tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post6277560497372308437..comments2024-03-28T09:41:39.187-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: The Articles of Dragon: "Falling Damage"James Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-32836975455300817292012-02-08T09:16:21.909-05:002012-02-08T09:16:21.909-05:00Almost entirely correct. Velocity actually increas...Almost entirely correct. Velocity actually increases with only the square root of the distance fallen. But energy increases with velocity squared. So the square root and the squaring cancel each other out and energy does increase linearly with distance fallen.https://www.blogger.com/profile/14398295844409607075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-86375585942419066602011-12-22T14:20:21.802-05:002011-12-22T14:20:21.802-05:00And one more in the DMG Aerial Combat section: &qu...And one more in the DMG Aerial Combat section: "it is 1-6 hit points of damage for every ten feet they fall" (p. 53)Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-20393156462268097452011-11-24T09:36:41.537-05:002011-11-24T09:36:41.537-05:00I think we just recreated that debate all over aga...I think we just recreated that debate all over again! Truly, the classics last forever. I look forward to seeing it one more time when we hit Dragon #88. :-DDeltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-60504972327459022192011-11-24T00:37:24.240-05:002011-11-24T00:37:24.240-05:00The thing is, velocity (and therefore energy) incr...The thing is, velocity (and therefore energy) increases exponentially with TIME fallen, but linearly with distance fallen. The result being that a linear 1d6 per 10 feet is actually the more "realistic" of the two models.Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11677895164302972957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-24064644615199283392011-11-23T15:10:53.288-05:002011-11-23T15:10:53.288-05:00My guess is EGG had been running or witnessing hig...My guess is EGG had been running or witnessing higher level campaigns long enough to realize linear falling damage just didn't cut it for all the reasons cited here. And the modified rule more closely mimicked the 10 feet per second per second acceleration dynamic of gravity, which (who knows?) he either knew or did not know or did not care about at the time he was writing the original rules.<br /><br />Clearly, a fall of 10 feet might just kill a second-level magic user. In fact, it seems almost cruelly lethal overkill for that class/skill. Not until you're running 10+ level characters does the silliness of players laughing off the linear damage of falls from towering heights begin to manifest.Pat Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06787799814630339641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-23034816417156739222011-11-23T15:01:11.561-05:002011-11-23T15:01:11.561-05:00I just hope people don't start thinking all pe...<i>I just hope people don't start thinking all people are deliberately lying. I think the only way we can find the truth is examine the perspectives of everybody, and then not letting our own biases influence as well.</i><br /><br>Deliberately lying? No, not always, even most of the time, but, when there's a history of unreliability, I don't think it unreasonable to be skeptical. Plus, in this particular instance, we're talking about what Mentzer said in an article published in 1983, not even a decade since the publication of OD&D, let alone <i>AD&D</i>. If memories were failing even then, it calls into question much of what's been said in the nearly 30 years since then.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-80736465933023108292011-11-23T14:55:31.301-05:002011-11-23T14:55:31.301-05:00I just hope people don't start thinking all pe...I just hope people don't start thinking all people are deliberately lying. I think the only way we can find the truth is examine the perspectives of everybody, and then not letting our own biases influence as well.JRThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06028363896728357260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-68366384264398459032011-11-23T14:53:06.310-05:002011-11-23T14:53:06.310-05:00In any sort of later recollection, the word "...In any sort of later recollection, the word "always" takes on the additional meaning of "this is not true." George Lucas uses it in this sense, too. :-)trysterohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12028400087980452998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-47490588308157755702011-11-23T14:51:43.906-05:002011-11-23T14:51:43.906-05:00I wonder how many people will make contradictory s...<i>I wonder how many people will make contradictory statements if they live to be 70 years old.</i><br /><br>There's a difference between changing one's mind later and <i>denying</i> that one is in fact changing one's mind, isn't there?James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-57066513503596829582011-11-23T14:49:23.304-05:002011-11-23T14:49:23.304-05:00I wonder how many people will make contradictory s...I wonder how many people will make contradictory statements if they live to be 70 years old. <br /><br />In any event, my guess is Gary just changed his mind, or made a house rule official. To note, in both Mythus and LA he uses the newer exponential damage system. I'll bet he read a science article on falls and then changed his mind forever after reading that.JRThttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06028363896728357260noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-61182035236705107002011-11-23T13:48:59.160-05:002011-11-23T13:48:59.160-05:00Two such examples, both from 1978 (recalled from w...<i>Two such examples, both from 1978 (recalled from when I ran these modules and they caught my eye):</i><br /><br>Somehow, I knew you'd come through with some examples to cite! Yes, these make Mentzer's assertion that Gary had "always" used the 1d6 per 10' per 10' for falling damage even more dubious.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-51619960144623102912011-11-23T13:47:32.956-05:002011-11-23T13:47:32.956-05:00The revisionist history on this issue was truly bi...<i>The revisionist history on this issue was truly bizarre, and frankly troubled me on a more fundamental issue about the status of "what Gygax said", and how it was possible for him to directly contradict what he'd written on multiple occasions and examples. I suppose he's not the first artist for whom that's true.</i><br /><br>No, he's not, but it's one of the reasons why, much as I liked and respected the man, I didn't always put full stock in his recollections a quarter-century or more after the fact. I think Gary in the years before he died had a lot less reason to be revisionist in his answers than in, say, the '80s, but it still made me wary. This goes double for other TSR employees who report on what they remember Gygax saying.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-52104617219567785462011-11-23T12:56:53.746-05:002011-11-23T12:56:53.746-05:00Indeed, I'd hazard a guess that, if one were t...<i>Indeed, I'd hazard a guess that, if one were to look through the various modules and articles Gygax penned between 1974 and 1983, we'd find instances where the 1d6 damage per 10' rule was in fact used....</i><br /><br />Two such examples, both from 1978 (recalled from when I ran these modules and they caught my eye):<br /><br /><b>Module G2</b>, re: slipping over the glacial rift ledge 50-300 feet down: "Each member falling to the bottom of the Rift takes 1 six-sided die of damage for every 10' falling distance, 10 dice maximum due to the cushioning effects of snow drifts." [p. 2]<br /><br /><b>Module D1</b>, re: sink holes 10-80' deep: "[I]f the party is running in haste or traveling without light, treat sink holes as pits, with a 1 in 3 (1-2 on d6) chance of falling in. Damage thus sustained is 1d6 per 10'" [p. 3]Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-24837557629569918322011-11-23T12:55:24.820-05:002011-11-23T12:55:24.820-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-41987398116427577272011-11-23T12:47:16.772-05:002011-11-23T12:47:16.772-05:00The revisionist history on this issue was truly bi...The revisionist history on this issue was truly bizarre, and frankly troubled me on a more fundamental issue about the status of "what Gygax said", and how it was possible for him to directly contradict what he'd written on multiple occasions and examples. I suppose he's not the first artist for whom that's true.<br /><br />That said, for several years I was a proponent of cumulative-damage-dice, and wanted to use this for both falling and any other environmental factors (heat, cold, hunger, thirst, air, etc.) More recently I again became convinced to use the original, simpler mechanic. (Discussed <a href="http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2009/06/oed-environment.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.)Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-51141341073022924902011-11-23T06:14:20.537-05:002011-11-23T06:14:20.537-05:00That's how Castles & Crusades handles fall...That's how Castles & Crusades handles falling damage.Bigharahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14232940345429292782noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-37368848578077229172011-11-23T05:17:33.277-05:002011-11-23T05:17:33.277-05:00The witty JA Holmgren did an entire series of comi...The witty JA Holmgren did an entire series of comics about this and other "broken rules" called, "Joe Genero, Adventures of the Common Man." Loved it, and I still have my Joe Genero tee shirt!Scheyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05583635395481079327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-56714850197190724342011-11-23T04:18:11.071-05:002011-11-23T04:18:11.071-05:00I had a chat with Gary at one point, and he said s...I had a chat with Gary at one point, and he said something along the lines of "the text should have been 1d6 per 10' per 10' fallen." Notice the repetition of the "per 10'" part, which can easily pass off as an editing error, when it's not. Actually, the above models the acceleration due to the fall, which is definitely more "realistic" (and lethal.) <br />About realism: even in a game when you have tens of hit points, if these model the skill to avoid real damage, when you fall like a brick there is little skill which can save your skin.<br /><br />BTW, 2e also had massive damage rules; if you got 50hp damage you could die on the spot.Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-86210728993389283482011-11-22T19:52:10.788-05:002011-11-22T19:52:10.788-05:00What happens in a game: Player realises that his c...What happens in a game: Player realises that his character can easily survive the 60' fall to the water below, so jumps off. I've known gamemasters to look askance at this. But consider...<br /><br />What happens in the reality of the game: Hrofgar the Barbarian, running from the pursuing city guards, finds himself atop of the walls of Old Arris, with guards approaching from both ends. Praying to his god Kohnaan that the moat is deep enough he takes a swan dive off the wall just ahead of the guards. The guards are stunned to see Hrofgar pop up to the surface and swim for the far side (just ahead of the moat monster). "Surely the Hand of Kohnaan eased my fall," he thinks and sends up a prayer of thanks.<br /><br />Unfortunately the argument about falling comes afoul of the argument of what exactly is a hit point. In reality a serious fall is likely to result in broken bones and ruptured internal organs. But then, so is getting hit by a mace, and we don't see a "you were hit on the pelvis, make a system shock roll to avoid your hip breaking." {well, OK, some people used critical hit tables [ala Arduin and later Arms Law] to get these result on a critical hit but that was only in the case of a critical hit).<br /><br />I use the 1d6/10' because it's more heroic. I also don't use rules for blood infection (unless you are fighting someone who actively spreads filth on their weapons), or diseases because it's not heroic. No one wants to hear of Hrolfgar Who Died Of Septicaemia.<br /><br />[Incidentally my house rule for damage in AD&D: Hit points are the ability to avoid damage by whatever means, but they must be actively used. Actual physical damage to the character is represented by taking CON damage. This replaces the "live to -10 hp." Critical hits and sneak attacks do damage to CON directly. So actually managing to drive a dagger into someone hurts. I used each 6 on a d6 for big damage (spells and falls) caused a point of CON damage but no hit point damage.]Reverance Pavanehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01217657347160811310noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-62460363167093455522011-11-22T15:35:04.473-05:002011-11-22T15:35:04.473-05:00Thought: perhaps the 1d/10' was intended only ...Thought: perhaps the 1d/10' was intended only for pits, where there would nearly always be a wall close enough to scrape along to shed velocity? Then the 1d/10' cumulative variant could be used for falls where there's no convenient surface to use as a brake.<br /><br />Worst of both worlds, possibly, but...Rob Crawfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03010767328260010949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-54972560749492787402011-11-22T14:29:25.992-05:002011-11-22T14:29:25.992-05:00"Yes, & the semi-mythical case of the PC ..."Yes, & the semi-mythical case of the PC shooting himself in the temple to intimidate an NPC.<br /><br />If the DM can't handle this sort of player behaviour it is the campaign that is broken, not the rules."<br /><br />I think the problem here is the idea of 'Hit Points' - If I go back to D&D I'd want to explain HP as something more akin to Hero or Fate Points - heroes and villains have greater capacity to avoid being run through with a sword, whether through ability and experience, the blessings of gods, or simple luck. Conan might be able to take a few more blows than an ordinary man, but run him through with a sword and he's dead. But you only run him through with a sword when he's fatigued and used up all his luck, i.e. when he's down to less than 8HP.<br /><br />http://drbargle.blogspot.com/2010/06/characters-saint-sebastian.html<br /><br />If a player wanted to shoot himself in the head in a game I was running, it'd be a Save or Die situation, with anything less than a natural 1 (which would be a misfire or something) being a permanent crippling injury.Andy Bartletthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06683770320671028815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-73029497157125645602011-11-22T14:13:20.832-05:002011-11-22T14:13:20.832-05:00@Pat Henry: Considering how many of us poor li'...@Pat Henry: <i>Considering how many of us poor li'l 1 HD humans have fallen ten feet and have limped away grinning, I'd be inclined to give the first 10 feet free (or if you're feeling grouchy maybe a 1D4-2). That's a nice offset when you smash into jelly at 60 feet or more. </i><br /><br />Agreed, and I'd go farther than this. I find that returning to the original "to hit = to kill" combat rules of Chainmail/OD&D always clarifies these issues for me. Hit Points are a latecomer to the D&D combat system, as a way to model the slow attrition of the stamina and spirit of a large monster or an extraordinary hero over the course of a long battle. An ordinary human being in Chainmail was either alive, or dead. Accordingly, I'm a big fan of using Saves rather than Hit Points wherever possible. It might be possible for a hero (i.e., levelled character) to survive a fall that would have killed a lesser man, and to suffer HP damage in the process. But the first step should always be to throw a save (at an appropriate bonues or penalty) to handle the ordinary case of what happens to an ordinary human when falling from a height of X feet.Picadorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01244353406711565712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-79908723061369491752011-11-22T14:07:50.783-05:002011-11-22T14:07:50.783-05:00There's a fun project for an enterprising soul...<i>There's a fun project for an enterprising soul out there!</i><br /><br />I suspect our definitions of "fun" may be wildly divergent from one another. :)Michael Curtishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13217338828086458862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-70365975277582325932011-11-22T12:52:31.306-05:002011-11-22T12:52:31.306-05:00Not only does the pit example in Vol 3 (cited by A...Not only does the pit example in Vol 3 (cited by Akiyama) provide a slightly different interpretation of the falling rules, but there's a third set of falling rules in the naval combat section, p. 31:<br /><br /><i>"Those falling must make saving throws, one chance out of six for every level fallen that damage will be sustained, i.e. a fall from 40 feet will require a 5 or a 6 to save. Damage is determined by rolling a six-sided die for every level, one die for every two levels if the fall is broken by water or some yielding substance. Note that any figures struck by a falling figure must also make saving throws and are subject to damage, just as if they had themselves fallen."</i><br /><br />These are closer to the pit rules than to the aerial mount falling rules, plus they seem to confirm that it's one die per ten feet, not ten yards. The switch from "sometimes take damage from short falls" to "always take damage from short falls" is maybe connected to the fear of the edge case. Personally, I'd rather go back to the original and reduce the chance of damage for short falls, rather than using Mentzer's suggestion.<br /><br />I've got my own simple solution to the edge case which doesn't require changing the damage dice at all: look for matches on the dice. Doubles mean an injury (double 6=head, double 1=leg,) triples mean a severe injury, quadruples mean permanent injury. Injuries cause penalties to actions until taken care of, but are otherwise mostly freeform description.Talysmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02162328521343832412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-72499358575678688612011-11-22T12:47:35.930-05:002011-11-22T12:47:35.930-05:00There is however a certain unpalatable quality to ...<i>There is however a certain unpalatable quality to high level fighters leaping ridiculous heights, surviving the fall and continuing on their jolly way.</i><br /><br />Yes, & the semi-mythical case of the PC shooting himself in the temple to intimidate an NPC.<br /><br />If the DM can't handle this sort of <b>player</b> behaviour it is the campaign that is broken, not the rules.<br /><br />That being said, I tend to reserve diced damage for combat, using saving throws for most other cases.rainswepthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06165059567790555748noreply@blogger.com