D&D 5E Why is there a limit to falling damage?
No, the effects of size on falling are far far far far far far less linear than that.
If you take a creature and scale it up by a factor of X, it has X^3 the weight and X^2 the cross section. This means it falls X times faster.
A Large creature is 2x the size of a medium in each dimension; it should take 2x the damage.
By the time you hit tiny, falling distances become infinite; a squirrel can fall from any height and not be hurt. A mouse can fall down a 1000' mine shaft and not even be stunned.
There is some mitigation for this from the design of the creature in question; elephant legs are much larger than human legs for the creature's scale.
And smaller creatures develop adaptations that reduce falling damage (cats, squirrels) before the scale law would say they don't get hurt.
pogre
Legend
The player did not make a big deal about it. He just backed off and the group got down the cliff a different way. My group is great and there was no real conflict - the rest of the players were like, "c'mon man," to the player. I make mistakes on rules from time-to-time - I make a ruling and we move on. The players correct me when necessary by email later usually.
The player did mention post-game that I should add my house rule to our miniscule house rules document - less than half a page. He actually agreed with the call after the game.
TheDelphian
Explorer
I like many people agree with your ruling.
here are some other arguments.
How badly injured are survivors who do fall that far ?
What are the percentages of survivors. Yeah one person survived a 33K ft fall but how many have not. If it is one in a million get some d10 and roll for it. 6d10 (I Think) roll in order. You have to get all zeroes and the last roll is a 1. Then you survive.
Counter meta argument. HPts represent, morale, exhaustion (in a different sense) luck, dodging etc.
So when you just step off you
can't dodge the ground (as previously stated)
Only so much rolling with the blow you can do
Depend on luck in a way luck doesn't like. You never roll exactly what you want when you want to
Morale is out the door cause you are suicidal.
and hitting the ground doesn't make you tired it makes ya dead.
Just a few thoughts.
here are some other arguments.
How badly injured are survivors who do fall that far ?
What are the percentages of survivors. Yeah one person survived a 33K ft fall but how many have not. If it is one in a million get some d10 and roll for it. 6d10 (I Think) roll in order. You have to get all zeroes and the last roll is a 1. Then you survive.
Counter meta argument. HPts represent, morale, exhaustion (in a different sense) luck, dodging etc.
So when you just step off you
can't dodge the ground (as previously stated)
Only so much rolling with the blow you can do
Depend on luck in a way luck doesn't like. You never roll exactly what you want when you want to
Morale is out the door cause you are suicidal.
and hitting the ground doesn't make you tired it makes ya dead.
Just a few thoughts.
G
Guest 6801328
Guest
Actually, an interesting variant would be to make the die size based on size, using HD equivalents.
Tiny = d4
Small = d6
Medium = d8
Large = d10
Huge = d12
Gargantuan = d20
Honestly, a 10' drop on your head can kill you. And that's great... if you fall on your head. Meanwhile, folks have survived falls from thousands of feet, by way of not falling on their heads....
I am really sorry to tell you all this, folks, but falling damage is a NARRATIVE element, not a realistic physics simulation or something. Arguments based on physics or realistic modeling do not apply. But then, your hit points aren't just meat and physics, either so...
That cap means that, in terms of narrative... if you are badass enough, that cliff just isn't an important enough piece of the universe to kill you.
At level 20 you are a being who can stand toe to toe with a 50' tall god power being, have that being breath enough fire to crack a stone wall, and laugh.
High level D&D characters are not "physically fit soldiers", and we shouldn't measure what they can do based on what we imagine a human being could do. What a specialized, lucky, trained and ridiculously fit human being can do is a floor on the competence of a high level D&D character, even going back to the first edition of D&D.
Back then, a level 4 Fighter hero was a match for 40 trained soldiers. Complete incompetents can beat Olympic-level fencing masters with restricted rules of engagement at that ratio in the real world.
A T3 barbarian should be able to jump off a 10,000 foot cliff and break the ground when he lands.
If you want to play in the realm of "physically fit soldiers", restrict D&D to level 1, maybe 2 or 3. At level 3, a 14 con fighter has 28 HP, which can survive a 20d6 fall one time in a bajillion (roughly).
High level D&D characters are not "physically fit soldiers", and we shouldn't measure what they can do based on what we imagine a human being could do. What a specialized, lucky, trained and ridiculously fit human being can do is a floor on the competence of a high level D&D character, even going back to the first edition of D&D.
Back then, a level 4 Fighter hero was a match for 40 trained soldiers. Complete incompetents can beat Olympic-level fencing masters with restricted rules of engagement at that ratio in the real world.
A T3 barbarian should be able to jump off a 10,000 foot cliff and break the ground when he lands.
If you want to play in the realm of "physically fit soldiers", restrict D&D to level 1, maybe 2 or 3. At level 3, a 14 con fighter has 28 HP, which can survive a 20d6 fall one time in a bajillion (roughly).
Fanaelialae
Legend
That's fine if that's the kind of campaign you want to run. I would assume that in that style of campaign a T3 barbarian can stab themselves through the heart and walk away fine.
That's not how I run my campaigns. High hp are less about "meat", and more about luck and skill. IMC a level 20 barbarian who chooses to stab themselves in the heart would die (barring immediate medical intervention or the like).
I think both are valid, as long as you're consistent. Although in this case it's more about the player trying to game the system. I mean, I think we can reasonably assume that had he been down to 20 hp, he wouldn't have proposed what he did. He only suggested it because he knew the rules and that the fall couldn't kill him (according to those rules).
Frankly, I think a major part of the GM's role is ruling on unconventional situations like the above.
jmartkdr2
Hero
I'mma snip this out, because I feel it bears highlighting -
the issue here isn't a rule (about falling damage or anything else). It's not how many d6's we need to gather for this. It's complete;ly unrelated to high school physics. It's not even whether a 20th level barbarian (who's literally tougher than a human can possibly be, despite being a human...) can tank being hit by a planet -
it's the this player, in this case, broke the tone of the game, and the dm called them out on it. Call it "The Rule of Uncool." If what you're doing is too silly to be allowed, it won't be allowed even if RAW would let it be.
Laurefindel
Legend
This
For the better or for the worse, height is not a very frightful opponent in D&D.
For a gritty-scary game, a relatively simple variant is damage = distance fallen in feet, save for half on landing (allow Athletics or Acrobatics in lieu of Dex save if player wishes). Use 10 feet increments to avoid arguments about whether the fall was 12 feet or 14 feet.
In theory, 1 damage per meter square would allow the simplest quadratic equation, but the default distance increment of 2.5 meters makes it awkward for quick metal calculation. A bit easier if you drop fraction, or if you use metric for that matter...
Similar Threads
