D&D 5E Calculating fall damage in special situations

Euberon

First Post
Same article:

"A cat in the US city of Boston survived a fall from a 19-storey window and only bruised her chest. How do cats survive falls from such great heights?"

19 storeys. That's, like, what, 19x15=285 feet? That'd be 20d6 damage. At half, that's 10d6. The cat has 2 hp.

That cat sounds like it has Evasion and if falls have a saving throw, which that sounds pretty reasonable, too. That would allow the cat to live after such a fall. Just thinking out loud.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Satyrn

First Post
Let's see.

If my players tried some crazy acrobatic stunts in an attempt to avoid all damage I'd give them a skill check to reduce the damage in half, and then narrate them halfway down to give them a chance to describe further measures for a chance at landing safely.

They might also avoid those checks by finding some "surefire" method. That druid shapeshifting into a cat, for example, would take half damage, and if the player was smart enough to say "and cats always land on their feet" I'd probably have him land safely (though having him roll an Acrobatics check -maybe even at advantage - to go avoid even balf damage would feel better for you) .

Also, I'd halve the damage if they cushioned their fall with the bodies of their foes.
 

randrak

First Post
Wait wait....so you only reach terminal velocity if you fall from 1,500 ft (for a human)? Then why did Wizards make a cap at 20d6? The cap should be 150d6.
 

Satyrn

First Post
Wait wait....so you only reach terminal velocity if you fall from 1,500 ft (for a human)? Then why did Wizards make a cap at 20d6? The cap should be 150d6.

Because at some point you can just say "The Rock falls. He dies." And Dwayne's just gonna have to roll up a new character.
 

jaelis

Oh this is where the title goes?
Wait wait....so you only reach terminal velocity if you fall from 1,500 ft (for a human)? Then why did Wizards make a cap at 20d6? The cap should be 150d6.

Because
jaelis said:
it's clear that the dnd falling rules are based on game play and simplicity, not any attempt to model reality.
 

Mad_Jack

Legend
Just a couple thoughts...

I don't have the MM to check if they're actually statted up, but creatures like flying squirrels or sugar gliders probably don't have an actual flight speed listed - which gets around the level restriction for the druid...

If the party can hold off the bad guys for a round or two, they could tie a rope if they have one to the bridge, and have the barbarian and those party members most likely to survive the fall hold off the opponents while the rest of them climb onto the rope.
By the time the opponents cut or untie the rope, even the last party member on it will have shaved off at least a damage die or two from the fall... Theoretically, they could even let go of the rope, fall for a bit,and then try to catch themselves by grabbing the rope again.
 
Last edited:


FitzTheRuke

Legend
I look at things the other way around. They jump 100 feet. They take 10d6. Does the damage rolled kill them? If it does they go kerslpat on the rocks.

If NOT, then there HAS to be a story reason. Come up with it. Deep enough water under the bridge (unless it was previously stated to be dry) Trees or bushes to break the fall (unless previously stated to be barren), mud/sand? A manure cart?

At a table full of gamers, someone ought to be able to come up with something that works with the story to explain why a 100 foot fall didn't kill them. The game is telling you they live, it's your job to figure out why.

I'd also let the barbarian-holding-the-cat thing make the druid take less damage, because it's a fun idea. I would probably make the barbarian roll something (slight of hand maybe?) to see how well he can hang on to the cat while crashing through those tree branches, or whatever.

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app
 

Horwath

Legend
Wait wait....so you only reach terminal velocity if you fall from 1,500 ft (for a human)? Then why did Wizards make a cap at 20d6? The cap should be 150d6.

because the speed gain, and hence damage is not linear.

you gain 50% of terminal velocity after 3 sec, 8 sec for 90% and 15 sec for 99%(at 1500ft aprox).

half of the speed you gain in first 150-200ft. rest in the next 1300.ft.

But falling damage should be lethal to all at the same rate so damage should be based in proportion to max health.

Like 10% of max HP per 10ft. Then 200ft if 200% of max HP in damage(instant death).
 

FitzTheRuke

Legend
because the speed gain, and hence damage is not linear.

you gain 50% of terminal velocity after 3 sec, 8 sec for 90% and 15 sec for 99%(at 1500ft aprox).

half of the speed you gain in first 150-200ft. rest in the next 1300.ft.

But falling damage should be lethal to all at the same rate so damage should be based in proportion to max health.

Like 10% of max HP per 10ft. Then 200ft if 200% of max HP in damage(instant death).
But then falling 10 or 20 feet couldn't possibly kill you, even if you were low level.

Sent from my LG-D852 using EN World mobile app
 

Remove ads

Top