PDA

View Full Version : Flying towards the ground and damage.



Sziget Pengék
2013-02-08, 06:23 AM
I am making a Winged Anthropomorphic Ape Monk, specializing in grapple for the purposes of dropping an enemy from a great height. What I want to know is if I fly towards the ground with the enemy, then turn out at the last second (perfect maneuverability) would it increase the damage from falling faster than normal?

I personally would rule it as ((Downward Movement+Height)/10[round down])d6; Max 20d6, effectively increasing the height fallen by the downward movement.

Does anyone have any actual rules for this?

Ashtagon
2013-02-08, 06:32 AM
Wouldn't it just be simpler to rule that you release the "cargo" at the start of your turn, before the downward movement that round? It amounts to the same result as your houserule, with less complexity and being 100% RAW legal.

Doorhandle
2013-02-08, 06:34 AM
I am making a Winged Anthropomorphic Ape Monk, specializing in grapple for the purposes of dropping an enemy from a great height. What I want to know is if I fly towards the ground with the enemy, then turn out at the last second (perfect maneuverability) would it increase the damage from falling faster than normal?

I personally would rule it as ((Downward Movement+Height)/10[round down])d6; Max 20d6, effectively increasing the height fallen by the downward movement.

Does anyone have any actual rules for this?

Maybe if you were a dungeon-crasher fighter? it really depends on your G.M.

Sziget Pengék
2013-02-08, 06:54 AM
Wouldn't it just be simpler to rule that you release the "cargo" at the start of your turn, before the downward movement that round? It amounts to the same result as your houserule, with less complexity and being 100% RAW legal.

I'm not following here, releasing the 'cargo' would drop it from the height I am at regardless of when they are dropped. I'm specifically trying to increase the speed at which they hit the ground by flying them strait into the ground at max speed.


Maybe if you were a dungeon-crasher fighter? it really depends on your G.M.

It's not a bull rush, so this shouldn't apply. GM is always a factor, this is true.

Ashtagon
2013-02-08, 07:05 AM
I'm not following here, releasing the 'cargo' would drop it from the height I am at regardless of when they are dropped. I'm specifically trying to increase the speed at which they hit the ground by flying them strait into the ground at max speed.


ok... previous round, you start at 100 ft and dive 30 feet.

Current (dropping) round, you start at 70 feet and plan on diving another 30 feet.

your houserule: dive 30 feet, release. Net 10d6.

RAW as I see it: release, then dive 30 feet: Net 10d6.

Not realistic: release, then dive, adding this round's movement to the effective height.

It sounds like you may be trying to add two rounds worth of movement to the damage somehow.

If you want to specifically add the previous round's movement, I'd point out that there's no similar rule anywhere to that.

Also, fly speeds are really slow compared to falling. I wouldn't want to justify any increase in damage. The fastest srd dragon with its 250 ft move hits 28 mph.

Khedrac
2013-02-08, 07:08 AM
Do remember that unless you are pinning someone you picked up then it takes a grapple check to drop them. Since moving while grappled also takes a grapple check and is explicitly a standard action then RAW you cannot actually do this without pinning! This is worth discussing with your DM as that's a bit silly even though it is RAW.

As for damage taken it's probably worth looking at the damage done by defenestrating sphere which is able to do impact damage if the target hits a ceiling. I think your idea is probably about right.

NOhara24
2013-02-08, 07:08 AM
Does anyone have any actual rules for this?

No, there are no rules for this. Falling damage in D&D 3.5 does not account for velocity reached while falling, it's all based on how far you fall. 1d6/10ft.

And in my mind, if you can't exceed the maximum fall damage of 20d6 by driving someone into the ground from a great height, there's no point in going through the whole bit when you can just let them fall and achieve the same result.

Worira
2013-02-08, 07:10 AM
Also, you need a rather fast flight speed to fly downwards further in a move action than you'd fall in a round anyway. Your character can't.

Sziget Pengék
2013-02-08, 08:23 AM
Do remember that unless you are pinning someone you picked up then it takes a grapple check to drop them. Since moving while grappled also takes a grapple check and is explicitly a standard action then RAW you cannot actually do this without pinning! This is worth discussing with your DM as that's a bit silly even though it is RAW.

As for damage taken it's probably worth looking at the damage done by defenestrating sphere which is able to do impact damage if the target hits a ceiling. I think your idea is probably about right.

I'll look into defenestrating sphere, thanks :D


Taking -20: An attacker with the improved grab ability can opt to conduct a grapple with only part of its body. Doing so imposes a -20 on the attacker's grapple checks, as noted in the Monster Manual. A flying grappler who takes the -20 penalty need not use a standard action to continue moving, but it can just fly along holding onto the foe. Even so, the held opponent counts as part of the load the attacker carries.

Because the attacker is not using an action to make a grapple check, it does not damage the creature it holds, establish a pin, or accomplish any other effect that requires a successful grapple check. The foe still can attempt a grapple check of its own during its own turn to escape.

Dropping a Foe: If you release another flyer from your hold during your turn, it stalls if it has a minimum forward speed, otherwise, it resumes normal flight. A nonflying creature that you drop freefalls. Any creature you drop can try to hang on, but see Just Hanging On.

Just Hanging On only applies to creatures 2 size categories smaller, DC20 Climb to hold on, but is denied dex and only able to use one hand, but no sheild.

If the larger creature moves during its action, the clinging creature moves along with it. The larger can throw off the clinging creature with a grapple (a standard action) opposed by the clinging creature's Climb check.

Essentially, i can indeed fly them at the ground and let go(move action to fast free fall, no standard required to grapple to move but -20 on grapple after vs the escape on their turn(which isnt an issue due to dropping them to the ground anyway) with the allotted actions, though with the ruling about exiting a free fall requiring a full round action i couldnt pull out of the free fall in time and would hit the ground at 183ft/s (125mph) along with my foe unless i had an additional move action to back it up, which(if i'm not mistaken on the wording) travel devotion easily makes up for. There is also the option of featherfall to pull out of the freefall.

It's awfully complicated and ill probably just employ travel devotion to double move (100ft straight up) and grapple in the same round(-20 to escape, and limitations of action while free falling after escaping), but the flavour is cool ith ramming them into the ground like a Seismic Toss from Ash's Charizard (Pokemon for any DND-only nerds)



Also, you need a rather fast flight speed to fly downwards further in a move action than you'd fall in a round anyway. Your character can't.

Fast Freefalls: A creature with a fly speed can propel itself downward as a move action, adding up to twice its flying speed to the distance it freefalls. A creature with Perfect maneuverability can make a fast freefall automatically, while less maneuverable creatures require a Reflex save (DC 15). If the save fails, the creature stalls. On a successful check the creature fast freefalls for a full round.

1000ft+100ft(2x50), can so :P. 125mph straight into the ground, though as i said above: this takes actual effort to pull off without a hitch haha.

Ashtagon
2013-02-08, 08:41 AM
I'll look into defenestrating sphere, thanks :D


Taking -20: An attacker with the improved grab ability can opt to conduct a grapple with only part of its body. Doing so imposes a -20 on the attacker's grapple checks, as noted in the Monster Manual. A flying grappler who takes the -20 penalty need not use a standard action to continue moving, but it can just fly along holding onto the foe. Even so, the held opponent counts as part of the load the attacker carries.

Because the attacker is not using an action to make a grapple check, it does not damage the creature it holds, establish a pin, or accomplish any other effect that requires a successful grapple check. The foe still can attempt a grapple check of its own during its own turn to escape.

Dropping a Foe: If you release another flyer from your hold during your turn, it stalls if it has a minimum forward speed, otherwise, it resumes normal flight. A nonflying creature that you drop freefalls. Any creature you drop can try to hang on, but see Just Hanging On.

Just Hanging On only applies to creatures 2 size categories smaller, DC20 Climb to hold on, but is denied dex and only able to use one hand, but no sheild.

If the larger creature moves during its action, the clinging creature moves along with it. The larger can throw off the clinging creature with a grapple (a standard action) opposed by the clinging creature's Climb check.

Essentially, i can indeed fly them at the ground and let go(move action to fast free fall, no standard required to grapple to move but -20 on grapple after vs the escape on their turn(which isnt an issue due to dropping them to the ground anyway) with the allotted actions, though with the ruling about exiting a free fall requiring a full round action i couldnt pull out of the free fall in time and would hit the ground at 183ft/s (125mph) along with my foe unless i had an additional move action to back it up, which(if i'm not mistaken on the wording) travel devotion easily makes up for. There is also the option of featherfall to pull out of the freefall.

It's awfully complicated and ill probably just employ travel devotion to double move (100ft straight up) and grapple in the same round(-20 to escape, and limitations of action while free falling after escaping), but the flavour is cool ith ramming them into the ground like a Seismic Toss from Ash's Charizard (Pokemon for any DND-only nerds)




Fast Freefalls: A creature with a fly speed can propel itself downward as a move action, adding up to twice its flying speed to the distance it freefalls. A creature with Perfect maneuverability can make a fast freefall automatically, while less maneuverable creatures require a Reflex save (DC 15). If the save fails, the creature stalls. On a successful check the creature fast freefalls for a full round.

1000ft+100ft(2x50), can so :P. 125mph straight into the ground, though as i said above: this takes actual effort to pull off without a hitch haha.

If you actually are able to manipulate things to do the necessary moves in mid-air, you can almost certainly do a simple drop from 200 feet up anyway, which is much simpler to do from a rules perspective anyway.

Eloel
2013-02-08, 08:58 AM
On a related note, would you get increased damage if you threw someone from high up? With something like Fling Enemy?

nedz
2013-02-08, 09:46 AM
You're actually better off just flying upwards — more height = more damage.
But this might stop you attacking again for a couple of rounds whilst you get back into position.
You can fly down at twice your fly speed, and up at half, so this might not matter.

Also: Freedom of Movement, which is a Spell/Ring, will stop them hanging around your ankles.

Diarmuid
2013-02-08, 11:13 AM
Not trying to hijack, and this is semi-on topic.

Has anyone ever found a definitive ruling on what "falling speed" is? How far does something/someone fall in a round without any outside intervention?

jindra34
2013-02-08, 11:17 AM
Not trying to hijack, and this is semi-on topic.

Has anyone ever found a definitive ruling on what "falling speed" is? How far does something/someone fall in a round without any outside intervention?

150 feet the first round 300 every round there after IIRC.

Diarmuid
2013-02-08, 11:26 AM
Do you have a source for that?

Worira
2013-02-08, 11:57 AM
Do you have a source for that?

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/movement.htm#tacticalAerialMovement

Diarmuid
2013-02-08, 12:24 PM
That source doesnt make it clear if the 3rd round of falling would be at 300, 450, or 600...all of which would be logical progressions of the existing pattern.

Sziget Pengék
2013-02-09, 05:18 AM
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040706a


Flight rules.

Free fall speed is 500 first round, 1000 every round after. something with wings can choose to freefall this way, but normally it would fall at 150 the first round then 300 each round after because of wing drag.




On a related note, would you get increased damage if you threw someone from high up? With something like Fling Enemy?

This is something i would like to work out, as that is another option for this PC/NPC.

Eugenides
2013-02-09, 02:32 PM
If you actually are able to manipulate things to do the necessary moves in mid-air, you can almost certainly do a simple drop from 200 feet up anyway, which is much simpler to do from a rules perspective anyway.

Mate, just drop it. The OP has clearly demonstrated that they are not interested in the answer you are supplying.

Ashtagon
2013-02-09, 04:20 PM
Mate, just drop it.

That's my point. Just dropping it is easier :smalltongue:

Curmudgeon
2013-02-10, 01:57 AM
150 feet the first round 300 every round there after IIRC.
Those are the speeds if you stall: i.e., fail to maintain minimum forward flying speed. Stalling speeds can't apply to creatures which can't fly.

Non-flying creatures fall normally, which amounts to about 500' in the first round and 1200' each round thereafter.

Flickerdart
2013-02-10, 02:07 AM
Non-flying creatures fall normally, which amounts to about 500' in the first round and 1200' each round thereafter.
Are there actually numbers for this somewhere? I've never been able to find them.

Curmudgeon
2013-02-10, 05:31 AM
Are there actually numbers for this somewhere? I've never been able to find them.
They're in the FAQ. It's got nothing explicitly to do with the D&D rules, except that the default in the game is that real-world laws of physics apply. So, assuming Earth-normal gravity and air density, and figuring on human-type falling characters, you get those real-world results.

Kyberwulf
2013-02-10, 07:42 AM
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040706a
In the Stalling and Freefalling section does say you drop 500 feet, the first round and 1,000 the second. That is an official site, made by Skip Williams. So its Official.

You could also see if you could treat him as a sort of improvised Thrown Object? Meaning you make an attack Roll, a 1 means he manages to stay attached to you. A 20 you deal double damage. Anything else means you throw him. Make an attack roll vs 15 or something. Hitting over that means you throw him where you want. you miss that he lands in any square around him. Like Siege Weapon. He takes the distance fell as damage plus any Strength score you have as bonus Damage. Plus any damage he would take from falling on a sword or something lol.

Curmudgeon
2013-02-10, 02:30 PM
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040706a
In the Stalling and Freefalling section does say you drop 500 feet, the first round and 1,000 the second. That is an official site, made by Skip Williams. So its Official.
Yes, it's officially produced by someone on the WotC payroll. That doesn't mean it contains any official D&D rules. (Much of what's contained in those "Rules of the Game" articles are Skip's house rules. Of course, he doesn't always distinguish the RAW from house rules. :smallsigh:) It also doesn't mean any of it's right, or even consistent.

If you read the FAQ (also "official", and also not RAW) you'll see that the same guy (Skip Williams) said that you'll fall about 500 feet in the first round and 1,200 feet (not 1,000 feet) each subsequent round. So Skip's given two different "official" answers to this question. However, because he showed his work in the FAQ answer you can see that that one is more in keeping with reality than the one in his "Rules of the Game" article.