Dnd math question. A player takes 1d6 fall damage for every 10 ft they fall.
In a situation where someone is flying parallel to the ground 15ft high at 40mph. If they they fall, and hit the ground at that speed, how do you calculate the damage.
The specific scenario is they are in a flying wildshape, take damage while flying 40mph and are knocked out of the wildshape
They fell one whole increment of 10 ft, they take 1d6 falling damage
Per the rules, speed is relevant and so is any number of feet below a multiple of ten. A creature falling 11 feet and a creature falling 19 both take 1d6, whereas a creature falling 20 takes 2d6
I understand that component. But I'm saying a fall when you're flying along at 40mph would hurt more that a flat fall from 0 velocity. So how would I work that out
I understand that component. But I'm saying a fall when you're flying along at 40mph would hurt more that a flat fall from 0 velocity. So how would I work that out
That feels a bit bad. So if you're flying across the surface at like 200mph and drop 10ft, the rules say it'll hurt the same as someone just stepping off a 10ft ledge. 👎 boo
D&D is not a physics simulator. In the rare circumstance such an extreme situation occurs, the DM is always empowered to modify the rules to fit these edge cases. However the rules focus on a core envelope of expected play
As Davyd said it is not a physics simulator and if it was their would be hundreds of factors to consider.
Leather armor ir likely to provide very good protection for falls from a low height at speed. Motorcycle racers will often come off at 200 mph (from a height of about 2 feet) and walk away unhurt as their leather armor provides all the protection they need. Ofcourse if they hit something soid like a tree the damage is likely to be significant goinging into something softer like a bush less so, The game rules can not dozens if not hundreds of pages written to determine fall damage while traveling at speed based to determine how far they slide (how based on the coefficient of friction between their clothing and the ground and therefore if they hit anything solid and if to at what speed etc etc. It doesn't even give rules on whether damage is reduced if you land in water or snow.
RAW is simple and straightforward but the DM is free to change things if circumstances warrent it.
That feels a bit bad. So if you're flying across the surface at like 200mph and drop 10ft, the rules say it'll hurt the same as someone just stepping off a 10ft ledge. 👎 boo
The rules don't say which is the point. The rules don't say there is X damage and they don't say there is zero damage. Since D&D is a role playing game, the rules aren't exhaustive, they don't cover every situation. This is why the game has a DM.
The DM adjudicates the interaction of the characters with the game world both for areas covered by the rules and for areas that aren't covered by the rules. In the case of areas not covered by the rules, the DM uses their best judgement to decide how they think the interaction would work. You can either come up with that based on something similar or based on your best guess.
For example, the rules don't cover what happens when a character moving at 200mph suddenly runs into a wall of force that they didn't see coming. How do you adjudicate that?
There are a couple of options .. you could use falling damage and physics as a basis. The maximum falling damage is 20d6 from a fall of 200' or more. After falling 200', a creature is moving about 77.5mph. Terminal velocity when falling is also about 150mph but depends on wind resistance and the shape of the object. Based on both of these, 200mph hits the 20d6 damage cap for falling damage. So I'd probably just use 20d6.
A linear increase in damage with distance isn't a bad approximation since the increase in kinetic energy is also linear with distance fallen.
Anyway, that is just one way a DM could justify assigning damage from a character hitting something at speed.
Also, just to add to the reality discussion ... 20d6 is only 70 damage on average. Most higher level D&D characters will have no problem taking that damage and jumping up to fight never mind just walking away. High level D&D characters are intended to be heroic with a survivability far beyond normal. So, using the real world to decide how to adjudicate something in a D&D game can't be taken too literally :)
TL;DR The rules don't cover everything. It is the job of the DM to decide how situations not covered by the rules are resolved.
Real world physics actually aligns with the rules here anyway. If an object (projectile) drops onto a frictionless, horizontal surface, only the vertical component of movement matters. The horizontal component does not contribute to gravitational forces. So, if you reach out your hand and fire a gun horizontally over a perfect sheet of ice, the bullet will eventually fall to the ice with the same amount of force as if you had reached out your hand and dropped the bullet directly downward onto the ice.
Now, if you want to start talking about some sort of additional damage created by sliding or being dragged along a rough surface then you are no longer talking about "falling damage". It would be something else which can be added to the list of situations for which there are no rules such as being crushed by a massive object, being thrown forcefully into a surface or object, being dismembered, being stretched on a rack-like torture device and so on. In these cases it is up to the DM to make a ruling.
While the core rules are made as simple as possible, a DM judging a high speed fly crash should result in extra damage can always double it as a critical fall damage or add Improvising Damage to the fall damage for exemple.
Yeah I know that, what I'm asking for is someone's best idea for what they would do. I know it comes down to a dm discression so I guess I'm asking is what other dms would do in that instance. What kinda numbers would you think were appropriate.
up2ng makes a really good point; what you're talking about with this isn't really fall damage, it's the damage you'd take from skidding along the ground. It might be possible to model that with a kinematic equation or something, but here's what I'd do just for a quick and dirty solution:
When a creature crashes while travelling at least 10 mph, they take an additional 1d6 Bludgeoning damage for each 10 mph they were traveling. A creature that crashes this way comes to rest a number of feet beyond the space in which it crashed equal to 5 x the amount of damage it took.
So if your player is traveling at 40 mph 15 feet above the ground and falls, they take 1d6 fall damage per RAW, then take 4d6 additional crash damage per this homebrew, then slide or roll an additional 4d6 x 5 feet in whatever direction they were traveling when they crashed.
This is all extremely back of the napkin stuff, feel free to modify it as feels appropriate to you, but that's how I would run it.
Yeah I know that, what I'm asking for is someone's best idea for what they would do. I know it comes down to a dm discression so I guess I'm asking is what other dms would do in that instance. What kinda numbers would you think were appropriate.
For simplicity's sake, as DM i'd just do 1d6 X 10 ft. wether the creature is moving or not.
I would also let them make a Dex (Acrobatics) save to take half damage from the skid if you go this route.
The problem with applying extra damage to a fall like this is that you should probably apply disadvantage to hit someone travelling at 40 MPH. But this would make Wildshape an even stronger ability than it already is. The reality is that the game works within the rules so you don't have to break out your calculator to solve quadratic equations to determine how much damage you take from rapid deceleration.
To be totally fair, I think that "hard to hit a creature flying very fast" factor is why small, flying creatures often get the Flyby trait (cannot be targeted with opportunity attacks while flying). But you're definitely right that there's a reason D&D doesn't take speed into account by default for things like this: once you let speed affect one thing, you suddenly notice a bunch of different things it really should affect. At some point you just have to let go the desire to model realistic physics, but what point that will be is different for everybody.
So in the example, they are moving at a speed of 1760' per round? What has them going that fast?
A very rough but closer approximation is that 40 mph = a speed of 400. But the point remains: hopefully the OP is not seeing a creature Stat with a flying speed of 40 and assuming that that means 40mph because it doesn't mean that.
So in the example, they are moving at a speed of 1760' per round? What has them going that fast?
A very rough but closer approximation is that 40 mph = a speed of 400. But the point remains: hopefully the OP is not seeing a creature Stat with a flying speed of 40 and assuming that that means 40mph because it doesn't mean that.
Well, my thinking was just that maybe the game effect causing them to go ridiculously faster than anything else in the game should be the source of the damage.
also for some reason, i had it in my head that they were going 200 mph.
Well I would convert 40mph to 58fps (feet per second) and for every 10 feet its 1d8 so it should be arround 5d8 damage plus the 15 feet (1d8 fall damage) for a total of 6d8 damage.
But that would be homebrew since in the 5e rules you only take damage from height and not from speed (as far as I understand).
I would calculate the hypotenuse as the distance fell, since that's the actual distance traveled.
A^2 + B^2 = C^2, with A being the speed on a horizontal axis, A=40
B being the height, B=15, and C being the hypotenuse. It would show as follows:
40^2 + 15^2 = C^2, solve for C
1600+225=C^2
1825=C^2
42.7 = C, this is the actual distance traveled relative from an outside observer. Round down as D&D likes to do. The person described would take 4d6 fall damage.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Dnd math question. A player takes 1d6 fall damage for every 10 ft they fall.
In a situation where someone is flying parallel to the ground 15ft high at 40mph. If they they fall, and hit the ground at that speed, how do you calculate the damage.
The specific scenario is they are in a flying wildshape, take damage while flying 40mph and are knocked out of the wildshape
They fell one whole increment of 10 ft, they take 1d6 falling damage
Per the rules, speed is relevant and so is any number of feet below a multiple of ten. A creature falling 11 feet and a creature falling 19 both take 1d6, whereas a creature falling 20 takes 2d6
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I understand that component. But I'm saying a fall when you're flying along at 40mph would hurt more that a flat fall from 0 velocity. So how would I work that out
You don't, the rules don't factor speed
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
That feels a bit bad. So if you're flying across the surface at like 200mph and drop 10ft, the rules say it'll hurt the same as someone just stepping off a 10ft ledge. 👎 boo
D&D is not a physics simulator. In the rare circumstance such an extreme situation occurs, the DM is always empowered to modify the rules to fit these edge cases. However the rules focus on a core envelope of expected play
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
As Davyd said it is not a physics simulator and if it was their would be hundreds of factors to consider.
Leather armor ir likely to provide very good protection for falls from a low height at speed. Motorcycle racers will often come off at 200 mph (from a height of about 2 feet) and walk away unhurt as their leather armor provides all the protection they need. Ofcourse if they hit something soid like a tree the damage is likely to be significant goinging into something softer like a bush less so, The game rules can not dozens if not hundreds of pages written to determine fall damage while traveling at speed based to determine how far they slide (how based on the coefficient of friction between their clothing and the ground and therefore if they hit anything solid and if to at what speed etc etc. It doesn't even give rules on whether damage is reduced if you land in water or snow.
RAW is simple and straightforward but the DM is free to change things if circumstances warrent it.
The rules don't say which is the point. The rules don't say there is X damage and they don't say there is zero damage. Since D&D is a role playing game, the rules aren't exhaustive, they don't cover every situation. This is why the game has a DM.
The DM adjudicates the interaction of the characters with the game world both for areas covered by the rules and for areas that aren't covered by the rules. In the case of areas not covered by the rules, the DM uses their best judgement to decide how they think the interaction would work. You can either come up with that based on something similar or based on your best guess.
For example, the rules don't cover what happens when a character moving at 200mph suddenly runs into a wall of force that they didn't see coming. How do you adjudicate that?
There are a couple of options .. you could use falling damage and physics as a basis. The maximum falling damage is 20d6 from a fall of 200' or more. After falling 200', a creature is moving about 77.5mph. Terminal velocity when falling is also about 150mph but depends on wind resistance and the shape of the object. Based on both of these, 200mph hits the 20d6 damage cap for falling damage. So I'd probably just use 20d6.
A linear increase in damage with distance isn't a bad approximation since the increase in kinetic energy is also linear with distance fallen.
Anyway, that is just one way a DM could justify assigning damage from a character hitting something at speed.
Also, just to add to the reality discussion ... 20d6 is only 70 damage on average. Most higher level D&D characters will have no problem taking that damage and jumping up to fight never mind just walking away. High level D&D characters are intended to be heroic with a survivability far beyond normal. So, using the real world to decide how to adjudicate something in a D&D game can't be taken too literally :)
TL;DR The rules don't cover everything. It is the job of the DM to decide how situations not covered by the rules are resolved.
Real world physics actually aligns with the rules here anyway. If an object (projectile) drops onto a frictionless, horizontal surface, only the vertical component of movement matters. The horizontal component does not contribute to gravitational forces. So, if you reach out your hand and fire a gun horizontally over a perfect sheet of ice, the bullet will eventually fall to the ice with the same amount of force as if you had reached out your hand and dropped the bullet directly downward onto the ice.
Now, if you want to start talking about some sort of additional damage created by sliding or being dragged along a rough surface then you are no longer talking about "falling damage". It would be something else which can be added to the list of situations for which there are no rules such as being crushed by a massive object, being thrown forcefully into a surface or object, being dismembered, being stretched on a rack-like torture device and so on. In these cases it is up to the DM to make a ruling.
While the core rules are made as simple as possible, a DM judging a high speed fly crash should result in extra damage can always double it as a critical fall damage or add Improvising Damage to the fall damage for exemple.
Yeah I know that, what I'm asking for is someone's best idea for what they would do. I know it comes down to a dm discression so I guess I'm asking is what other dms would do in that instance. What kinda numbers would you think were appropriate.
up2ng makes a really good point; what you're talking about with this isn't really fall damage, it's the damage you'd take from skidding along the ground. It might be possible to model that with a kinematic equation or something, but here's what I'd do just for a quick and dirty solution:
When a creature crashes while travelling at least 10 mph, they take an additional 1d6 Bludgeoning damage for each 10 mph they were traveling. A creature that crashes this way comes to rest a number of feet beyond the space in which it crashed equal to 5 x the amount of damage it took.
So if your player is traveling at 40 mph 15 feet above the ground and falls, they take 1d6 fall damage per RAW, then take 4d6 additional crash damage per this homebrew, then slide or roll an additional 4d6 x 5 feet in whatever direction they were traveling when they crashed.
This is all extremely back of the napkin stuff, feel free to modify it as feels appropriate to you, but that's how I would run it.
For simplicity's sake, as DM i'd just do 1d6 X 10 ft. wether the creature is moving or not.
So in the example, they are moving at a speed of 1760' per round? What has them going that fast?
To be totally fair, I think that "hard to hit a creature flying very fast" factor is why small, flying creatures often get the Flyby trait (cannot be targeted with opportunity attacks while flying). But you're definitely right that there's a reason D&D doesn't take speed into account by default for things like this: once you let speed affect one thing, you suddenly notice a bunch of different things it really should affect. At some point you just have to let go the desire to model realistic physics, but what point that will be is different for everybody.
A very rough but closer approximation is that 40 mph = a speed of 400. But the point remains: hopefully the OP is not seeing a creature Stat with a flying speed of 40 and assuming that that means 40mph because it doesn't mean that.
Well, my thinking was just that maybe the game effect causing them to go ridiculously faster than anything else in the game should be the source of the damage.
also for some reason, i had it in my head that they were going 200 mph.
Well I would convert 40mph to 58fps (feet per second) and for every 10 feet its 1d8 so it should be arround 5d8 damage plus the 15 feet (1d8 fall damage) for a total of 6d8 damage.
But that would be homebrew since in the 5e rules you only take damage from height and not from speed (as far as I understand).
I would calculate the hypotenuse as the distance fell, since that's the actual distance traveled.
A^2 + B^2 = C^2, with A being the speed on a horizontal axis, A=40
B being the height, B=15, and C being the hypotenuse. It would show as follows:
40^2 + 15^2 = C^2, solve for C
1600+225=C^2
1825=C^2
42.7 = C, this is the actual distance traveled relative from an outside observer. Round down as D&D likes to do. The person described would take 4d6 fall damage.