rushlight said:
I didn't like the way falling rules worked too well, so I added a small additional level of danger - a Fortitude or die save based on the distance fallen. So far since establishing the rule, quite a few checks have been made. Most were at higher levels, so they were passed easily - even when large distances were involved.
We recently started a new campaign, at level 1. Needless to say, we've just lost our first character - a party NPC - to the new falling rules. She fell 10 feet.
The save? DC 2.
She rolled a 1 - and had no bonus to Fortitude.
Yep, the save is 2 DC per 10 feet fallen. We all decided that it was fate talking - who fails a DC 2? She musta landed square on her noggin.
I disagree w/ the concept making climbs more deadly than they already are, especially if the party has no way to avoid them. Though you may think you are making the game more realistic this way, that should not be the goal for a heroic game. Where's the valor in falling to one's death? With your DC 2 per 10 feet fall rule, you will easily kill many PCs that attempt climb checks.
Not convinced? Consider this example...
Character is 4th level w/ +2[edit] fortitude save and +5 on his climb. His AC is 18 and he has 20 hit points. In the adventure he is faced with a choice of climbing down a hole to escape or staying to fight against a deadly beast.
The climb route involves a 40' descent requiring a DC15 climb check. If he falls, he could take up to 4d6 damage and w/ your houserule be also forced to make a DC8 fortitude save or die. On climb check rolls of 1 thru 5, he will fail by 5 or more, and fall suffering the 4d6 damage. That alone may be enough to kill him. But on top of that, because of your house rule he also has to make a DC 8 fort save meaning that a roll of 1 thru 5 is fatal.
Meanwhile, the deadly beast has a +2 attack, so it will hit him on a 16 thru 20. If it hits, it dishes out 4d6 damage, and the attack also has a 25% chance to instantly kill him with that attack. If it misses, the monster vanishes.
Does that sound like a very fair monster? I think most players I know would scream bloody murder about that creature.
Well guess what? Your climb check is the same as that monster. The climb check roll is equivalent to the monster's attack, hurting the PC on 5 of the 20 possible numbers for 4d6 damage. And in both cases the effect has an additional 25% chance to kill the PC outright.
Climbs aren't easy, especially for weak characters or ones with high armor check penalties. When characters fall, they take large amounts of unavoidable damage. If you do fall and survive, you will likely be losing a move action to then stand up, possibly triggering AoO's in the process. Climbing also tends to spread out a party into a dangerous single file formation making them easy targets, and anyone mid-climb is a sitting duck for missile fire and other forms of attack. Climbs are dangerous enough already.
