That same article refers to a bunch of other objects, all of which are around 200mph. Nice round number, I'd go with that. Which is 1760 ft/round, if you need to be that precise.
1700fpr is 193mph
1800fpr is 205mph
Frankly, I'd prefer to use round number, so I'd probably go with 1800, since it also can be divided by 6 and 2 (giving that falling object two 900 foot "move actions" :)
|
I dunno If I'm missing something, but there doesn't seem to be anything about actual falling speed there. (granted, it's usually not an issue)
I guess since you can cast a spell if you fall over 500 ft, then 500 ft/round would be a good default?
**EDIT**: Ninja'd! 900 ft per round sounds good, too! Time to look up the rules for flight speed next.
You said you needed terminal velocity, not falling speed.
Falling speed isn't constant; you need an equation for that ... but why do you need it, and is it important to be super precise in the context of the game?
|
|
You said you needed terminal velocity, not falling speed.
Falling speed isn't constant; you need an equation for that ... but why do you need it, and is it important to be super precise in the context of the game?
I'm trying to work out if it's possible to fly faster (say, by using the fly spell) than an enormous, irregular piece of stone that's already falling at terminal velocity.
So terminal velocity is what you want.
In that context I'd use the 200mph figure, because it's pretty darn close (it really doesn't vary much based on object configuration unless you're talking about a parachute or something).
Now, fly is typical a 60 foot move, so clearly it won't beat the 900 feet/move action of a falling object.