Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 9557598" data-attributes="member: 4937">The complex math that Arn derives his falling damage from isn't even really the bad part of the system.  All that math just resolves out to a handy dandy table of the sort common in 1e AD&D.  And, as a table it's not that bad.  I see what he's going for albeit there is an assumption of rigor and accuracy to his calculations that I think is unwarranted.  He's rounding to far more decimal places than he should.  No, the first reason Arn wasn't proclaimed a genius is that for all his math, the resulting system is neither particularly good for the game nor particularly realistic.  The resulting table looks quite like 1d6/10' for distances above 90' or so or at least close enough to not bother with, but is massively different at 30' or below.  How much damage from 10' of all is probably the killer here, as it averages 14.5 damage from a 10' fall.  Straight up lethal to most 3rd level characters of the time.But this isn't even the real problem.  The real problem is that Arn fudges his numbers by introducing a novel saving throw mechanic that is for some reason "roll low" in an otherwise roll high system and which is incredibly nitpicky and iterative (exploding saving throws!) and filled with a bunch of GURPS like modifiers for every circumstance that he doesn't even bother to collect into a table.  This saving throw on top of the derived table was I think a step of complexity too far for just about everyone but Arn.  The whole system is just not at all elegant while not at all convincing as being more realistic.  The rebuttal to it is sound.</blockquote>

Verification