Converting Al-Qadim creatures

[Cleon]

Yes, let's just say it only drops rocks of up to PC weight, so the damage is just normal falling damage. That can still get pretty high, but we can make it a ranged attack with a smallish range increment to make it hard to hit.

But that would mean it'd be pretty pointless for the Roc to use that attack. It could do 8d6+36 damage with a diving Flyby attack AND get to add Power Attack to it for the same damage and the option of Snatching its prey.

If the boulder doesn't do similar or greater damage, why would it bother?

Not to mention a Great Roc would look like it's tossing pebbles if it drops 200 lb stones.

 

[freyar]

Ok, Cleon, this boggles my mind. I think you're misreading the SRD again. It says

For each 200 pounds of an object’s weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage).

To me, that clearly says figure out the damage dice first by weight then extra damage for distance, then cap it all at 20d6. (Though you can argue about whether it's 1d6/200lb/10ft or 1d6/200lb +1d6/10ft.) Also, this is based on the falling rules, which have a max cap at 20d6.

As for why it would bother -- because it's cool! Besides, dropping a 200 lb "pebble" for 20d6 would be similar damage. As for the range increment, I was just trying to get Shade to go along with it. I like the 20d6 damage.

 

[Shade]

Yeah, I believe freyar's interpretation is correct.

Also, Flyby Attack doesn't allow a full attack, nor does it prevent attacks of opportunity, so it's a much riskier endeavor with a lesser damage payout.

 

[freyar]

Ok, so can we just settle on using regular falling object damage rules for the rocks? If so, what range increment and how many for dropping the rocks?

 

[Shade]

Yeah, I think that'll suffice.

Four range increments of 50 ft.?

 

[freyar]

That's fine by me. At greater distances, should the aim be considered essentially random?

 

[Cleon]

Ok, Cleon, this boggles my mind. I think you're misreading the SRD again. It says

To me, that clearly says figure out the damage dice first by weight then extra damage for distance, then cap it all at 20d6. (Though you can argue about whether it's 1d6/200lb/10ft or 1d6/200lb +1d6/10ft.) Also, this is based on the falling rules, which have a max cap at 20d6.

As for why it would bother -- because it's cool! Besides, dropping a 200 lb "pebble" for 20d6 would be similar damage. As for the range increment, I was just trying to get Shade to go along with it. I like the 20d6 damage.

Yeah, I believe freyar's interpretation is correct.

Also, Flyby Attack doesn't allow a full attack, nor does it prevent attacks of opportunity, so it's a much riskier endeavor with a lesser damage payout.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. It seems quite clear to me the 20d6 cap is on the extra damage from the distance fallen, not the basic amount.

And I'd allowed for the inability not to make a full attack with a Flyby attack, my quoted damage of 8d6+36 was for a diving great roc with a single claw attack. Dives deal double damage with claw or talon attacks according to the SRD.

Anyhow, I guess I'll leave it up to you to settle on the boulder damage and just reserve my own figure for domestic use.

 

[Cleon]

Yeah, I think that'll suffice.

Four range increments of 50 ft.?

I'd prefer to use five range increments (like a thrown weapon) or ten range increments (like a missile weapon), just for consistency's sake.

Preferably 5 range increments, since it's basically rock-throwing.

That's fine by me. At greater distances, should the aim be considered essentially random?

That's what I would think, yes.

 

[freyar]

5 range increments is fine.

As to the damage cap, I'm almost curious enough to ask in the 3e rules forum.

 

[Cleon]

5 range increments is fine.

As to the damage cap, I'm almost curious enough to ask in the 3e rules forum.

Don't do it freyar, for that way lies madness!

You'll risk getting into arguments as to whether a PC can fall down an infinitely tall staircase, so long as each step is too short to do hit points of damage, and then the subject of the Grappling Rules will come up...

No, it's not worth the risk to your sanity.