Falling from Great Heights

I would be quite happy to see a system where if you pushed someone out of a high window, that person might end up paralyzed below the waist. Is that too much to ask?
Well, considering this is a system where I can beat you repeatedly with a large, metallic object and you will never, ever, suffer any lasting effect so long as you don't die, then, yes, I would say this is too much to ask.

<snip>

Why should falling be the special case?
It shouldn't.
There are any number of fantasy RPGs which give you a damage system (for falling, for combat, for acid, etc) in which characters can be paralysed, cut, maimed, blinded, scarred etc. The ones I'm familiar with are RM and RQ (for that classic 80s anti-D&D feel) and Burning Wheel (for a more contemporary vibe). But I would be very very surprised if D&Dnext changed D&D, after 30 years of being wound-free, to resemble any of these games.

surviving a 200' fall cannot be described in any realistic way...at least without the use of some dues ex machina, which gets pretty stale with continued use.
Sorry to dogpile a little bit, but I'm curious about your response to some of [MENTION=52548]Aaron[/MENTION]'s other examples: poison, pools of acid, fire, etc.

In all editions of D&D hit points have represented damage/threats of harm besides combat attacks.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

There are any number of fantasy RPGs which give you a damage system (for falling, for combat, for acid, etc) in which characters can be paralysed, cut, maimed, blinded, scarred etc. The ones I'm familiar with are RM and RQ (for that classic 80s anti-D&D feel) and Burning Wheel (for a more contemporary vibe). But I would be very very surprised if D&Dnext changed D&D, after 30 years of being wound-free, to resemble any of these games.
I would also be surprised. I would be pleasantly surprised.
 

I would also be surprised. I would be pleasantly surprised.
Serious question - why not just play one of those other games?

If you compare 3E to a game like RM or HARP, for example, the difference in combat resolution is the most obvious difference. Once you get rid of hit points in favour of a crit/wound system, what is the point of sticking to D&D? A preference for D&D spell casting over the RM/HARP spell point mechanics?
 


Serious question - why not just play one of those other games?

If you compare 3E to a game like RM or HARP, for example, the difference in combat resolution is the most obvious difference. Once you get rid of hit points in favour of a crit/wound system, what is the point of sticking to D&D? A preference for D&D spell casting over the RM/HARP spell point mechanics?
Well, familiarity. The fact that I own the books and can get rules online. The fact that I don't know or trust the other systems. Then again, I've gotten a lot of ideas from other systems that represent wounds better, so I do play them sometimes.

But beyond that, D&D is the flagship. If D&D changes in tone, the hobby changes. We've seen many huge changes in tone that at least in the eyes of some haven't disqualified the printed game from being called D&D. If one side of combat can be discretized and complicated (i.e. the attack) why not the other side (the result on the target). At the moment, I hesitate to explain to colleagues that I play D&D partially because of the enormous disconnect between the game I run and the books that are in stores (and if I said I played a fantasy rpg, they wouldn't understand the term). You try explaining to a group of biomedical graduate students why D&D is a great combat-oriented roleplaying game, but characters can't be meaningfully wounded.

I also think a paradigm shift would allow a broad fan base and many designers to examine the gameplay issues resulting from an incrementally more realistic approach to health and injury. I've written great injury rules myself for d20, but I'd rather not have to adapt them to D&D myself.
 

Ahnehnois - I think that adding in a wounds location system and all those other fiddly bits would turn D&D into GURPS. If you want to see combat grind, try that system. Even a glacially slow D&D combat where players dither over every action is still lightning fast in comparison.

If it's an optional add-on, great, I can ignore it. But, I really hope it never becomes part of the base mechanics because it just slows the game down SOOO much.

I don't play D&D for this level of simulation.
 

To all the people who dislike that high-level characters can drink acid, swim in lava, survive falls, etc., and all the people who think that a mook stabbing you to death at night should be a threat at every level: Realistic heroes are low-level. By the time you get past 13th level or so, mundane physics don't really matter to characters anymore. That's all there is to it.

By level 7, you're a mythical hero. Beowulf died fighting a dragon that works out to roughly Large size in 3e (or perhaps the smaller end of Huge), and one without a breath weapon and spellcasting at that, which puts it around CR 8-10, a boss fight for a level 4-6 solo PC. He also fought a troll, which from its description could be anything from a regeneration-less D&D troll to an ogre or one of the smaller giants, which is again in the lower CR range.

Chimerae, lernaean hydras, Pegasus, Medusa, minotaurs, fiendish (i.e. Nemean) lions, chimeric hell hounds (i.e. Kerberos), lamias, ogres, trolls, and practically every other creature faced by any Greek hero, part-deity or otherwise, are all below CR 6.

Can you see Odysseus, Herakles, Conan, and King Arthur, all working together, take out the high-flying death-ray-slinging CR 10 beholder? How about a life-draining dread wraith, a CR 11 baddy immune to normal weapons? Any of them would be squashed flat or blasted to pieces or killed with a touch fighting one of those things, and there are more where they came from. Lots of players don't realize just how unrealistic you have to be to even have a chance to survive what mid-level PCs routinely encounter. Mundane heroes without any magic of some form to draw on become obsolete fairly quickly.

Any martial character resembling one of those guys who would be capable of reliably taking out barely-mid-level threats like the monsters mentioned is either 6+ levels higher than any of them--and therefore capable of soloing all of those characters at once, plus all of the Argonauts, Joan of Arc, Theseus, and the Knights of the Round Table together with ease--or is decked out in so much magic that they left realism behind a long time ago. I would feel insulted if someone that superhuman and/or magical couldn't routinely survive a huge fall. Hell, Gandalf was an angel who maps better to the CR 14 planetar than to any caster class or gish build, and he survived a multiple-day-long fall into a lake, while fighting an even-CR demon, and survived that; why shouldn't a high-level character be able to do the same?

Though the above examples use 3e math since those are the books I have at hand, the same applies to BECMI and AD&D, as hit points don't start hitting caps until around name level. In fact, martial PCs were even better than the above in AD&D relative to their 3e counterparts (for instance, a 2e fighter with just mundane plate and a mundane sword he's specialized in can kill 6 trolls without dying in under a minute, while a 3e fighter trying to do the same does so much more slowly and is likely to die long before succeeding). 4e works out the same way, with PCs who start out as heroes and quickly become the best of the best, eventually being able to auto-resurrect themselves. Falling damage should cease to be a concern at all for both the Epic 4e character and the Immortal pre-3e character.

So while it's certainly possible to ask that a more gritty HP variant come around in a module or supplement, or say that you'd prefer a more low-powered standard in 5e, don't pretend that characters in D&D have ever been anything like "normal" people past low levels without extensive houseruling like the ever-popular insta-kill rules for lava and other hazards.
 

Meh.

I'm fine with helicopter swords, double air jumps, shoulder rolls, and guardian angels.

If a guy can learn to stop time by wiggling his hands and saying some gibberish... a guy can learn to survive falling off a cliff.

Joe has over a dozen level. He eats ogres for lunch and leaps off cliffs like Wile E Coyote.
 
Last edited:

pemerton said:
But aren't single-handed slayings of dragons and demigods also 1 in a million?

But the same PC can almsot always survive being hit by the club of a 12' tall giant, or being fried by the breath of a gargantuan red dragon.

Surviving what would be certain death for anyone else is part of the schtick of a demi-god slaying paladin!

Not everyone agrees that a character 'hit' by an attack actually get hit in the game world. This is why surviving multiple sword wounds with no treatment etc is feasible for -any- character north of 20 Hp or so.

You can't imagine a glancing blow or being demoralized or dodging from a very high fall, though.
 

...I'm curious about your response to some of Aaron's other examples: poison, pools of acid, fire, etc.

Okey dokey...

Poisons: There are lots of different poisons, with varying lethality. And a poison's effect is incredibly variable (dosage, body weight of target, constitution/fortitude of target, mode of exposure, etc.) Also, very few poisons kill immediately unless exposed to massive doses. In the real world, people survive poisonings all the time, sometimes even without medical attention. So I'm cool with it being modeled through Hit Point loss or Ability damage based on a random Fortitude Check (or Constitution Check in D&D Next).

Acid: Again, this is a variable threat. If it's a pool of acid, then see the rules for Lava (in other words, Death and nothing but Death;)). That is if a Reflex (Dexterity) check is failed to keep from falling in. An Acid attack however (splashing, spray, etc.) is just Hit Point damage (IMO).

Fire: Fire also is variable. It depends on the time of exposure, the heat of the fire, mitigating objects, clothing, or a shield, etc. Fire isn't usually immediately lethal (which is why death by burning was such an absolutely horrible punishment). So in this case also, Hit Point damage works just fine for me.

As to a Giant's club (as I think somebody mentioned earlier), I think the damage potential should be much higher than typically represented. But getting lucky and not suffering maximum Hit Point damage from such an attack is a reasonable outcome. There are a ton of variables in any weapon attack. Even a the attack from a Giant's club. So variable damage potential, modeled by Hit Points also works.

But Lava (falling onto lava, as one cannot fall into lava) is almost certainly instant death. Either a save or die effect, or massive damage potential (determined each round...if saved before you're out of Hit Points, then you live - though you'd likely wished you'd died).

And Falling Damage, based on real world consequences, falls of 50 feet are about 50% fatal, with the chances of survival quickly diminishing to practically zero very quickly. So, I'd want damage that scales up exponentially, or a percentage check for survivability (like 90% at 10 feet, 80% at 20 feet, 50% at 50 feet, 40% at 60 feet, 10% at 90 feet, and 99% at 100 feet or more...believe it or not, that's actually better odds than real life). Or even use both together.

B-)
 

Remove ads

Top