Yes and no. You'd have to figure out terminal velocity as affected by air resistance. I'm not convince falling a short distance should make a difference given how much fantasy ignores the effects of size.The lack of accounting for mass in falling damage rules continues to irk me. It’s not missing from the rules just wrong.
Instead of the d6 it should be based on the size of the object/creature:
Tiny: no falling damage, they always effectively featherfall.
Does a halfling really have so much less air resistance versus a human that it's going to matter over relatively short distances? This is basic Newtonian physics here, the only reason cats can fall large distances is because they are so light they can act as their own parachute. After a certain size, the air resistance might even decrease the damage taken. Of course large animals in the real world would take more damage from a relatively short fall because of how they are built, but most larger creatures in D&D aren't real world animals.
If you were really going to do something realistic, you would have the same number of dice for say the first 100 feet, then lower dice for every 100 feet after that (because your velocity increases less) until you hit terminal velocity at 1,500 feet.