bit too much, especially if I'm also allowing a higher damage cap from falling, and am thus open to the possibly of being more lenient here. Perhaps DC 10 + 1 for every additional 10 damage? Or perhaps DC 15 + 1 for every 20 damage? Or even increase the threshold from 50 to, say, 60? 70?
Three: Falling from great heights is traumatizing to the body, no matter who you are, and so I added the following to simulate the shock:
If a character falls 200 ft. or more, they must make a Fort save DC 20 + 1 per every additional 10 feet fallen (DC 21 at 210 ft, DC 22 at 220 ft. etc).
On failure, character is nauseated for a number of rounds equal to the DC minus 19 (1 round at DC 20, 2 rounds at DC 21, etc) and then sickened for twice that length.
On success, character is only sickened for a number rounds equal to the Fort DC minus 19 (like above).
Why nausea and sicken? I believe that these conditions can adequately simulate the shock one's body takes from falling so far without delving too deep into realism. I wanted to remain somewhat abstract concerning falling and I feel these conditions do a decent job of representing that without going into things like ability damage (something I was trying to avoid). After all, if you really fell from such a distance, chances are you would be in shock for a lot longer than just a minute or two, so I'm still being somewhat lenient here.
---
So there it is, part and parcel. Tell me what you think of it or tell me to go home, I'll appreciate either. :)
I thought I read an article by Gygax many years ago where told this story somewhere along the line (or maybe it's just apocryphal):
The original draft of the D&D rules called for 1d6/10 ft/10 ft. That is, the damage is cumalative, with 10 feet being 1d6, but 20 feet being 3d6, and maxing out at 20d6 at 60 feet (which I think is about right for terminal velocity--remember you are accelerating at almost 10 meters per second). However, an editor thought the second "per 10 feet" was an error and deleted it and the rules were published as 1d6/10 feet, max 20d6.
Come to think of it, I wonder if that's why ended up as an editor with a math minor...?
I've always used what I consider the canonical falling damage in D&D. It's slightly scarier. Maybe we can bring that back in Pathfinder RPG. Though, with the escalation of HP in the last couple of editions, maybe the damage die should be increased to a d8 or d10. Pushes that massive damage potential a lot closer.
|
Crow, two things.
First: One thing you might wish to consider, broken bones. After a fall of so many feet(best choice in my oppinion), upon so much damage recieved, on a failed save, or any combination of the three, you roll 1d6 to determine the possibility of a broken bone.
6 = None
5 = Right Leg
4 = Left Leg
3 = Right Arm
2 = Left Arm
1 = Roll Twice More, disreguarding any additional 1's
Second: Would it no longer be advantagious for me to use a catapult as my personal rapid transit system under your falling rules?
|
|
god, every wizard I've ever made that died has died from falling damage... none of my other characters every fall for some reason.
Second: Would it no longer be advantagious for me to use a catapult as my personal rapid transit system under your falling rules?Still pushing for that, eh Cato?
If you'd had ever gamed with me, you'd know that is something I would have seriously tried in game.
|
|
god, every wizard I've ever made that died has died from falling damage... none of my other characters every fall for some reason.
Second: Would it no longer be advantagious for me to use a catapult as my personal rapid transit system under your falling rules?Still pushing for that, eh Cato?
If you had ever played with me, you'd know that is something I would seriously try in game.
I also am a product of the cumulative falling damage (3d6 at 20 ft., etc.) rule, and pretty much always use that. For longer falls, I've sometimes borrowed from Victory Games rules:
0 - 10 ft. = no damage;
11-20 ft. = light wound (take damage equal to 1/4 your total/max hp);
21-60 ft. = medium wound (1/2 total hp);
61-150 ft. = heavy wound (3/4 total hp);
151-250 ft. = incapacitated (you're at -1 hp);
251 ft.+ = dead.
Why? Because I hate rolling handfuls of d6's (unless my character is using a two-handed sword against a Large creature in 1st edition).
In the 2nd edition PHB or DMG they listed real falls that people survived. One was a fall that the individual received no broken bones and the other was the highest height that someone did not die from. Of course there is the opposite situation where people have broken bones falling in the shower.
HPs have increased with each edition, although falling damage has remained the same. In first edition a fighter was d10 until 9th level basically maxed at a +4 constitution bonus, thereafter you only received +3hp/ level. Now, constitution seems to rise with level and hps accumulate don't level off.
Increasing falling damage to d8 or d10 could definitely be in line.
Combining some of the above ideas...
1d6 per 10 feet for each 10 feet fallen
10 = 1d6
20 = 3d6
30 = 6d6
40 = 10d6
50 = 15d6
60 = 20d6
A soft landing equals a shift from d6s to d4s. Some examples of a ‘soft’ landing would be a lush forest, a pile of hay, slope of a hill, etc.
A hard/dangerous landing equals a shift from d6s to d8s. A dangerous landing would be a surface that is harder then earth. Some examples of a dangerous landing would be solid rock, metal, cobblestones, etc.
A deadly landing equals a shift from d6s to d10s or even possibly d12s. A deadly landing would be one that is arranged to give maximum damage when hit. Some examples of a deadly landing would be jagged rocks, a spiked pit, etc.
|
Also, since any 1d4 Commoner can probably survive a 10 foot fall (even onto concrete) unless the ground scores a critical hit, the damage dice should probably be reduced to 1d4 or even 1d2.
FWIW,
Rez
On this subject, remember Rez that even a five foot fall can kill you if you land wrong. It's not likely, but it's possible. A 1d4 commoner landing wrong and taking the max 6 points is unconcious and dying without aid. I think the random damage of the dice simulates the random chance quite well in its abstract way.
|
I have always felt that the current falling rules in D&D are too lenient. I understand that the idea behind the rules is to be fast and easy and not to distract from the game, but still, the rules have never sat well with me. So I decided to try and come up with my own alternate rules for falling to make it a little more scary a prospect. Please understand that I still want to keep falling somewhat of an abstract and do not want to delve too far into the realm of realism. I've seen plenty of threads discussing how falling should work physically and am not interested in being that precise. I only wish to make falling more dangerous, not real. So here it is:
First off, the damage from a fall is still 1d6 per 10 ft. fallen. Now with the changes/additions:
One: The damage cap for falling is increased to 50d6. I figure that after 500 ft. one has probably reached terminal velocity, and even if they haven't, I didn't want to stray too far away from the abstract.The reason I changed the damage cap is because I have always been dissatisfied with the 20d6 cap. It seems so small when compared to the kind of HP higher level characters will possess. The current system caps out a maximum of 120 damage. Now, while that certainly is nothing to scoff at, it really isn't very scary after, say, Level 10. While even very high level characters will eventually be able to shrug off this damage, it is likely still high enough to provoke concern.
Two: Institute death by massive damage ruling. I'm not sure if death by massive damage applies to falling or not per actual rules, I decided to enforce it here as follows:
If character takes 50 points of damage or more, they must make a Fort Save DC 15 + 1 for every additional 10 damage taken or die from system shock of the fall. I figure that with the risk of real death, falling becomes a lot more scarier.
I do recognize that this scaling of the Fort save may be a bit too much, especially if I'm also allowing a higher damage cap from falling, and am thus open to the possibly of...
Instead of hit point damage, how about 1 point of Con damage per 10 feet of falling?