D&D 5E On Falling

[Juriel]

So, the rules say that 'falling from a great height is one of the most common hazards facing an adventurer', yet then don't touch the subject at all, beyond 'you take 1d6 damage for every 10 feet you fell, and land prone unless you avoid taking damage from the fall'. And that is the entirety of their handling of the subject.

Which doesn't really cover stuff that comes up all the time. If I am shoving stuff off the cliff, does it get a saving throw? Does it just move into the 'empty air' square and fall? What (beyond Feather Fall or flying) is something that would let you avoid taking any damage from the fall? Resistance and falling 10 feet and rolling 1 for damage and rounding it down to zero? They pointedly removed Acrobatics saying anything about lessening falling damage, so I guess that's no longer a part of it.

I guess it makes sense to avoid making a second saving throw for a whole goblin tribe that you just Thunderwaved to a lower dungeon level, but if the initial attack/save roll is all that is needed, then fighting near any kind of lava/spiky pits just became infinitely more dangerous. Let alone Warlocks with Repelling Blast - 40ft of no-save forced movement.

Has any adventure or random tweet approached the issue any? Or, hell, even discussion around the playtest... This isn't really even a case of 'oh it makes the environment matter', because if it just happens to you, then it just becomes another form of rocket tag in certain environments (volcanoes, mountain tops, etc).

 

[Tormyr]

Monks can negate some falling damage.

 

[77IM]

I think this will be covered in the DMG, in a section on hazards. I'm guessing they left this vague in the PHB to empower DMs to handle it as suits their play style (hopefully the DMG gives advice on this too).

For myself, I'd allow a save to catch yourself but it would be difficult and leave you hanging off the ledge. I'd probably allow Dexterity (Acrobatics) to mitigate damage somehow but I'm not sure how since numbers scale differently in this edition.

 

[Agamon]

Fighting in a volcano or on the side of a cliff is dangerous? Let me write that down somewhere so I don't forget it.

 

[Quickleaf]

The warlock casts Repelling Blast on the parapets. What happens next?

[video=youtube;jmSinbTKHKo]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmSinbTKHKo&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/video]

 

[Chocolategravy]

Why would it get a saving throw to not fall? It doesn't get a save to not get shoved when there is ground there, it's a lot harder to stop yourself when there isn't ground at all. Warlocks are silly since there is no restriction on it like the shove action you can move mountain sized creatures (but not mountain sized non creatures), but it does require a hit.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

So, the rules say that 'falling from a great height is one of the most common hazards facing an adventurer', yet then don't touch the subject at all, beyond 'you take 1d6 damage for every 10 feet you fell, and land prone unless you avoid taking damage from the fall'. And that is the entirety of their handling of the subject.
***major snippage***

Yup, sounds good. Y'see, I think you're reading the rules "backwards". What I mean by that is simply this: think of the situation, think of the likely consequences/probability, then use the game rules to model something fitting that. I think you're thinking of it backwards where you're trying to find a rule and then interpret that rule into the situation.

Reverse your thinking. Deciding what rule to use as your model for any given situation should be *after* you have decided how you think it should likely play out.

(I hope that makes sense...kinda hard to explain what I mean...)

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Stalker0]

Why would it get a saving throw to not fall?

It was the default rule in 4e. Since forced movement effects were very common in 4e, there was a rule that allowed saving throws to prevent characters from knocked into bad effects or over cliffs.

That said, I haven't not seen an equivalency in 5e.

 

[Juriel]

Y'see, I think you're reading the rules "backwards". What I mean by that is simply this: think of the situation, think of the likely consequences/probability, then use the game rules to model something fitting that. I think you're thinking of it backwards where you're trying to find a rule and then interpret that rule into the situation.

Rules dictate how the game will progress. If tossing people off cliffs is a no-save insta-death, then you have no reason to fight with people, it just becomes a game of shove shove Thunderwave okay, clear. And the same applies to the PCs, no saves, just 'sorry the giant tossed you off the cliff, can you eat 70 falling damage? okay, no, roll new char'

This is why it could be a good idea to touch on the subject in some fashion. 'Oh hey, in heroic fiction boss battles at top of a mountain/wizard tower/ramparts don't usually start and end with the first 4 x Repelling Eldritch Blast, so named characters always get a save to hang on' would do it, that simple.

Because, the rules cannot help but shape the narrative and the world, they let everyone know how things operate. And they choose what the players get rewarded for doing. Rules should make the GM's life easier, because he doesn't have to start being an armchair game designer on the spot, fixing stuff like this when all he wanted was a cool backdrop for a boss encounter.

 

[Stormonu]

For pit traps and the like, I use a DC 20 Dex save for the victim to catch onto the edge (and be hanging by fingertips).

I'd do spells on a case by case basis, but I'd be tempted to use the spell DC as a Dex save for the victim to catch themselves.

This last evening, the Dragonborn Ranger/Pirate in my group gave a nothic a "This. Is. Sparta" kick into a 20' deep crevasse. I had the two of them roll an opposed strength check and forgo the Dex save.

The nothic near plunged to its death (4 hp remaining at the bottom of the crevasse); the kitsune monk finished it off by leaping over the crevasse and showering it with shurikens on the way over...