DM: It's a 20-foot drop. You will take bludgeoning damage 2d6.
Player: Can't I do some kind of ability check to see if I take less damage.
DM: No, it's a 20-foot drop straight down onto a rocky floor, but I'm willing to check * Pulls Out Player's Handbook and looks up falling *
Player: I should at least get an acrobatics check
DM: * double checks dexterity ability check. *
DM: Ruling stands, from a fall, especially one at that hight you are going to take falling damage. * rolls 2d6 * Take 11 points of damage.
Player: This is BS we should house rule that.
No, I was not the player but I was the DM, so I'll own up on that point. Yes, I could have allowed the character in chainmail to do some acrobatic/dexterity stunt to lessen the fall but as RAW there is no 'cushion' rule that indicates a player can mitigate their fall damage.
I'm willing to say if I was wrong but I wanted to throw the scenario out and get the hive mind opinion.
If my player would have said that he tries to climb down and hang on the bridge before jumping, i would have allowed him a DC 10 athletics check to reduce the damage by 1d6. On the same page i would allow someone who is trained in acrobatics to land and roll, for a 1d6 reduction (higher dc for higher fall). But, my player would have to come up and describe to me how they plausible want to do it. Simply saying can i roll acrobatics would not cut it. Roleplay it, make me see it and you get your chance to roll.
Totally cool to make a house rule for that. Completely in your domain to not allow that on the fly. I think this is a good conversation to have as a group regarding this house rule. If the player is not good at describing how they do something, it might not be a good idea to make them try to describe how they use that skill to that effect; that might not be part of the game that they find enhances their fun.
In the real world it is possible to use break fall techniques to lesson the impact of a fall or at least distribute it. I know several folks who managed to avoid significant injury (one on a bicycle and the other on a motorcycle at least in part due to using proper falling techniques). When you learn parachuting, they also teach you the basics of break falls for the landing .. feet and knees together, knees bent, "roll" the landing.
In the real world, it is possible to jump down 10' without getting hurt .. though a significant fraction of folks might have some injury and some could be seriously hurt. There is a wide range of outcomes.
In D&D though, from a DM perspective and RAW, you are absolutely right. Falling damage for 20 feet is 2d6 and there are no rules about mitigating it. If someone lowered themselves and dropped the last 10' then I'd reduce the damage to 1d6 since they really weren't falling 20'. However, if they jumped off a 20' ledge wearing armor I would do the 2d6 damage. There isn't much they can do in a D&D sense to mitigate the damage. If you want a house rule you could throw in an acrobatics check to reduce the damage by some amount (either drop 1d6 or half or whatever) but it adds complexity for very little gain and really doesn't factor in whether the character is wearing armor or carrying 50 lbs of gear some of which has sharp edges and you would not want to land on it.
I would have allowed an athletics check to hang from the bridge and let go rather than 'jumping'. This would reduce the fall distance from 20 ft to 15 ft, and I would let him take 1d6. It would also take an extra round.
Long Jump. When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.
This rule assumes that the height of your jump doesn't matter, such as a jump across a stream or chasm. At your DM's option, you must succeed on a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check to clear a low obstacle (no taller than a quarter of the jump's distance), such as a hedge or low wall. Otherwise, you hit it.
When you land in difficult terrain, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to land on your feet. Otherwise, you land prone.
High Jump. When you make a high jump, you leap into the air a number of feet equal to 3 + your Strength modifier (minimum of 0 feet) if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing high jump, you can jump only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement. In some circumstances, your DM might allow you to make a Strength (Athletics) check to jump higher than you normally can.
You can extend your arms half your height above yourself during the jump. Thus, you can reach above you a distance equal to the height of the jump plus 1 1/2 times your height.
I'm overweight, clumsy, never played sports, have spinal problems and yet I've jumped down from a 12 feet tall ledge without any issues. My brother is more athletic playing sports and is physically fit but even without any training in "break falls" techniques or anything of that sort has jumped down 20 feet - he very mildly scraped a knee in an awkward landing, but was otherwise perfectly fine. As kids we've jumped from the top of garages and trees 8 to 10 feet tall and it was easy - it was a game.
There's a massive difference between falling 10 to 20 feet and jumping down from a 10 to 20 ft height. With jumping down, your mind and body is prepared - it knows what to expect, it can instinctually do what it needs to mitigate the impact and balance itself. When you fall it is not expected, there's no balance and so you are more likely to land incorrectly and get hurt.
So, yes, I'm on the player's side here. The idea that an experienced adventurer must get hurt by jumping down a distance that ordinary, untrained, people in the real world can jump down without getting hurt - is disappointing, unrealistic and completely breaks the immersion.
Personally, I would have taken a look at the Jumping rules, and considered the High Jump. I'd consider it a high jump without needing the 10 ft run up (since they don't need the momentum, it's just about bracing) so that's 13 + strength score distance without damage, without rolls. It still uses up their movement, of course, but I'd consider a jump down just like any other jump. Perhaps an Acrobatics check, DC 10, if over 10 ft, to avoid landing prone.
Technically a houserule but I'd prefer that over pissing off my players just because the designers didn't think about this properly.
Edit: IAmSposta posted while I was typing (I'm a slow typer), with the rules and highlighted what I missed about the acrobatics check - so really, what I thought was a houserule, actually wouldn't be. So, yeah, the Player was perfectly right to have been unhappy - he was jumping not falling, and you used falling rules instead of jumping rules.
Long Jump. When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.
This rule assumes that the height of your jump doesn't matter, such as a jump across a stream or chasm. At your DM's option, you must succeed on a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check to clear a low obstacle (no taller than a quarter of the jump's distance), such as a hedge or low wall. Otherwise, you hit it.
When you land in difficult terrain, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to land on your feet. Otherwise, you land prone.
High Jump. When you make a high jump, you leap into the air a number of feet equal to 3 + your Strength modifier (minimum of 0 feet) if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing high jump, you can jump only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement. In some circumstances, your DM might allow you to make a Strength (Athletics) check to jump higher than you normally can.
You can extend your arms half your height above yourself during the jump. Thus, you can reach above you a distance equal to the height of the jump plus 1 1/2 times your height.
To me, a long-jump is a horizontal jump and in this case, the player jumped off the bridge down to lower 'level' floor 20 feet below. I'm not disagreeing with your point I'm just trying to see the correlations of a horizontal jump rule to the vertical drop the player made. In this case, falling damage would never really be applied if they succeed in the check which counters the fall rule. Again, not disagreeing but just talking/typing my thought out.
Long Jump. When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.
This rule assumes that the height of your jump doesn't matter, such as a jump across a stream or chasm. At your DM's option, you must succeed on a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check to clear a low obstacle (no taller than a quarter of the jump's distance), such as a hedge or low wall. Otherwise, you hit it.
When you land in difficult terrain, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to land on your feet. Otherwise, you land prone.
High Jump. When you make a high jump, you leap into the air a number of feet equal to 3 + your Strength modifier (minimum of 0 feet) if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing high jump, you can jump only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement. In some circumstances, your DM might allow you to make a Strength (Athletics) check to jump higher than you normally can.
You can extend your arms half your height above yourself during the jump. Thus, you can reach above you a distance equal to the height of the jump plus 1 1/2 times your height.
To me, a long-jump is a horizontal jump and in this case, the player jumped off the bridge down to lower 'level' floor 20 feet below. I'm not disagreeing with your point I'm just trying to see the correlations of a horizontal jump rule to the vertical drop the player made. In this case, falling damage would never really be applied if they succeed in the check which counters the fall rule. Again, not disagreeing but just talking/typing my thought out.
One presumes that the rule for landing in difficult terrain applies to both long jumps and high jumps. It would make no sense for them not to. They most likely saw no need to reprint the exact same rule a second time a mere 5 sentences later.
And the PC wasn’t “falling,” they were “jumping.” The rules for a high jump make no mention of falling damage when landing at all.
DM: It's a 20-foot drop. You will take bludgeoning damage 2d6.
Player: Can't I do some kind of ability check to see if I take less damage.
DM: No, it's a 20-foot drop straight down onto a rocky floor, but I'm willing to check * Pulls Out Player's Handbook and looks up falling *
Player: I should at least get an acrobatics check
DM: * double checks dexterity ability check. *
DM: Ruling stands, from a fall, especially one at that hight you are going to take falling damage. * rolls 2d6 * Take 11 points of damage.
Player: This is BS we should house rule that.
No, I was not the player but I was the DM, so I'll own up on that point. Yes, I could have allowed the character in chainmail to do some acrobatic/dexterity stunt to lessen the fall but as RAW there is no 'cushion' rule that indicates a player can mitigate their fall damage.
I'm willing to say if I was wrong but I wanted to throw the scenario out and get the hive mind opinion.
You forgot to check if that player have Masterize the proficiency about the type of armor he/she's wearing ( plus the DEX saving throw, and plus acrobatics check, that could get him/her a chance to avoid some damage ).
Let him/her not die so easily, or at least say something like * your life's going to leave out sooner than you expect *.
You forgot to check if that player have Masterize the proficiency about the type of armor he/she's wearing ( plus the DEX saving throw, and plus acrobatics check, that could get him/her a chance to avoid some damage ).
Let him/her not die so easily, or at least say something like * your life's going to leave out sooner than you expect *.
There is no such word as "masterize".
They're wearing chainmail which doesn't impede jumping or affect falling.
There's no reason for a Dex save - they're not avoiding something or dodging from a trap or reacting to a hazard.
You forgot to check if that player have Masterize the proficiency about the type of armor he/she's wearing ( plus the DEX saving throw, and plus acrobatics check, that could get him/her a chance to avoid some damage ).
Let him/her not die so easily, or at least say something like * your life's going to leave out sooner than you expect *.
There is no such word as "masterize".
They're wearing chainmail which doesn't impede jumping or affect falling.
There's no reason for a Dex save - they're not avoiding something or dodging from a trap or reacting to a hazard.
Dertinus is translating from Spanish-English and back again. There is a bit of a language barrier that must be overcome.
You forgot to check if that player have Masterize the proficiency about the type of armor he/she's wearing ( plus the DEX saving throw, and plus acrobatics check, that could get him/her a chance to avoid some damage ).
Let him/her not die so easily, or at least say something like * your life's going to leave out sooner than you expect *.
There is no such word as "masterize".
They're wearing chainmail which doesn't impede jumping or affect falling.
There's no reason for a Dex save - they're not avoiding something or dodging from a trap or reacting to a hazard.
Dertinus is translating from Spanish-English and back again. There is a bit of a language barrier that must be overcome.
But it's not spanish, either?
I googled and it's slang, apparently, for "master", like "I want to master the sword and become a great swordsman".
There's no mastering proficiency with armour, you either have it or don't. There's a feat for heavy armour which lets you ignore up to 3 points of bludgeoning damage but you can't suddenly gain a feat without levelling up, and there's no indication the OP is banning that feat or that the player has it already, so the very indirect and weird way to mention it has no real relevance to the topic. So, it makes no sense.
DM: It's a 20-foot drop. You will take bludgeoning damage 2d6.
Player: Can't I do some kind of ability check to see if I take less damage.
DM: No, it's a 20-foot drop straight down onto a rocky floor, but I'm willing to check * Pulls Out Player's Handbook and looks up falling *
Player: I should at least get an acrobatics check
DM: * double checks dexterity ability check. *
DM: Ruling stands, from a fall, especially one at that hight you are going to take falling damage. * rolls 2d6 * Take 11 points of damage.
Player: This is BS we should house rule that.
No, I was not the player but I was the DM, so I'll own up on that point. Yes, I could have allowed the character in chainmail to do some acrobatic/dexterity stunt to lessen the fall but as RAW there is no 'cushion' rule that indicates a player can mitigate their fall damage.
I'm willing to say if I was wrong but I wanted to throw the scenario out and get the hive mind opinion.
You weren't wrong, there's no official rule for reducing damage from a fall without some spell or ability which does explicitly does so. But while your player wasn't the most diplomatic about it(given the dialogue you attributed to them), a house rule to let an Acrobatics check mitigate fall damage is a perfectly viable idea, within reason. I would definitely limit it to a maximum height(probably somewhere in the 20-30 foot range). I don't think you can "tuck and roll" out of taking full damage from a 100ft fall, for example :)
What I was attempting to explain was that Dertinus had to copy our posts, put them into an online translator, try to figure out what the gowdawefull translation software was probably saying in Spanish (because it probably made little sense to him), come up with what he thought was a relevant response in Spanish, put that into the translation software so it could turn it into “English” (which makes just as little sense to us), and then copy paste it here. Like whisper down the lane, that never comes out nearly as coherent as it should have.
For example Google translates “Dexterity Saving Throw” into “Lanzamiento de ahorro de destreza” in Spanish, and then translates that Spanish into English as “Skill Saving Launch.” We just need a little understanding is all.
What I was attempting to explain was that Dertinus had to copy our posts, put them into an online translator, try to figure out what the gowdawefull translation software was probably saying in Spanish (because it probably made little sense to him), come up with what he thought was a relevant response in Spanish, put that into the translation software so it could turn it into “English” (which makes just as little sense to us), and then copy paste it here. Like whisper down the lane, that never comes out nearly as coherent as it should have.
For example Google translates “Dexterity Saving Throw” into “Lanzamiento de ahorro de destreza” in Spanish, and then translates that Spanish into English as “Skill Saving Launch.” We just need a little understanding is all.
Don’t get me wrong, he can hold a conversation. And he has at least an average* understanding of the rules. But there are language issues when it comes to technical translations/transliterations.
*I know you read these forums. I know you know what I mean. There are folks who think Cunning Action gives Rogues a second BA/turn. There are folks debating if you can equip a cat Animal Companion with a shortsword.
I would allow a deliberate drop to subtract your jump height from distance fallen. That won't help much though.
That’s what I would do too. But since everything is measured in 10’ increments in D&D when it comes to falling, and since everything rounds down in D&D, that would have reduced it to a 10’ fall.
No, I was not the player but I was the DM, so I'll own up on that point. Yes, I could have allowed the character in chainmail to do some acrobatic/dexterity stunt to lessen the fall but as RAW there is no 'cushion' rule that indicates a player can mitigate their fall damage.
I'm willing to say if I was wrong but I wanted to throw the scenario out and get the hive mind opinion.
If my player would have said that he tries to climb down and hang on the bridge before jumping, i would have allowed him a DC 10 athletics check to reduce the damage by 1d6. On the same page i would allow someone who is trained in acrobatics to land and roll, for a 1d6 reduction (higher dc for higher fall).
But, my player would have to come up and describe to me how they plausible want to do it. Simply saying can i roll acrobatics would not cut it. Roleplay it, make me see it and you get your chance to roll.
Totally cool to make a house rule for that. Completely in your domain to not allow that on the fly. I think this is a good conversation to have as a group regarding this house rule. If the player is not good at describing how they do something, it might not be a good idea to make them try to describe how they use that skill to that effect; that might not be part of the game that they find enhances their fun.
In the real world it is possible to use break fall techniques to lesson the impact of a fall or at least distribute it. I know several folks who managed to avoid significant injury (one on a bicycle and the other on a motorcycle at least in part due to using proper falling techniques). When you learn parachuting, they also teach you the basics of break falls for the landing .. feet and knees together, knees bent, "roll" the landing.
In the real world, it is possible to jump down 10' without getting hurt .. though a significant fraction of folks might have some injury and some could be seriously hurt. There is a wide range of outcomes.
In D&D though, from a DM perspective and RAW, you are absolutely right. Falling damage for 20 feet is 2d6 and there are no rules about mitigating it. If someone lowered themselves and dropped the last 10' then I'd reduce the damage to 1d6 since they really weren't falling 20'. However, if they jumped off a 20' ledge wearing armor I would do the 2d6 damage. There isn't much they can do in a D&D sense to mitigate the damage. If you want a house rule you could throw in an acrobatics check to reduce the damage by some amount (either drop 1d6 or half or whatever) but it adds complexity for very little gain and really doesn't factor in whether the character is wearing armor or carrying 50 lbs of gear some of which has sharp edges and you would not want to land on it.
I would have allowed an athletics check to hang from the bridge and let go rather than 'jumping'. This would reduce the fall distance from 20 ft to 15 ft, and I would let him take 1d6. It would also take an extra round.
If you look under the rules for Jumping under Special Types of Movement you will find this:
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
I'm overweight, clumsy, never played sports, have spinal problems and yet I've jumped down from a 12 feet tall ledge without any issues. My brother is more athletic playing sports and is physically fit but even without any training in "break falls" techniques or anything of that sort has jumped down 20 feet - he very mildly scraped a knee in an awkward landing, but was otherwise perfectly fine. As kids we've jumped from the top of garages and trees 8 to 10 feet tall and it was easy - it was a game.
There's a massive difference between falling 10 to 20 feet and jumping down from a 10 to 20 ft height. With jumping down, your mind and body is prepared - it knows what to expect, it can instinctually do what it needs to mitigate the impact and balance itself. When you fall it is not expected, there's no balance and so you are more likely to land incorrectly and get hurt.
So, yes, I'm on the player's side here. The idea that an experienced adventurer must get hurt by jumping down a distance that ordinary, untrained, people in the real world can jump down without getting hurt - is disappointing, unrealistic and completely breaks the immersion.
Personally, I would have taken a look at the Jumping rules, and considered the High Jump. I'd consider it a high jump without needing the 10 ft run up (since they don't need the momentum, it's just about bracing) so that's 13 + strength score distance without damage, without rolls. It still uses up their movement, of course, but I'd consider a jump down just like any other jump. Perhaps an Acrobatics check, DC 10, if over 10 ft, to avoid landing prone.
Technically a houserule but I'd prefer that over pissing off my players just because the designers didn't think about this properly.
Edit: IAmSposta posted while I was typing (I'm a slow typer), with the rules and highlighted what I missed about the acrobatics check - so really, what I thought was a houserule, actually wouldn't be. So, yeah, the Player was perfectly right to have been unhappy - he was jumping not falling, and you used falling rules instead of jumping rules.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
That was basically my point, but Cyb3rM1nd articulated it better than I did.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
To me, a long-jump is a horizontal jump and in this case, the player jumped off the bridge down to lower 'level' floor 20 feet below. I'm not disagreeing with your point I'm just trying to see the correlations of a horizontal jump rule to the vertical drop the player made. In this case, falling damage would never really be applied if they succeed in the check which counters the fall rule. Again, not disagreeing but just talking/typing my thought out.
One presumes that the rule for landing in difficult terrain applies to both long jumps and high jumps. It would make no sense for them not to. They most likely saw no need to reprint the exact same rule a second time a mere 5 sentences later.
And the PC wasn’t “falling,” they were “jumping.” The rules for a high jump make no mention of falling damage when landing at all.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
You forgot to check if that player have Masterize the proficiency about the type of armor he/she's wearing ( plus the DEX saving throw, and plus acrobatics check, that could get him/her a chance to avoid some damage ).
Let him/her not die so easily, or at least say something like * your life's going to leave out sooner than you expect *.
My Ready-to-rock&roll chars:
Dertinus Tristany // Amilcar Barca // Vicenç Sacrarius // Oriol Deulofeu // Grovtuk
There is no such word as "masterize".
They're wearing chainmail which doesn't impede jumping or affect falling.
There's no reason for a Dex save - they're not avoiding something or dodging from a trap or reacting to a hazard.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Dertinus is translating from Spanish-English and back again. There is a bit of a language barrier that must be overcome.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
But it's not spanish, either?
I googled and it's slang, apparently, for "master", like "I want to master the sword and become a great swordsman".
There's no mastering proficiency with armour, you either have it or don't. There's a feat for heavy armour which lets you ignore up to 3 points of bludgeoning damage but you can't suddenly gain a feat without levelling up, and there's no indication the OP is banning that feat or that the player has it already, so the very indirect and weird way to mention it has no real relevance to the topic. So, it makes no sense.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
You weren't wrong, there's no official rule for reducing damage from a fall without some spell or ability which does explicitly does so. But while your player wasn't the most diplomatic about it(given the dialogue you attributed to them), a house rule to let an Acrobatics check mitigate fall damage is a perfectly viable idea, within reason. I would definitely limit it to a maximum height(probably somewhere in the 20-30 foot range). I don't think you can "tuck and roll" out of taking full damage from a 100ft fall, for example :)
I recognize that “masterize” is slang.
What I was attempting to explain was that Dertinus had to copy our posts, put them into an online translator, try to figure out what the gowdawefull translation software was probably saying in Spanish (because it probably made little sense to him), come up with what he thought was a relevant response in Spanish, put that into the translation software so it could turn it into “English” (which makes just as little sense to us), and then copy paste it here. Like whisper down the lane, that never comes out nearly as coherent as it should have.
For example Google translates “Dexterity Saving Throw” into “Lanzamiento de ahorro de destreza” in Spanish, and then translates that Spanish into English as “Skill Saving Launch.” We just need a little understanding is all.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
Ohhh, I see.
My Homebrew: Races | Subclasses | Backgrounds | Spells | Magic Items | Feats
Need help with Homebrew? Check out this FAQ/Guide thread by IamSposta
See My Youtube Videos for Tips & Tricks using D&D Beyond
Don’t get me wrong, he can hold a conversation. And he has at least an average* understanding of the rules. But there are language issues when it comes to technical translations/transliterations.
*I know you read these forums. I know you know what I mean. There are folks who think Cunning Action gives Rogues a second BA/turn. There are folks debating if you can equip a cat Animal Companion with a shortsword.
Some of them are. Or so abstracted that they make no sense unless you understand exactly how it was abstracted.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
I would allow a deliberate drop to subtract your jump height from distance fallen. That won't help much though.
That’s what I would do too. But since everything is measured in 10’ increments in D&D when it comes to falling, and since everything rounds down in D&D, that would have reduced it to a 10’ fall.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB