When objects fall

[fusangite]

As evidenced in some of my recent contributions, over the past few years, I have become more and more convinced that the physics of the worlds described in the core rules of D&D 3.5 are governed by Aristotle's physics. There is the matter of there being 4 terrestrial elements instead of 100+, the fact that a number of items have fixed GP values pegged to real world physics and the fact that when objects fall, the falling damage increases arithmetically instead of geomatrically; plus, unlike present-day physics, Aristotelian physics offers a number of solid theories for how magic works. Obviously, this is pretty convenient when one is faced with physics problems that arise in your game that are not covered in the core rules such as what happens when water and electricity interact, the trajectory of a thrown object, the nature of the universe beyond the upper atmosphere, or the consequences of dumping a bunch of unexpected crap into a body of water. But I get the sense that very few people view physics in D&D the way I do.

So, I thought I would ask:
1. Do objects accelerate towards the earth as they fall in your world?
2. Do objects have Newtonian trajectories when they are thrown?
3. What do the stars that people see in heavens actually represent?
4. Does water conduct electricity?
5. Are your world's physics based on a consistent model or do you just make them up as you go?

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

1. Until they reach terminal velocity, yes.
2. Probably not, ie if the archer wants to shoot someone 1000 feet away in a 10'X10' corridor, I let him.
3. The Sins of Men. I'm kidding. They're stars.
4. Yes.
5. I don't develop a specific physical model for my worlds. I assume that normal physics apply, and adjust the model accordingly when need be.

AR

 

[Henry]

1. Do objects accelerate towards the earth as they fall in your world?

Assuming D&D physics means aristotelian physics, then no.

2. Do objects have Newtonian trajectories when they are thrown?

Yes, because it's easiest to describe.

3. What do the stars that people see in heavens actually represent?

Depending on the world, it's been stars, suns (not the same thing), or just portals to the ether.

4. Does water conduct electricity?

Oh, yes. Wouldn't be as fun if it didn't.

5. Are your world's physics based on a consistent model or do you just make them up as you go?

Pretty much make it up as I go. I use the "common sense" model, which is, it works just as you see in in everyday life, UNTIL you break out the calculator. Then it works as the DM says it does.

Any more than that falls under Hong's Third Law.

 

[Gez]

1. Yes they do. But they reach terminal velocity quickly. Maybe the rules do not simulate this perfectly accurately, but I do not care either way.
2. They follow a parabollic trajectory, if that's what you mean. First they rise, then they fall. I do not need to use formulaes to determine these things, fortunately, my players aren't constantly building Foucault pendulums and similar things.
3. Good question. Some believe they are wizards who went to explore the mysteries that lie Beyond the Skies, and got themselves lost. More knowledgeable people think they are holes in the fabric of the Plane of Shadow that let the light from the Astral Plane shine on the world. Less knowledgeable think they are mere lamps put in the sky by the god of travelers to help people find their path at night. Most people do not concern overmuch with stars, as the moon is much more important. There are gods on the moon, you know, and the side of the moon (not tidally-locked) that you see determines which gods can influence what happens.
4. Why wouldn't it?
5. The former in theory; the latter in actuality. I.e., what Henry said.

 

[Mordane76]

1. Do objects accelerate towards the earth as they fall in your world?
I usually just go with the book.


2. Do objects have Newtonian trajectories when they are thrown?
We don't take arcs into account - it would just make things more difficult.


3. What do the stars that people see in heavens actually represent?
What they would normally represent, even if the people on the ground don't actually know that. I've never had a concept where it functioned differently.


4. Does water conduct electricity?
Now that I think of it, I'm not sure how I've dealt with this in the past. I think I've said yes it does.


5. Are your world's physics based on a consistent model or do you just make them up as you go?
Definitely the make it up as I go.

 

[jmucchiello]

There is the matter of there being 4 terrestrial elements instead of 100+, the fact that a number of items have fixed GP values pegged to real world physics and the fact that when objects fall, the falling damage increases arithmetically instead of geomatrically

Have you considered that hit points might represent an increase in damage potential that is logarithmic? Thus 10 hit points is not twice as damage soaking as 5 hit points. So when damage increases arithmetically, say for falling damage or for spells that increase by level, the damage down is geometric relative to what a hit point represents.

Granted strength and carry capacity might break my hypothesis. Is every 10 points of Strength doubling capacity arithmetic or geometric and does damage increasing by +1 per 2 Str maintain my concept that damage increases logarithmically?

I don't feel like running numbers to figure this out. I just thought I'd give you another way to approach the "surreal" nature of falling damage.

 

[jmucchiello]

Oh, and while I'm not going to answer the questions as posed, I'll point out that while we play on a grid, it is non-Euclidean because we don't do the 3/2 diagonal thing. Drives me a little nuts but some of the other players won't deal with the real geometry. Some day I'll demand a revokation of this varient but until then, discussing arrow trajectories seems petty.

 

[Voadam]

So, I thought I would ask:
1. Do objects accelerate towards the earth as they fall in your world?
2. Do objects have Newtonian trajectories when they are thrown?
3. What do the stars that people see in heavens actually represent?
4. Does water conduct electricity?
5. Are your world's physics based on a consistent model or do you just make them up as you go?

1 Yes plus I do accelerating fall damage, so 30 feet is 1d6+2d6+3d6.
2 Yes but it hasn't come up
3 undetermined so far
4 It used to with lightning bolts turning into fireball type area in pre3e, hasn't come up in 3e yet.
5 mix of D&D rules consequences (e.g. combat time, magic) and real world for descriptions.

 

[jerichothebard]

So, I thought I would ask:
1. Do objects accelerate towards the earth as they fall in your world?
2. Do objects have Newtonian trajectories when they are thrown?
3. What do the stars that people see in heavens actually represent?
4. Does water conduct electricity?
5. Are your world's physics based on a consistent model or do you just make them up as you go?

1. Yes, but I don't feel it's required to alter the falling damage rules.

2. Yes, but not so tightly that it changes line-of-sight = ability to hit, even under extreme circumstances such as the aforementioned 10x10 corridor.

3. There are no stars in the sky of my world, only the sun and moon. When there were stars, they represented the gods (ala Dragonlance).

4. Yes, but if you cast lightning bold under water, it does the exact same thing it does in air. It's magic. A lightning rod connected to a pond, however, would probably fry everything in the pond.

5. Yes, but it isn't exactly modeled on our world's physics. For example, a combination of saltpeter, charcoal and sulpher results in a pile of inert, dry, smelly pellets. No boom.

 

[Umbran]

the fact that when objects fall, the falling damage increases arithmetically instead of geomatrically

This one, as someone else has effectively noted, is a bit weak. You are claiming a direct connection between acceleration and "damage" which you've not yet proven. In real world physics, there's no single number we point to and call "damage" to people of physical objects, so I think that your claim that falling damage should increase geometrically (with time of fall, or with distance fallen) leaves a bit to be desired. This goes doubly so when we know full well that the D&D hit point is not really representative of clear damage to the body of the creature.