D&D 5E Request for thoughts on falling damage change

[cooperjer]

I like some of the systems I've seen in this thread. In my game I use a simple set of equations with a save. The goal was not to simulate reality, but to allow a low level character to have some risk from falling a short distance (10-20 ft.) but know that falling too far is deadly. This system was created after a game in which I had combat mid-air (500-ft) on dragon back and a PC warlock fell off the dragon, stood up and walked away. I reviewed how this would affect a barbarian and concluded I needed a change.

Falling
The damage type is gravity damage. It cannot be resisted. (This addresses the barbarian resistance. There are probably more elegant ways to address it).

Damage rolls: 1d6 / 10 feet with a maximum of 20d6.
Multipliers: Multiply the damage based on how far the character falls by Feet/40 + 1 round down. Examples ( up to 39ft = x1, 40 to 79ft = x2, 80 to 119ft = x3, 120 to 159ft = x4, 160 to 199ft = x5, ...)
Ability check for half damage: A character can make an Athletics or Acrobatics ability check with DC = Feet fallen / 3 round down, maximum of 30. (I wanted to use both Athletics and Acrobatics to prevent Dex characters from dominating this; plus Athletics is strongly related to jumping in the rule set.)

I think the math works out that a high level character can fall from a tall height and still survive which allows for the heroic landing, but the player will most likely be put into a position of making a choice if they are read for combat or want to hide until a short rest is completed.

I haven't had to use these rules as of yet. The characters are currently in Princes of the Apocalypse but they are in the water node. If they make it to the earth or air node I might get to use the rules.

 

[thethain]

Just a note: If a 10' fall deals 10 damage, every person who ever fell off a rooftop would be dead as a commoner has 4 HP. 1d6 actually makes a lot more sense in that situation, as you could land on your feet and sprain an ankle (1), or land on your skull on a rock, splattering your brains about the area (6).

Also I jumped off our treefort as a teenager, it was probably 8-9 feet off the ground. I don't think any of the half dozen people who jumped dozens of times hurt themselves. So I don't think the extra 2 feet would have sent us all into a splattering pile of ichor.

Remember that in DnD terms, 1d6 is a fair amount of damage. Its the same as being stabbed with a shortsword from an average person!

I think the current rules fit the world of DnD while also remaining simple to implement and remember.

 

[Tormyr]

Thanks everyone for your feedback. I have posted a document with the distance covered and damage taken for creatures of different sizes along with a means to mitigate some damage.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/rpgdownloads.php?do=download&downloadid=1410
Please post any feedback for that document in its comments thread.

 

[Tormyr]

Just a note: If a 10' fall deals 10 damage, every person who ever fell off a rooftop would be dead as a commoner has 4 HP. 1d6 actually makes a lot more sense in that situation, as you could land on your feet and sprain an ankle (1), or land on your skull on a rock, splattering your brains about the area (6).

Also I jumped off our treefort as a teenager, it was probably 8-9 feet off the ground. I don't think any of the half dozen people who jumped dozens of times hurt themselves. So I don't think the extra 2 feet would have sent us all into a splattering pile of ichor.

Remember that in DnD terms, 1d6 is a fair amount of damage. Its the same as being stabbed with a shortsword from an average person!

I think the current rules fit the world of DnD while also remaining simple to implement and remember.

The document I posted has a means for mitigating fall damage for short distances. On average, a commoner would take 0 damage from a 10 foot fall.

 

[ad_hoc]

The only problem I personally have with the rules is the 10ft damage because of how they tend to work with climbing checks at low levels. There's always a scene where someone says;

PC: I'm going to climb the tree.
DM: Make a strength athletics check.
PC: OK *Rolls dice*
DM: You fail, take 1d6 damage.
PC: A 10ft fall took half my health?
DM: Yup, sorry.
PC: OK *Rolls eyes* Well we need to rest now...

It just feels tedious, annoying, and it can grind the momentum of the scene. It's a nice little laugh the first time but it gets old quick.

That was 3e.

In 5e you don't need to make the roll. Just do it unless there is some sort of special circumstance that makes it exciting.

For example if you are scaling a cliff then you just do it. But if there are excessive winds and rain then sure maybe make a roll. But still only if it is interesting to do so.

You should only be making ability checks if all of the following are true:

The outcome is in doubt
There is a meaningful consequence for failure
It is interesting

The climbing a tree example fails 1 and 3 and possibly even 2 depending on the circumstances.

 

[discosoc]

This proposal sort of ignores the fact that surviving a (sudden and unplanned) fall of more than about 10 feet has nothing to do with any sort of skill or "level." People have survived falling out of planes that broke up thousands of feet in the air, and others routinely die just falling off their home roof (about 20 feet). A lot of it depends on how and where you land, obviously, but there's a certain point where even that takes a back seat to luck. After all, people aren't cats with a "righting reflex" or flexible bone structures that allow it. It's certainly not a skill that can be taught. Even people who carefully plan on landing feet first on a 20 foot jump are often surprised at how little control they really have once they jump (higher distances do allow for more control, but you also have to fight things like tailspins that can easily cause you to black out). And those that do manage to land feet first quickly realize why that's actually a pretty bad way to land.

My point is, if you want to create a more accurate method for dealing fall damage, it has to bypass absolute hit points entirely. The best way I can think of would be in the form of a percentile damage, possibly modified down by a little skill and perhaps a lot of luck, *and* ignoring massive damage rules. Consider the following:

1. Fall damage is 50% of your full HP for every 10 feet you fall.
2. A DC 10 Acrobatics or Athletics check reduces the damage by 5%.
3. You can repeat the check until you fail it, but each attempt increases the DC by 2.

So, for example, you tumble off the roof of you house (20 feet). If you fail your check, then you drop to 0 and either stabilize on your own or hope someone comes to help you pretty quickly. But if you made the check, and most the next 2 checks as well, you'd drop the damage by 15%, resulting in 85% of your total HP lost. As long as you weren't wounded beforehand or something, you'd get up and maybe decide to clean the gutters tomorrow.

What this concept does is allow for "realistic" fall damage while also allowing for stupid survival luck. It also let's characters survive the common cinematic falls that you tend to find in games and movies without tying it directly to their HP.

 

[Tormyr]

This proposal sort of ignores the fact that surviving a (sudden and unplanned) fall of more than about 10 feet has nothing to do with any sort of skill or "level." People have survived falling out of planes that broke up thousands of feet in the air, and others routinely die just falling off their home roof (about 20 feet). A lot of it depends on how and where you land, obviously, but there's a certain point where even that takes a back seat to luck. After all, people aren't cats with a "righting reflex" or flexible bone structures that allow it. It's certainly not a skill that can be taught. Even people who carefully plan on landing feet first on a 20 foot jump are often surprised at how little control they really have once they jump (higher distances do allow for more control, but you also have to fight things like tailspins that can easily cause you to black out). And those that do manage to land feet first quickly realize why that's actually a pretty bad way to land.

My point is, if you want to create a more accurate method for dealing fall damage, it has to bypass absolute hit points entirely. The best way I can think of would be in the form of a percentile damage, possibly modified down by a little skill and perhaps a lot of luck, *and* ignoring massive damage rules. Consider the following:

1. Fall damage is 50% of your full HP for every 10 feet you fall.
2. A DC 10 Acrobatics or Athletics check reduces the damage by 5%.
3. You can repeat the check until you fail it, but each attempt increases the DC by 2.

So, for example, you tumble off the roof of you house (20 feet). If you fail your check, then you drop to 0 and either stabilize on your own or hope someone comes to help you pretty quickly. But if you made the check, and most the next 2 checks as well, you'd drop the damage by 15%, resulting in 85% of your total HP lost. As long as you weren't wounded beforehand or something, you'd get up and maybe decide to clean the gutters tomorrow.

What this concept does is allow for "realistic" fall damage while also allowing for stupid survival luck. It also let's characters survive the common cinematic falls that you tend to find in games and movies without tying it directly to their HP.

Except I am not looking to simulate reality, because there are too many variables to simulate include weight vs. surface area, which part of the body hits first, the amount of cushion of the ground, how stiff or relaxed the body is, and probably a few other factors. Rather than worrying about that, I just want something that has short falls that are potentially survivable for everyone, and infinitely large falls that are survivable by only a special few.

 

[S'mon]

In my 4e game I use fall damage (falls of 10'+)= 1 per foot fallen, max 250. Basically double the listed rate, but with the exact same cap. Largex2 Hugex4 Gargantuanx8. Doubled for elites, x4 for solos.

That looks like it would work in 5e too. I give all healthy adult human NPCs 2 hit dice, so they generally have 9-11 hp. I'd probably have them unconscious not dead if the fall damage wasn't at least 10 over their current hp. But people do die tripping on the pavement, and deliberate jump would take 10 off the damage.

 

[CydKnight]

Use what you like, but your system ignores reality in that people have survived falls of thousands of feet http://www.popularmechanics.com/adventure/outdoors/a5197/4344037/

On top of that, I think my fantasy heroes should be able to do better than the average lucky squishy human.

As quoted in the article "`It's not the fall that kills you, it's the sudden stop.' Every example in this article describes something that interrupted that sudden stop at terminal velocity. For me this would be dictated by terrain at the DM's discretion. Perhaps a new random table called "Falling Terrain". So while I do agree that a ridiculous 5000 foot free fall could be survivable, I think the damage dice being discussed here assumes you simply impact the ground or hard flat surface unimpeded during free fall.

Again I think, extenuating circumstances similar to those described in the article, and perhaps a dice roll or two, can be applied by the DM for the purposes of determining survivability of such a hideous and otherwise fatal free fall.