D&D General How Do You Handle Falling Damage?

[ezo]

Would it?

Yes. That was my point.

But is Ancient Red Dragon breath truly "hotter" and "deadlier" than Lava?

Well, of course that is entirely subjective. When I watch a movie and see dragon's breath melt suits of armor or turn stone into slag, I would think so (perhaps not "hotter and deadlier", but as hot and as deadly, sure.

I would propose "Lava is so inherently destructive and deadly, you are dead."

So would be dragon's breath. Consider you fall into a vat of acid versus a black dragon douses you with its acid breath? Both would pretty much be inherently destructive and deadly to you.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is good to know. You aren't calibrated for hazard damage the way the designers envision the heroic fantasy genre. Increased damage, uncapped, insta-death, what have you. If for your table, you want to emulate a different genre where hazards are more likely to kill you that the foes you fight -- because that's not heroic fantasy -- that's good for your table. But doesn't belong as a change for general play following the normal genre the rules are attempting to emulate.

I don't know if you call the genre you run gritty or something, but you should label it to be clear it's for a different genre then the default 54e rules are mechanically emulating.

You seem to be jumping to an unsupported conclusion.

Lava = Death does not mean Hazard = Death.

Yes, we are moving away from the designer's seeming intent, but also... Lava isn't something that we often see ANYONE in fantasy just shrugging off. Except for "I am a dragon of fire, therefore I bath in lava" and that is a creature with Fire Immunity, and I would say they are still feeling the heat of the lava, treating it like a hot tub.

But this doesn't apply to lightning bolts from storms, or blizzards of slicing ice, or poisonous swamp fumes. Those are still perfectly fine hazards to face. My current "this is instant death" list would look like

1) Lava/Magma
2) The Sun
3) Actual Blackhole (not a sphere of annihilation, a naturally forming black hole)
4) Cosmic level poison, ie "This is a poison that kills gods" being used on a mortal being.
5) The True Center of an elemental plane

And to be clear, these are not things that are instant death for everything. A fire elemental can wade through lava without a problem, so could a God. But a mortal hero isn't going to be able to do so without special abilities or preparations. But it does make sense to me that there are things that are not meant to be survivable by mortal flesh. That does not mean I reject hazards or what a gritty game. There is a scale here.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes. That was my point.

I would disagree

Well, of course that is entirely subjective. When I watch a movie and see dragon's breath melt suits of armor or turn stone into slag, I would think so (perhaps not "hotter and deadlier", but as hot and as deadly, sure.

Consider this. True Lava remains "molten" for multiple months of time. One study I saw says 130 days, which is about 4.5 months.

Dragon breath turns stone to slag... for a few minutes? And the dissipation of heat is directly related to how hot the material was. The hotter something is, the longer it takes to cool down. And even if Dragon Breath briefly reaches the same heat, it dissipates much much faster.

Additionally, Dragon Breath being something that expands into the air, can realistically create pockets of more or less hot material, it is pushing the air ahead of it, and move around obstacles, spreading the heat. Meanwhile, lava is immensely dense, concentrating the heat much more efficiently.

Now, you can disagree, that is fine. I'm merely pushing back against the idea that there is only one logical path here, and that if I consider lava instant death, I must by default except that Dragon Breath is just as bad if not worse.

So would be dragon's breath. Consider you fall into a vat of acid versus a black dragon douses you with its acid breath? Both would pretty much be inherently destructive and deadly to you.

Me in my non-heroic human body that could die to a sharp whack with a thick stick? Sure.

But Acid is far less deadly than lava. Acid melting a material is making a chemical reaction that reduces the potency of the acid over time. That's why more concentrated acids "eat" more material, it takes longer to dilute them. I could imagine an acid that is near instant death for anything touching it, but it would be far stronger than most acids I can think of. And actually, I would say that such an acid would be nearly impossible to store, and the fumes would damage the party long before anyone got to the point of getting waist deep in it.

It is just a different tier of threat.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Instant and irrecovable death for anything over one foot. Watching the group trying to navigate rough staircases is always a blast.

 

[ezo]

I would disagree

Of course you would...

Now, you can disagree, that is fine. I'm merely pushing back against the idea that there is only one logical path here, and that if I consider lava instant death, I must by default except that Dragon Breath is just as bad if not worse.

Thanks. Of course I do, I already stated my opinion and why. You "must by default" do what ever you want, right? So, I'm not telling anyone how they must do anything.

Me in my non-heroic human body that could die to a sharp whack with a thick stick? Sure.

But Acid is far less deadly than lava. Acid melting a material is making a chemical reaction that reduces the potency of the acid over time. That's why more concentrated acids "eat" more material, it takes longer to dilute them. I could imagine an acid that is near instant death for anything touching it, but it would be far stronger than most acids I can think of. And actually, I would say that such an acid would be nearly impossible to store, and the fumes would damage the party long before anyone got to the point of getting waist deep in it.

It is just a different tier of threat.

Ok... it was just an example of a different type of dragon breath. Is the science lesson over, now?

 

[greymist]

I'm not seeing the problem that solves, though. A wizard could do it from level one.

I assume you are equating a 1st level wizard casting Feather Fall to my example of old-school fighters stepping off cliffs.

Old-school 1st level wizards typically had 3 or 4 hit points, and rarely had Feather Fall in their book of 5 spells.

And to clarify, the problem being solved is 100 hp fighters stepping off a 100’ cliff because they know they can 10d6 damage. It’s more or less the point raised in the OP.

 

[Clint_L]

A bit of something I don't recall if anyone posted about yet is including the massive damage rules:
View attachment 365784

I just don't care for the effects, a bit to soft IMO.


Ah, but see, there's the rub.

We often talk about hit points in the abstract, which of course they are, but as I posted above, hit points in 5E are:

Nothing about skill, dodging, turning with the blow, etc. which we commonly attribute to how damage is mitigated narratively and was common in prior editions.

While it is harder to imagine protecting yourself from lava, etc. with hit points being "durability, will to live, and luck" it is (as many attribute) a huge part of plot armor for PCs.

I would argue it isn't easier to find a way to avoid the brunt of the dragon's breath. You failed your save, you are caught very possibly in the center of the blast (or close to it!), what did you do? Nothing. YOU BURN! In stories and movies we see creatures turned to cinders in such cases. You can't just say, "I ducked behind my shield" or something, as if we're being honest, your shield would likely melt right there on your arm. Fire wraps around obstacles, you still get burned.

So, narratively, we have to justify it... But if someone is going to rule "wading through lava" is instant death, failing a save versus one of the most damaging attacks in the game should probably be the same IMO.

No, I totally disagree. It is easy to imagine scenarios where the the character survives dragon breath. In my games, hit points represent general survivability, not meat damage. So dodging, luck, etc. is exactly what happens in the dragon breath scenario.

If a character wades into lava, there's no dodging. You can't get lucky. They've just chosen to kill themselves. I would double check if they really want to do that, given the obvious consequences of wading into lava, but if player makes that choice, who am I to overrule them?

My current house rule:

• 10 ft. (3) 1d6
• 20 ft. (7) 2d6
• 30 ft. (14) 4d6
• 40 ft. (24) 7d6
• 50 ft. (38) 11d6
• 60 ft. (56) 16d6
• 70 ft. (77) 22d6
• 80 ft. (101) 29d6
• 90 ft. (129) 37d6
• 100 ft. (161) 46d6

I’ve been playing long enough to remember high level fighters purposely jumping off cliffs knowing they would not die. My progression generally ensures death at 80 ft plus which seems reasonable.

46d6 is an average of 151 damage, which is survivable by lots of high level characters, including most fighters. A barbarian would take 75 HP damage, which is only about a quarter of the health of a high level barbarian.

This is good to know. You aren't calibrated for hazard damage the way the designers envision the heroic fantasy genre. Increased damage, uncapped, insta-death, what have you. If for your table, you want to emulate a different genre where hazards are more likely to kill you that the foes you fight -- because that's not heroic fantasy -- that's good for your table. But doesn't belong as a change for general play following the normal genre the rules are attempting to emulate.

I don't know if you call the genre you run gritty or something, but you should label it to be clear it's for a different genre then the default 54e rules are mechanically emulating.

I don't need to label common sense. As I mentioned above, if a player proposes wading into lava, I double check to see if they are in fact committing character suicide, and after that it's on them.

Do you label your game "gritty" if you don't allow players to intentionally guillotine themselves and survive? Like, if a player tells you, "My character shoves their head into the fully operational wood chipper and grinds it into mush," do you feel the need to tell them, "Hey, this is a gritty 5e game -wood chippers aren't just fun and games over here!"?

But thanks for the tip! I definitely appreciate it! Much needed advice!

Edit: I'm curious, actually. If a player told you that their character wanted to kill themselves (maybe they need to end a curse on their family or something; who knows?), would you tell them it is impossible unless they figure out some extreme way to do it that does more than double maximum their maximum HP in one roll? Like, let's say they've lost the battle and want to commit sepuku, would you tell them that a short sword only does 1d6 damage and they have 150 HP so they are basically immune to it?

 

[Clint_L]

[deleted]

 

[Clint_L]

[deleted]

 

[Lanefan]

Nearly 20% of your "life"? Yeah, ok, you do that just for getting down 50 feet. I'll find a safer way if I can.

And by the time you've found and used that safer way, your friend is dead and the foe's long gone....