Flying PC drops bricks from 400' up!

[Gizzard]

During WW1 aviators dropped all manner of heavy and/or pointy objects out of their planes in hopes of harming enemy ground troops. I dont think they had any success.

Because of this, I wonder if it makes sense to roll a "deviation" first (similar to the rules for grenade weapons) and only consider making a "to hit" roll if you land within the same square as your foe. In the end, I'm figuring its pretty hard to hit a (moving?) object on the ground without the help of a ballistics computer.

[edit part
Ooops, missed that part about dropping the brick onto a tower roof. I'm still not sure I am clear on what the goal is; are you hoping to damage the tower with the brick? Hitting the tower should be easy (though not certain; wind currents and brick aerodynamics are variable!) but I'd expect the brick to just shatter if it hit stone. Maybe the hardness rules for breaking down doors would work well here.

 

[Quidam]

sopwith camels don't hover

In non-windy conditions, given the attacker is hovering , I don't think it'd be that difficult to drop a brick on someone's head from 100' up. Straight lines make for fairly simple ballistics.

 

[Orco42]

Good idea Gizzard.

Something like a scatter die with increased deviation dice for every 100' or so.

Say 1d3 squares at 100'
1d4 for 200'
1d6 for 300'
ect.

 

[Bob5th]

Re: broadsides of barns

Needless to say, the roof was broader than the broadside of a barn, and no attack roll was made.

Actually a attack roll would be required because the broadside of a barn has a AC of -4 I believe. It's in the Players Handbook saw it when I was looking through last weekend.

 

[Quidam]

all the things you want to drop stuff on

In this case, the roof was tile over wood and was laughably easy to hit. The goal was to create a medium-sized hole to enter the third floor of the house from.

But the general question applies to using it as an attack against creatures in addition to using it for purposeful vandalism. The idea of using deviation makes sense under certain circumstances, but the fact that you're dropping something straight down has got to have some mitigating effect on the difficulty.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Re: all the things you want to drop stuff on

The idea of using deviation makes sense under certain circumstances, but the fact that you're dropping something straight down has got to have some mitigating effect on the difficulty.

It might greatly increase your range increment. You still have to deal with windage and the fact that people make very tiny targets at that range (in fact, they'd have 50% 'cover' as they're 'prone' from your perspective). The range increment of a brick, BTW, is 10' so 'greatly increase' probably isn't as nice as it sounds: maybe you should be looking at a -26 to hit instead of a -78.

Also, if the dropped object takes any apreciable time to fall (which it will to reach 'terminal' velocity), hitting a moving target is going to be darn near impossible.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I beleive that IRL it would be a very difficult proposition to drop something on a person from 100' even if they weren't moving, if they were moving it would be darn near impossible. But heck in this game you don't even have a penalty to hit someone at that range with the right bow, even though that human will look awful small at that range as some people have pointed out in this thread. So I'm not sure that I'd make it a particularly difficult attack I might basically give the range increments of a long bow or crossbow or smething. If the object dropped was large enough, a statue, a wagon, Mt. Everest I'd either rule it an auto hit because it is basically an area of effect attack or make it a ranged touch attack.

As for porficiency I give everyone proficiency in throwing rocks, snowballs, and other everyday objects everyone throws as a kid. And basically include in this list any easy to throw, or drop object that doesn't require any formal training to use.

 

[Christian]

Re: sopwith camels don't hover

In non-windy conditions, given the attacker is hovering , I don't think it'd be that difficult to drop a brick on someone's head from 100' up. Straight lines make for fairly simple ballistics.

Sure. But how do you determine that you're exactly above the target? If you happen to have a 100' plumb line, it wouldn't be all that hard, I suppose. Otherwise, it's just not as easy as you might think. (Seriously, try it sometime. A good way is to stand on a bridge over a fairly deep canyon and try to drop stones on targets by the riverbank. [No, not on people, for crying out loud! Pick a mark or a tree stump or something!] I don't recommend aiming for flotsam in the river-you'll just get sweaty and frustrated.)

 

[Skullfyre]

Well let's see.
gravity is constant at 9.8m/s/s
the height is 400 feet which works out to be 121.1 m(approx)
Hmmmmmmm


I say it would hurt if it hit the target and since it is a thrown object the most range increments is 4.... but dropping it would sorta alleviate this.
Regardless if hit someone it would HURT and give them a big welt on the noggin..

 

[Quaestor]

why hasn't anyone mentioned True Strike yet? If the Sorc wants to be effective in combat, just cast Fly, carry the Bid Metal Ball(tm) 100' into the air, cast TS, and drop it. Bang. Nice damage for a 1st level spell!

It gets worse. Have in the party a warrior that totally specializes in grappling. Have someone cast fly on him. Grapple. Fly 90' into the air. Disengage the grapple. 1.5 rounds, one standard action, one move-equivalent, and one standard action to deal lots and lots of damage. Now personally, I would rule that even though Flying isn't physical movement, that you still can't concentrate enough to move while trying to grapple. But nasty though, eh?

Quaestor the Wanderer