Reading Pathfinder I noticed they removed the variant system for "Death From Massive Damage" which saw a maximum damage cap for sizes of creatures before a Fortitude save had to be made to see if the creature in question died from the shock of the blow instantly.
An example, a single attack that deals 50+ points of damage in one go forces the character to make a Fortitude save based on 10 + the damage differece of (damage -50) I think it was. Now, a situation where this might very well come up is exceptionally large falls and this is my situation.
A Barbarian in my party recently decided the only way to escape a rampaging dragon that had half-killed the party was to leap off the edge of a cliff. Since the damage cap for exceptionally large falls is 20d6, it doesnt matter how large the fall is after 200ft. Now since Pathfinder lacks this "Death From Massive Damage" variant rule, and the Barbarian could survive the fall off the cliff (he had 168 hit points and was unharmed at the point of the jump), he could not feasibly die in the fall though he had no Feather Fall or other fallback to help cushion the fall. Its implied that the character falls this distance in one round, so if the barbarian falls and sustains even maximum damage (120 damage) hes going to dust himself off and walk away. With the "Death From Maximum Damage" rule it would dissuade this suicidal thinking.
Someone suggested a houserule that saw a character making a Fortitude save dependant on how many 6's were rolled on the damage dice that would result in broken legs or other broken bones on a fall if the Fortitude save was failed.
Dont get me wrong, characters are seldom if ever hanging out near the edge of large cliffs like this, but walking away from what must have been a fall of hundreds of feet is unlikely without magical help. I know characters are heroic but the 'Death From Massive Damage' stopped this. The Drowing rule is pretty realistic to a large degree, so why not have something to rule large falls?.
I'd be interested to know peoples thoughts.
You could also institute a house rule classifying a fall of over 200ft to qualify as automatic critical damage, treating the damage rolled as a critical hit for bludgeoning damage. Your possible damage then maxes out at 240, and gets even more interesting if you're using a crit deck.
I thought death from massive damage did exist in Pathfinder as an optional rule, with the further limit that a single attack had to deal at least 1/2 of your total hit points (if that amount was greater than 50hp) for the rule to apply.
I thought death from massive damage did exist in Pathfinder as an optional rule, with the further limit that a single attack had to deal at least 1/2 of your total hit points (if that amount was greater than 50hp) for the rule to apply.
yep it is right there on 189 of the core rule book, and the DC 15 fort save still applies... although personally I would like to make it a bit more lethal, and would probably institute a house rule that the DC is 10 + (Damage - threshold) if it ever came up.
Thanks for that people. ^_^
I like that you mentioned Drowning rules, because I see Falling Damage in the same light. It's something that your training and ability to avoid lethal blows means nothing against, so I don't understand why we are still using hitpoints as a measure of surviving falling damage.
It would make more sense that a person suffers constitution damage from a fall, with a Fortitude save allowing reducing/eliminating the damage.
"Big Tough Burly" types will still survive falls better because they have good Fortitude saves and higher Constitution scores.
But now you don't have to mix the mechanics for fighting creatures that deal 40+ damage in a round against terminal velocity.
Those that actually do have training regarding falling, have a mechanic already in the Acrobatics skill (tumbling checks), and the Monk class for expanding on that.
I like that you mentioned Drowning rules, because I see Falling Damage in the same light. It's something that your training and ability to avoid lethal blows means nothing against, so I don't understand why we are still using hitpoints as a measure of surviving falling damage.
It would make more sense that a person suffers constitution damage from a fall, with a Fortitude save allowing reducing/eliminating the damage.
"Big Tough Burly" types will still survive falls better because they have good Fortitude saves and higher Constitution scores.
But now you don't have to mix the mechanics for fighting creatures that deal 40+ damage in a round against terminal velocity.
Those that actually do have training regarding falling, have a mechanic already in the Acrobatics skill (tumbling checks), and the Monk class for expanding on that.
Thank you...lol, the Drowning Rules are pretty realistic and falling damage while it works for falls of a certain size, the fact damage caps at 20d6 regardless how large the falls are beyond 200ft means tough burly types will gladly hurl themselves off a cliff if it truly called for it.
Someone suggested something like that, to deal a different kind of damage on the way down to represent broken bones and so forth, but to work out the save mechanic they suggested starting with a DC 10 Fortitude with a +1 per natural 6 rolled on the damage dice. The average damage might be a broken leg or something (no run or charge, -4 to dexterity was a sort of houserule)...lol
|
The terminal velocity has been discussed elsewhere, but I don't see the need to limit the damage to 20d6. It seems to me that if TV is at 600 feet (given an object with "average air resistance", whatever that means) then the maximum damage should be 60d6. This is truly only a problem for people who roll real dice (I play using MapTool so typing /roll [20d6] is just as easy as /roll [60d6]).
But I agree that it shouldn't be based on hps and should use a mechanic similar to drowning.
Luckily for your barbarian friend, falling damage will never trigger massive damage as massive damage is only triggered by attacks (though his DR does not apply as that only works against attacks as well).
Hitpoints represent your experience in battle as an abstract value.
Think about what a high level means in your game.
If you think of your world as a kind of anime world where the heros are able to leap large distances, you may choose to ignore falling damage entirely.
If you think of your world as a realistic world (where magic is possible because...), don´t even give him a save. Only maybe a luck save (he catches a branch of a tree). Humans don´t survive falling deep onto rocks.
Whatever you do, make clear the players know how you see the world. Tell the barbarian "You estimate to land savely on the ground, maybe some bones will crack but you are content to survive this" or tell him "As you look down the cliff you are sure, anyone who jumps down here will be smashed"
A Barbarian with a huge sum of hit points throwing himself off a cliff with an estimated height of 400 or so feet should take 40d6, but the falling damage is limited to 20d6, and as others have said, the Death From Massive Damage rule only requires a DC 15 Fortitude save (I do know a roll of 1 always fails but thats such a small margin of error.)
With Drowning being so realistic in the game, as it is with Starvation and Thirst, Fatigue and Exhaustion, I wonder whats to stop a character from abandoning some kind of flying sky ship thats kilometers in the sky if he knows he has more than 121 hitpoints, hes going to walk away from it and dust himself off even if he fell thousands of feet.
On a seperate issue...if a character can fall 200 feet give or take in a round, is it safe to assume that characters who fall more than this in a round should recieve another round to find some means to get out of it (such as trying to find a item that'll give them Featherfall or suchlike), with a new round for every extra 200 feet fallen?, I'd appreciate some thoughts.
On a seperate issue...if a character can fall 200 feet give or take in a round, is it safe to assume that characters who fall more than this in a round should recieve another round to find some means to get out of it (such as trying to find a item that'll give them Featherfall or suchlike), with a new round for every extra 200 feet fallen?, I'd appreciate some thoughts.
I believe the rules already cover falling speed. I'll post them once I find them.
On a seperate issue...if a character can fall 200 feet give or take in a round, is it safe to assume that characters who fall more than this in a round should recieve another round to find some means to get out of it (such as trying to find a item that'll give them Featherfall or suchlike), with a new round for every extra 200 feet fallen?, I'd appreciate some thoughts.I believe the rules already cover falling speed. I'll post them once I find them.
I'd appreciate that thank you.
I'd appreciate that thank you.On a seperate issue...if a character can fall 200 feet give or take in a round, is it safe to assume that characters who fall more than this in a round should recieve another round to find some means to get out of it (such as trying to find a item that'll give them Featherfall or suchlike), with a new round for every extra 200 feet fallen?, I'd appreciate some thoughts.I believe the rules already cover falling speed. I'll post them once I find them.
Page 443 says you cannot cast a spell unless the fall is greater than 500 feet, or the spell is an immediate action. That's not as clear cut as I thought it would be, but it hints that you fall ~500 feet each round.
Hit them with meteor swarms or dig a hole, which would you like to be the stronger attack?
-James
That's a BIG hole you're talking about. What did you create it with? Meteor swarm? :P
Check out this thread, it has a few thoughts on the falling distance per round.
Page 443 says you cannot cast a spell unless the fall is greater than 500 feet, or the spell is an immediate action. That's not as clear cut as I thought it would be, but it hints that you fall ~500 feet each round.I'd appreciate that thank you.On a seperate issue...if a character can fall 200 feet give or take in a round, is it safe to assume that characters who fall more than this in a round should recieve another round to find some means to get out of it (such as trying to find a item that'll give them Featherfall or suchlike), with a new round for every extra 200 feet fallen?, I'd appreciate some thoughts.I believe the rules already cover falling speed. I'll post them once I find them.The old 3x DMGs spelled it out expressly.
If the OP wants to go down this route then I would suggest a more 'realistic' combat system entirely. Why should someone be able to be stabbed more than Rasputin, but fear falling?
Hit them with meteor swarms or dig a hole, which would you like to be the stronger attack?
-James
It never ceases to amaze me; when someone calls into question a rule in d20/D&D as being damaging to campaign verisimilitude and generally unworkable for roleplaying, someone always pipes up with the "perhaps you should try another combat system altogether - d20 doesn't do that" crap.
Some of us appreciate the playability of d20 and much of the heroic nature of the rules, but see that some things are just silly. For instance, it used to go "if you are looking for a more 'realistic' skill system than proficiencies, perhaps you should play a different game altogether, D&D doesn't do that". Yet, I don't hear anyone on a d20 forum complaining that WotC greatly expanded the skill system because it's now "part" of d20.
Well maybe they shouldn't have copy/pasted the falling damage rule!
I typically use the massive damage optional rules.
I in particularly like combining the size and HD variants with the scaling Fort Save variant. I'd also suggest that people use the near death variant if they don't like the instant massive death but would like the healbots to be able to intervene.
This generally forces the PCs to be slightly more cautious in their actions while adding in additional versimilitude.
Combined with some sort of luck/action point mechanic and most PCs are going to survive but they do have to worry instead of just going "70hp damage? No sweat" or pulling out the "Rocks fall, PCs die" fiat card ;)
I have nothing against the fact its a game and the rules are there for some fun - I just wondered what other perspectives there were on this, I appreciate everyones input into this and thank you!
^_^
|
Well...
"A person has a terminal velocity of about 200 mph when balled up and about 125 mph with arms and feet fully extended to catch the wind."
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtml
Bloomfield, Louis A. "What is Terminal Velocity?" How Things Work. University of Virginia. 23 December 1999.
I ran up an Excel sheet to see how many rounds it would take and what height would be needed. My numbers don't feel right, so I'm gonna dig into it to see where I went wrong...