D&D 5E Why is there a limit to falling damage?

Lanefan · Jul 6, 2020

Fanaelialae said:
In the case of jumping down for no reason, I agree.

However, there is also the case of falling.

This is a distinction I just don't get. Internal setting consistency would tell me it matters not how or why you've gone off the cliff; the fact is that off you've gone and now you're falling whatever distance it is to the bottom.

If you make falling damage too deadly, no player is going to want their character to leap off the cliff onto the back of the dragon as it swoops by. Moreover, it makes fighting monsters that have knockback on a cliff extremely deadly.

Yes, and both of those are good things.

Trying to leap from a clifftop onto the back of a passing dragon is - and should be - extremely high-risk, with failure meaning death.

And what would be the point of knockback if it couldn't be used to push opponents off cliffs or into quicksand or whatever other deadly terrain feature happens to be nearby?

Lastly, it can be used to trivialize flying monsters by simply knocking them from the sky.

How does one do this? Dispel Magic won't help against a creature that can fly naturally (e.g. a dragon or a giant owl). A net might, if you can somehow get one up there and it's strong enough to contain the creature. But other than killing it in flight, what other means are there?

1e has a rule (IMO a very good one) that if a naturally-flying creature is brought down to (1/4?) hit points then it cannot remain aloft and is forced to the ground, but as the creature still controls its descent there's no falling involved.

Fanaelialae · Jul 6, 2020

Lanefan said:
This is a distinction I just don't get. Internal setting consistency would tell me it matters not how or why you've gone off the cliff; the fact is that off you've gone and now you're falling whatever distance it is to the bottom.

IMO, it is a matter of meta gaming on the part of the player.

In world, I explain it as luck/fate abandoning those who take it for granted and arrogantly behave as though it makes them invincible. Pride comes before the fall. Which is not at all uncommon in heroic fiction, albeit usually not quite so literally.

How does one do this? Dispel Magic won't help against a creature that can fly naturally (e.g. a dragon or a giant owl). A net might, if you can somehow get one up there and it's strong enough to contain the creature. But other than killing it in flight, what other means are there?

IIRC, knocking a creature prone while in flight is the easiest way to make it fall (obviously, this doesn't apply to creatures that can hover, but there are plenty of high level fliers like dragons that don't hover).

shadowoflameth · Jul 6, 2020

This is a proud nail of mine. For a truly deadly fall, I would agree that a simple, 'It looks suicidal' would suffice, meaning that RAW 'This is more than just a fall.' In my game, I may do that and either have the fall do max damage and/or rule that because of the severity of the fall or what you hit at the end, that it's damage that won't be healed without help or magic. You'll be knocked prone and immobilized until healed. That said, IRL in my lifetime, there have been people who survived falls off buildings, mountains, even skydiving, and in a magical fantasy world where something supernatural could intervene, it's certainly plausible. IRL even if you survive, a fall like that means permanent disability at the very least.

Lanefan · Jul 7, 2020

Fanaelialae said:
IIRC, knocking a creature prone while in flight is the easiest way to make it fall (obviously, this doesn't apply to creatures that can hover, but there are plenty of high level fliers like dragons that don't hover).

Hadn't thought of 'prone', but then again prone as a condition implies a standing not-prone condition, which in flight is much harder to define. At best I'd say the knocked-prone flier suddenly finds itself in a vertical dive, from which it can pull out if it has enough altitude to work with; though I'd likely be rather reluctant to apply 'prone' to something in flight in the first place.

Another means of bringing down a natural flier is, of course, to paralyse it somehow.

MGibster · Jul 7, 2020

pogre said:
I'm an old WFB player 20d6 is just getting warmed up!

That's a lot of gatling phasers.

Fanaelialae · Jul 7, 2020

Lanefan said:
Hadn't thought of 'prone', but then again prone as a condition implies a standing not-prone condition, which in flight is much harder to define. At best I'd say the knocked-prone flier suddenly finds itself in a vertical dive, from which it can pull out if it has enough altitude to work with; though I'd likely be rather reluctant to apply 'prone' to something in flight in the first place.

Another means of bringing down a natural flier is, of course, to paralyse it somehow.

PHB pg 191:
If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as the fly spell.

Lanefan · Jul 7, 2020

Fanaelialae said:
PHB pg 191:
If a flying creature is knocked prone, has its speed reduced to 0, or is otherwise deprived of the ability to move, the creature falls, unless it has the ability to hover or it is being held aloft by magic, such as the fly spell.

Just because it's in the RAW doesn't mean it's right.

I agree with speed=0 causing a dive and deprivation of movement causing either a free-fall or uncontrolled glide, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around how a creature can be knocked prone when in flight, given that standing/prone implies one is already on the ground. (you can't be 'standing' in flight either, again unless you can hover)

And the speed=0=fall RAW completely misses or ignores one factor: the speed (through the air, which is what matters) will no longer equal zero once the creature starts falling, and the creature can thus attempt to pull out of what's become a dive.

prabe · Jul 7, 2020

"Prone" is a defined condition in 5E, and not all creatures that fly are immune to having it imposed on them. I think the condition causing flyers to crash has something to do with "a prone creature's only movement option is to crawl" seeming to obviate flight. So, a trip attack can knock a flyer out of the air. Depending on how rigidly you understand "trip attack" it can kinda make sense.

Fanaelialae · Jul 7, 2020

Lanefan said:
Just because it's in the RAW doesn't mean it's right.

I agree with speed=0 causing a dive and deprivation of movement causing either a free-fall or uncontrolled glide, but I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around how a creature can be knocked prone when in flight, given that standing/prone implies one is already on the ground. (you can't be 'standing' in flight either, again unless you can hover)

And the speed=0=fall RAW completely misses or ignores one factor: the speed (through the air, which is what matters) will no longer equal zero once the creature starts falling, and the creature can thus attempt to pull out of what's become a dive.

I see a creature being knocked prone while flying as being sent spinning.

As for speed 0, it doesn't mean a creature can't be moved. It means that the creature can't currently walk/fly/swim.

Lanefan · Jul 7, 2020

Fanaelialae said:
I see a creature being knocked prone while flying as being sent spinning.

As for speed 0, it doesn't mean a creature can't be moved. It means that the creature can't currently walk/fly/swim.

In natural flight, that means it's stalled.

A stalled flier falls - to begin with. It can, however, then attempt to control its fall into a dive and then pull out of said dive. Even powered aircraft can do this and they're a whole lot less maneuverable than anything with natural flight; some birds can flip a stall into level flight without falling more than a few feet, and even something as big and lumbering as a Roc or Dragon would have a good chance to recover from a stall unless it happens at very low altitude.

The RAW conveniently ignore this bit and strongly imply that a fall caused by speed=0 will continue to the ground regardless of starting altitude.

The 'sent spinning' idea is a good one for prone-in-flight but again can be recovered from - I guess this would equate to a prone-on-the-ground person standing back up - and might not cause all that much loss of altitude, depending on the creature. The difference would be that a flier sent spinning is extremely unlikely to be within range of any opportunity attacks while it "stands up".

D&D 5E Why is there a limit to falling damage?

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

Fanaelialae

Legend

shadowoflameth

Adventurer

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

MGibster

Legend

Fanaelialae

Legend

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

prabe

Tension, apprension, and dissension have begun

Fanaelialae

Legend

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

Similar Threads