Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Grug the Just 10-01-05, 12:44 AM	Okay, last thread didn't go through so: By virtue of Iron Body and Righteous Might my Cleric weighs 16,000lbs. (200lbs. Base. If anyone wants to double check my math here) Now according to the DMG pg 303: Objects that fall upon characters deal damage based on their weight and the distance they have fallen. For each 200 pounds of an object’s weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage). So if a 16,000lb. object falls ten feet that's 81d6 damage. On average that'll punch through 1-1/2 ft. of stone. Also, my group is on the Astral Plane where you choose which direction is down. Am I now a "flying wrecking ball". Any opinions here? As a further note: there doesn't seem to be a Reflex save mention to avoid this? I'm sure that this kind of "attack" wasn't intended but...
Eco-Mono 10-01-05, 12:50 AM	Okay, last thread didn't go through so: By virtue of Iron Body and Righteous Might my Cleric weighs 16,000lbs. (200lbs. Base. If anyone wants to double check my math here) Now according to the DMG pg 303: So if a 16,000lb. object falls ten feet that's 81d6 damage. On average that'll punch through 1-1/2 ft. of stone. Also, my group is on the Astral Plane where you choose which direction is down. Am I now a "flying wrecking ball". Any opinions here? As a further note: there doesn't seem to be a Reflex save mention to avoid this? I'm sure that this kind of "attack" wasn't intended but... You'd probably need to make a ranged touch attack to make sure you actually connect with the enemy.
TheCarrionCrawler 10-01-05, 12:56 AM	Is Iron Body from Complete Divine? It looks familiar...but I can't place it!
Melpomene 10-01-05, 12:57 AM	People have been using the brokedness of the heavy falling thing system (HFTS) for years to push thier trumped up damage. Bah. I don't buy or like any of it.
Grug the Just 10-01-05, 01:19 AM	Both Iron Body and Righteous Might are in the PHB.
Nuntius128 10-01-05, 01:54 AM	Both Iron Body and Righteous Might are in the PHB. Bwahaha.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-01-05, 03:17 AM	Looking over the falling damage rules again, the only problem I can see is that it's for damage taken from being hit by a falling object. You're not really an object, you're a creature. Nitpicky and pedantic, I know, but still it feels like there should be a different set of rules, like when you use armed gnomes as thrown weapons. Also, it kinda looks like it might possibly shoulda coulda max out at 20d6 regardless. I realize it only says that in the distance fallen part, but it could be interpreted that it applies to the whole rule. As far as a save is concerned, it looks like it's up to the DM. These rules seem to be under the assumption that you've already failed whatever relevant save and this is your punishment. Reminds me of that scene in Fight Club with the giant bronze sphere, and they figured out that if they had used something made out of real bronze, it'd punch right through the fountain and into the parking garage below.
IceFractal 10-01-05, 03:21 AM	I think they'd get a Reflex save to avoid you, DC 15 or so, probably. This is the one downside of using heavy weights to do tremendous damage - they're not too hard to dodge.
Karalyn the Sellsword 10-01-05, 05:35 AM	The maximum of 20d6 damage would apply, there's no reason it shouldn't. Also, a gravity directed attack isn't really falling, gavity is what's building up the damage, technically you'd be doing less based on your relative mass. Given that you're weightless, you might be doing no damage.
Merestil Haye 10-01-05, 07:28 AM	Firstly, I agree with Tyler. A character cannot ever be a falling object because creatures and objects are mutually exclusive sets in the rules. An object is something without a Wisdom or Charisma score. Yes that's nitpicky. Secondly, when trying something like this, the best way to proceed is to find an analagous ability in the rules and adapt it. In this case there is one; the Crush attack listed for a true dragon. Reviewing that, we find that the Crush attack allows the attacker to deal damage to anyone in the area it lands on. The exact damage would probably be best for you and the DM to settle. There is also a Reflex save to avoid being pinned. The DC of the save would also be up for argument; the formula for calculating the dragon's DC does not apply to you because you do not have this as a racial ability. We also find that the Crush attack works on creatures three or more size categories smaller than the attacker. You would be Large, so the largest size creature you can crush this way would be Tiny. Lastly, objects do not care about taking damage. Creatures do. I would rule that you take damage from the fall - the same amount as you inflict on the victims seems fair. I'd even allow a Reflex save for ½.
Rulebook 10-01-05, 08:05 AM	in the astral plane, you're not weightless per se, you're gravity-less. this is a common mistake made by a lot of people. weight is just the force of gravity acting upon your mass. when you fall its gravity applying the force, and INERTIA doing the damage (you know, that tendancy for massive objects to keep moving even when something impedes them... like say, a person or a planet?) now just because there's no gravity, it dosent mean he still doesnt have 16,000 pounds of MASS. it takes quite a bit of energy to redirect that much mass to a harmless vector (and even more if its purely in the opposite direction, such as trying to stop him from smashing into you). so yes, you're now a human wrecking ball.
Karalyn the Sellsword 10-01-05, 08:47 AM	If you're gravity less, then there's no weight to you at all. Even if you apply directional gravity you'd only move/fall at whatever direction you moved at, which wouldn't be the same as falling damage which relies on a specific amount of gravity. The only reason he'd be a "Human Wrecking Ball" would be on a plane with Subjective Directional Gravity. Even then he'd be capped at 20d6 and take the damage himself. Strictly speaking SDG doesn't impose a strength of Gravity only a flying speed.
DrowSmurf 10-01-05, 08:50 AM	its not capped at 20d6, the 20d6 cap is only for distance, the wieght damage isnt capped therefore the 10ft causes 1d6 and the weight causes another 80d6
Judging Eagle 10-01-05, 10:53 AM	Reminds me of that scene in Fight Club with the giant bronze sphere, and they figured out that if they had used something made out of real bronze, it'd punch right through the fountain and into the parking garage below. Actually, the sphere was bronze. Just not solid bronze. Solid bronze wouldn't even have been able to be lifted onto the pedastel it was on in the first place. As for the living large iron wrecking ball. This is what I'd do. 1. You have to make a proper tumble check (to be able to tuck yourself into position so that you don't have any of your arms/legs snapping off due to the acceleration (9.81 m/s^2; or 9.81 meteres per second squared) when you hit your target. Could you use the tumble skill to reduce the damage done to the iron/divine might'ed person? Maybe that would work better instead Set the DC at 20; failing means that any damage you take could be applied to an object with your current hardness and 1/5 your total hp. If you destroy this 'object' when you strike, you lose an arm or leg roll a d4 (1 left arm, 2 right arm, 3 left leg 4 right leg); I could be mean and add the head as a fifth object with 1/10 of your total hp (breaking your head off = instant death), but I'm not (that) mean. 2. Make a ranged touch attack, to 'align' yourself and to pick your directional gravity. and/or 3. The target gets to make a reflex save modifed by the speed you are moving at. Base DC is 10 + 1 for every 10' you move to "charge." 4. If you hit, you take damage from the "target" not yourself. So if you hit a person with no hardness with a tiny (comparable) weight you'd take damage as if they were an object hitting you. Wrecking balls strike buildings with great force. You don't tend to see a wrecking ball shatter b/c of the force behind it; usually the wrecking ball gets a bit scuffed and has some steel creased from the bricks it hits. So, you would take in damage: 1. Your current 'speed' in d6's (max 20d6) one for every 10 feet 2. The targets weight/200 in d6's; so a 200 pound man that you strike would do 1d6 from his weight. So, if you are able to accelerate to say 200' a round (20d6 falling damage) and you weigh 16,000 lbs (80d6), you do about 100d6 when you connect. To successfully attack say a githyanki fighter (say 200 lbs w/ gear) on the astral plane you would: 1. Move to your target. 2. Touch your target's touch ac (the gith's T ac is prolly not much move over 12 or 13 so you'll hit) and / or 3. Your target tries to avoid you based on the speed you travel at. DC 10 + 1/10 feet you moved to touch them (if you make it DC 20, chances are they'll fail as well) 4. Resolve damage to both targets. The hit target takes 80 + 1/10feet of movement d6's, the hitting target takes the hit target's weight in damage (1d6/200 lbs) plus the hitting targets acceleration damage (20D6). So, you'd do 100d6 (average 300 damage, so he's gibbed) to the Gith fighter, but he'd do about 21d6 (average 63 damage to you so you'll need to heal or cast repair critical damage on yourself) to you back b/c you were moving at such high speeds. If you successfully make a tumble check (dc 15 + 5 per 10 feet fallen. In this case...the DC = 15 + (5* (200/10)) =15 + (5 * 20) =115 Tumble check However, every 5 that you beat 15 by means that you take that many LESS acceleration increments in damage. So if you can manage say an average tumble result of.... say (+5 (base dex) +3 (gear dex) +15 (tumble skill) +10 (average roll, or if you have a level of dervish so you can take 10 always) = 33) 33. 33 - 15 = 18, 18/5 = 3.something. So you'd take 3d6 less damage, not a lot mind you, but it will add up and eventually you'll try to max out your tumble ability so that you take almost no damage while utterly bowling over dozens and dozens of enemies.
DrMorganes 10-01-05, 11:21 AM	Am I the only one missing what appears to be a very, very important item? If you slam yourself into something from a mile high and yes, you will do marvelous amounts of damage to said something. You will also do marvelous amounts of damage to yourself...
Nephlite 10-01-05, 11:22 AM	Okay, last thread didn't go through so: By virtue of Iron Body and Righteous Might my Cleric weighs 16,000lbs. (200lbs. Base. If anyone wants to double check my math here) Now according to the DMG pg 303: So if a 16,000lb. object falls ten feet that's 81d6 damage. On average that'll punch through 1-1/2 ft. of stone. Also, my group is on the Astral Plane where you choose which direction is down. Am I now a "flying wrecking ball". Any opinions here? As a further note: there doesn't seem to be a Reflex save mention to avoid this? I'm sure that this kind of "attack" wasn't intended but... Nice idea, but no: you only deal 80d6. You take 1d6 damage from falling note (more by +1d6+str if opponent is wearing spiked armor I'd say) You'd need to melee touch attack the opponent to hurt him. If you miss you fall prone adjacent to the enemy.
DrowSmurf 10-01-05, 11:34 AM	You will also do marvelous amounts of damage to yourself... yes, you also deal the falling damage to yourself, not the weight damage, so thats 1d6 for you buddy!
jaelis 10-01-05, 11:59 AM	All the people who bring this up never seem to remember that if you play the way you're suggesting, its a much bigger advantage to monsters than PCs (since there's so many big heavy monsters). Do you really want a game where everything is decided by your iniative roll and your jump modifier?
SamualT Barronsword 10-01-05, 04:08 PM	Seems to me crushing weight damage would only apply where the opponent were in a postion to be smashed between the cleric and and an immovable solid surface. As I recall there are few solid surfaces on the Astral Plane. I would think the only damage you could do to someone in a place where there is nothing to crush an opponent against would be from the force of the collision (falling damage), not from the weight damage. After absorbing the force damage (say 1d6), the object hit would go off in one direction, while the "falling" object (which would also take 1d6 dmg) would go off in another direction, sort of like balls on a pool table. Take a ball and smash it down on top of another ball so that it is smashed between the table and the other ball, hard enough, and you can eventually break the ball. Hit it on the side just as hard and it just bounces across the table no matter how many times you hit it. Course I'm not a scientist so I could be wrong about this.
Grug the Just 10-01-05, 06:47 PM	Upon review of the post thus-far. From Tyler Do'urden: Looking over the falling damage rules again, the only problem I can see is that it's for damage taken from being hit by a falling object. You're not really an object, you're a creature. Nitpicky and pedantic, I know, but still it feels like there should be a different set of rules, like when you use armed gnomes as thrown weapons. Also, it kinda looks like it might possibly shoulda coulda max out at 20d6 regardless. I realize it only says that in the distance fallen part, but it could be interpreted that it applies to the whole rule. Okay, so you're saying that an airship falling 200' and landing on a kobold does the same amount of damage as a 200lb block falling 200' and landing on a kobold. Also, I do understand that terminolgy in this game is law. I being a creature am not an object but it's the closest thing I could find to how much damage would an 8-ton "thing" do to another "thing". At least in the core books. From Merestil Haye: Firstly, I agree with Tyler. A character cannot ever be a falling object because creatures and objects are mutually exclusive sets in the rules. An object is something without a Wisdom or Charisma score. Yes that's nitpicky. Secondly, when trying something like this, the best way to proceed is to find an analagous ability in the rules and adapt it. In this case there is one; the Crush attack listed for a true dragon. The closest thing I found was falling damage by objects. The Crush special ability is a bit off. From the SRD: Crush (Ex): This special attack allows a flying or jumping dragon of at least Huge size to land on opponents as a standard action, using its whole body to crush them. Crush attacks are effective only against opponents three or more size categories smaller than the dragon (though it can attempt normal overrun or grapple attacks against larger opponents). A crush attack affects as many creatures as can fit under the dragon’s body. Creatures in the affected area must succeed on a Reflex save (DC equal to that of the dragon’s breath weapon) or be pinned, automatically taking bludgeoning damage during the next round unless the dragon moves off them. If the dragon chooses to maintain the pin, treat it as a normal grapple attack. Pinned opponents take damage from the crush each round if they don’t escape. A crush attack deals the indicated damage plus 1-1/2 times the dragon’s Strength bonus (round down). That makes my characters monstrous weight negligible. A scraggly 180lb. Orc would do the same damage due to the Crush ability relying on strength. From jaelis: All the people who bring this up never seem to remember that if you play the way you're suggesting, its a much bigger advantage to monsters than PCs (since there's so many big heavy monsters). Do you really want a game where everything is decided by your iniative roll and your jump modifier? I don't actually intend to use this as some sort of standard operating procedure for my character attacking something. Really, I just wanted to find out if it was viable for use in some situations. As a cleric with access to 8th level spells I usually have a lot more reasonable options anyway. With that said. I see little reason to not assume that my character "creature" or not wouldn't do 80d6 damage to something he fell onto from 10ft. up, "object" or not. In doing so my character should only logically take 1d6 points of damage from a 10ft. fall. Now whether a creature that I fell on would get a reflex save or not that is up to my DM of course. Maybe this would be best suited to be a situation: Let's say my character is on the Astral Plane, which has subjective directional gravity, and he's on the other side of a stone door that is a foot and a half thick. (Hardness 8, 15hp per inch of thickness, so that's 240hp) Could I then step 10' away from the door, change my subjective directional gravity, (DC 16 Wisdom check) and fall towards the door and "Kool-aid Man" right through. Assuming that something that weighs 16,000lbs., creature or object, dealing 80d6 damage (Avg. 280). Would you allow that if you were a DM? Forget the bit about dealing that much damage to creatures. I don't intend to use it to kill things like some sort of munchkin. I have powerful enough abilities to kill things with. I don't need to go falling on them.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-01-05, 07:53 PM	Okay, so you're saying that an airship falling 200' and landing on a kobold does the same amount of damage as a 200lb block falling 200' and landing on a kobold. Well, first of all, I was just saying that it could be interpreted that way. Second of all, yeah maybe. Because once the 200 lb block is done falling on you, that's it. But once the airship is done falling on you, assuming it hasn't been destroyed, now you're pinned and continue to take damage or possibly even suffocate. Could I then step 10' away from the door, change my subjective directional gravity, (DC 16 Wisdom check) and fall towards the door and "Kool-aid Man" right through. Assuming that something that weighs 16,000lbs., creature or object, dealing 80d6 damage (Avg. 280). Would you allow that if you were a DM? Only if you change your battlecry to "OH YEAH!!!"
Thaebius 10-01-05, 08:21 PM	A note: There is a reason the 20d6 cap is where it is. Another mild bow to real world physics. In the real world, objects eventually reach "terminal velocity". Now, what terminal velocity is, exactly, is a function of air resistance, and it ends up being such that a penny (with a MUCH higher terminal velocity, thanks to MUCH less air resistance) would be able to kill someone, while a blanket (with between 10 and 100 times the mass) wouldn't do much more than it would from 10 feet, but rules for air resistance and terminal velocity would be too complex. Instead, they have it just that the increased damage, due to increased speed, based upon distance, is not infinitely increasing. What does that mean? It means that all is as it should be. It's not a maximum of 20d6 per falling object. Otherwise, were he drawn and quartered above someone's head, his body parts would do 4x as much damage as his body would when whole, which makes no sense. Instead, it's 20d6/200lbs, max. Or, at 16000lbs, falling 100 feet, he would do 800d6. A maximum of 1,600d6 would be possible, beyond that, he would be at terminal velocity, so he is capped at 1600d6. This is the ONLY logical way to read that passage, imho, as it is the only reading that does not result in a boulder cut up into chunks doing tremendously more damage than a regular boulder, which makes no sense from a rules standpoint, a balance standpoint (as you can in fact just cut it up then to do the same amount of gross damage) and a bowing to real world physics standpoint, which is where the RAI come in. So yes, you would do near infinite damage while falling on the material plane. As was pointed out, there should be a reflex save to avoid you, you could probably use falling ceiling traps to guesstimate DCs. No ranged touch attack should be required or Allowed, as while in freefall, you have limited control over your movement, and at 16000lbs, you would have NO control over your movement. As to the human wrecking ball- no you would not be one. Gravity is subjective, remember? They could just choose that direction to be down as well. Sure, it could/ should somehow give you massive bullrush bonuses, but how do you prevent them avoiding all damage by choosing to "fall" with you? On the material plane, if you could create a magic item with "Nail to the Sky", "Fly", and some other spell as prereqs, you might be able to create subjective gravity on the material plane. THEN you would be a human wrecking ball, and pity the poor creatures you face. *Note: All of this is arbitrary. If your DM is nice, they will set incredibly low DCs for the reflex saves, and you'll never use this tactic. If your DM is cruel, he'll let you kill quite a few things like this, and set HIGH save DCs. Then he'll send a gargantuan creature against you doing the same thing, for 500d6 damage or somesuch, in combination with a crush attack, just for fun. Then you all shall die. Either way, I honestly don't see a DM allowing this, as it abuses rules that were never meant to be used by PCs for combat like that, much less abused by them. And I doubt you would kill more than a couple of things you should never have been able to kill by doing this before one way or another, it ends. By the RAW, you win all over, you could be a God among men. But what DM, in an area they have such free reign over, in their right mind, would allow such a travesty?
Tyler Do'Urden 10-01-05, 08:39 PM	Instead, it's 20d6/200lbs, max. Or, at 16000lbs, falling 100 feet, he would do 800d6. A maximum of 1,600d6 would be possible, beyond that, he would be at terminal velocity, so he is capped at 1600d6. Now that's definately not how the rules say it should work. It's +1d6 per 200 lbs. and +1d6 per 10 ft. It's not +1d6 per 200 lbs. per 10 ft (which in this case would be 80d6 per 10 ft.) So it looks like Grug was right the first time (which is what I thought initially, I was just suggesting a possible alternative that didn't look like it was obviously wrong). Now the 64,000 gp question. Since iron body grants DR 15/adamantine, would this unidentified falling cleric bypass hardness?
jaelis 10-01-05, 09:36 PM	I don't actually intend to use this as some sort of standard operating procedure for my character attacking something. Really, I just wanted to find out if it was viable for use in some situations. As a cleric with access to 8th level spells I usually have a lot more reasonable options anyway. With that said. I see little reason to not assume that my character "creature" or not wouldn't do 80d6 damage to something he fell onto from 10ft. up, "object" or not. In doing so my character should only logically take 1d6 points of damage from a 10ft. fall. Now whether a creature that I fell on would get a reflex save or not that is up to my DM of course. Sure, your cleric has better things he could do, no doubt. But many other creatures in the world don't. So why wouldn't an iron golem just try to fall on you all the time? Why wouldn't that pathetic band of orcs get set up an ambush on top of a cliff and drop a 10-ton rock on you? My point is exactly that PC's have lots of ways to kill the baddies... letting the falling damage be uncapped just lets a lot of baddies have a much better way to kill PCs. I'm not saying its unrealistic, or even, in this case, that it is horribly munchkin of you (at least if you're willing to allow a save). I'm saying that capping the damage at 20d6 is much better for game balance, and generally better in favor of the players. Now, if you want to see the uncapped damage truly abused, check out the hulking hurler thread on the CO boards. Last I knew, they had a guy picking up a mountain and destroying the world with it. As for your example of busting through a wall, I think that just has a lot to do with how the DM rules things like that work on the Astral Plane. Subjective gravity is unphysical, so you can't apply real world physics. Myself, I'd let you do it, but I'd make you take the same amount of damage as you applied to the wall.
Balor von Balorvitch 10-01-05, 10:08 PM	If a character actually crashed through a wall and yelled "OH YEAH!" and crushed someone. I would let them kill Asmodeus! LOL :heehee that is the funnyest line invented! I was on seriously on the floor a minute ago! Thanks Grug the Just [quote=Grug the Just] Could I then step 10' away from the door, change my subjective directional gravity, (DC 16 Wisdom check) and fall towards the door and "Kool-aid Man" right through. [quote]
Nephlite 10-01-05, 11:06 PM	Sure, your cleric has better things he could do, no doubt. But many other creatures in the world don't. So why wouldn't an iron golem just try to fall on you all the time? Why wouldn't that pathetic band of orcs get set up an ambush on top of a cliff and drop a 10-ton rock on you? My point is exactly that PC's have lots of ways to kill the baddies... letting the falling damage be uncapped just lets a lot of baddies have a much better way to kill PCs. Maybe the Iron golem doesn't fight that way because he has no non-ordered inaitive. If he wasn't ordered to fight that way, he won't. Yes, that is a awesome ambush, but can that pathetic band even push a buoulder weighing 10 tons? How much weight is 10 tons again? So let the rocks fall where they may. And I agree: OH YEAH! :dancin: I'm not saying its unrealistic, or even, in this case, that it is horribly munchkin of you (at least if you're willing to allow a save). I'm saying that capping the damage at 20d6 is much better for game balance, and generally better in favor of the players. But that isn't following the RAW: RAW says falling damage you yourself take is capped for falling and hitting ground/water. Not Damage from being fallen on. That is uncapped. As for your example of busting through a wall, I think that just has a lot to do with how the DM rules things like that work on the Astral Plane. Subjective gravity is unphysical, so you can't apply real world physics. Myself, I'd let you do it, but I'd make you take the same amount of damage as you applied to the wall. So why don't weapons take damage when they hit stuff since you think hitting something shoud damage you back?
jaelis 10-01-05, 11:30 PM	Maybe the Iron golem doesn't fight that way because he has no non-ordered inaitive. If he wasn't ordered to fight that way, he won't. Yes, that is a awesome ambush, but can that pathetic band even push a buoulder weighing 10 tons? How much weight is 10 tons again? So why don't all masters order their iron golems to fight that way? 10 tons is 20000 lbs. Pretty heavy, but as Archimedes said, "Give me a lever (and a place to stand) and I'll move the world." But that isn't following the RAW: RAW says falling damage you yourself take is capped for falling and hitting ground/water. Not Damage from being fallen on. That is uncapped. Here's the text: For each 200 pounds of an object's weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage). It is possible, if somewhat awkward, to interpret the parenthetical statement as applying to the entire discussion. I would therefore say the RAW is not perfectly clear, though the straightforward reading is in agreement with Grug. My point is that the straightforward reading is also bad for the PCs in almost all cases, so players should think about that before pressing the issue.
ScipioX 10-02-05, 12:09 AM	Abusive mechanics aside, there's a reasonable rules method of getting around silly falling damage rules. A falling character is simply a character moving in a direction to another creature's square. The PHB has rules to cover this situation. It's called overrun. Characters being subject to overrun have the option to simply avoid the overrun. One thorny abusive rules problem solved. Improved overrun would not apply to falling 'overruns' because a falling character cannot control their movement like a character on the ground can.
Grug the Just 10-02-05, 04:22 PM	From ScipioX: A falling character is simply a character moving in a direction to another creature's square. The PHB has rules to cover this situation. It's called overrun. Agreed, and especially so for comedic affect. I also agree with the improved overrun point. Once again noting that I don't intend to use this against a creature, what if the character had imp. overrun and a fly speed with perfect manueverability, couldn't he just adjust his trajectory. But, overall I will have to "OH YEAH!" any time I would use this to bust through a wall.
Planar Wanderer 10-02-05, 04:27 PM	Just in case anybodys interested, this is essentially a variant on the *shudder* hulking hurler build. So for a discussion on the mechanics of this it might be worth digging up that thread on the CO board, I'll see if I can find it.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 10-02-05, 06:02 PM	The maximum of 20d6 damage would apply, there's no reason it shouldn't. Well, other than this pesky thing called the basic rules of the English language.
kalstrand 10-02-05, 11:45 PM	Just a note from a previous post. A penny reaches terminal velocity at approximately 62 miles per hour. Even at that speed the mass of a penny is so low that hitting a person at terminal velocity it won't even break the skin.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-03-05, 12:48 AM	Maybe, but oh LORDY will it ever sting.
Grug the Just 10-03-05, 12:50 AM	Hmm, Razor Pennies... Nah. I did see that episode of Mythbusters though, amazingly they found a staple gun that fired it at terminal velocity perfectly.
Alekzandr 10-03-05, 12:49 PM	Just in case anybodys interested, this is essentially a variant on the *shudder* hulking hurler build. So for a discussion on the mechanics of this it might be worth digging up that thread on the CO board, I'll see if I can find it. Check my sig.
mindplay 10-03-05, 12:50 PM	If fall damage is based off the same system that object fall damage is based off of... assume the average PC weighs 200lbs, then fall damage is 1d6 per 10feet. If the PC weighs more, he takes more damage from falling. So if this character jumped down 10 feet, he would do the 80d6 damage to the ground and the 80d6 damage to himself.
Traevanon 10-03-05, 01:01 PM	I would probably mitigate the effect this way. A Large character covers 4 squares. A Medium character covers 1 square. The medium character is only affected by 1/4 of the large character's weight. So the large character would do 1/4 damage over 1/4 his area, or 20d6. Alternatively the large character would do whatever damage 4000lb does. Take your pick. Beyond that improvisation we all know that the hardness and object hit point rules are sketchy at best, so its really not worth debating the RAW of this situation. Just do your best to represent it accurately with the cooperation of your DM. Demanding that this section of the rules be followed explicitly represents the worst kind of literalism.
Nephlite 10-03-05, 01:02 PM	If fall damage is based off the same system that object fall damage is based off of... assume the average PC weighs 200lbs, then fall damage is 1d6 per 10feet. If the PC weighs more, he takes more damage from falling. So if this character jumped down 10 feet, he would do the 80d6 damage to the ground and the 80d6 damage to himself. That is false. You take only 1d6 damage from falling 10 feet or 0 damage with a tumble check (Dc 15 I think or DC 20)
Tyler Do'Urden 10-03-05, 02:10 PM	That is false. You take only 1d6 damage from falling 10 feet or 0 damage with a tumble check (Dc 15 I think or DC 20) Further, the damage from the first 10 feet is nonlethal. You can also negate it with a DC 15 Jump check before you take the plunge.
DHP 10-03-05, 03:07 PM	There are rules for doing this trick in the "manual of the planes" described under "the elemental plane of air" chapter. It says: alternatively characters can simply pummel toward a helpless or stationary target. In this case use the falling objects section in chapter 3 of the DMG, to determine damage from falling objects. Apply the damage to both attacker and target. A maximum of 20d6 damage can be inflicted in this fashion. since the Plane of air has the same gravitational trait as the astral plane I assume it's the same rules that are supposed to be used. so according to this rule this trick is not very good because you can only do it against helpless or stationary targets, can only do 20d6 dmg and take the dmg yourself too.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-03-05, 04:34 PM	Yeah, but that's more like a deliberate skydiving accident, especially on the plane of Air. What Grug is talking about is more like long-distance "I'm gonna sit on you!" while temporarily being made out of steel. Anybody see Dane Cook's bit about the Kool-aid Man? "OH YEAH!" "Oh No! You clean this up before my Dad gets home."
SolenVlos 10-03-05, 04:46 PM	not sure I got everything, but here's something to think if you are on astral, no real gravity, and that no inertia thing that someone said, the no-inertia would also apply to the target. thus, no resisting AT ALL the push from the 16000 LB thing, would simply be bullrushed along. does this have any sense?
Ioreck 10-03-05, 06:29 PM	god i dont know why dms let this go.... if you don't want ur player abusing these stupid rules, give him an encounter with something incorporeal.... or just have a wizard cast imprisonment. that'll teach your player!
Jagyr Ebonwood 10-03-05, 06:52 PM	Grug raised the issue of doing essentially the same thing by flying with perfect maneuverability. That's just silly. Moving into someone really fast is what that is... If you reason that way, then the majority of level 1 commoners would die upon impact when two of them came running around a corner really fast and accidentally collided.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-03-05, 07:11 PM	So that's why they always said "No running in the halls." Ye gods, I could've been killed!
Judging Eagle 10-03-05, 08:00 PM	Hmm, not really. Since you aren't monks you're only doing subdual damage when you perform a headlong charge and crash with an other person around a corner. However, I'd bet that 80d6 of subdual damage won't be pleasant to take.
Grug the Just 10-03-05, 10:02 PM	From Jagyr Ebonwood: Grug raised the issue of doing essentially the same thing by flying with perfect maneuverability. That's just silly. Moving into someone really fast is what that is... If you reason that way, then the majority of level 1 commoners would die upon impact when two of them came running around a corner really fast and accidentally collided. Actually, I was saying that a falling critter with a perfect fly speed/manueverability could change it's trajectory while falling. Makes no difference really it was a moot point. Also, the first 10 ft. being non-lethal is an optional rule Tyler.
tiercel 10-04-05, 04:57 AM	Let's see, how can I put this? With apologies to Queen: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Oh mama mia, mama mia. Mama mia, let me go The message boards have a devil put aside for me, for meee, for meeeeeee... Ahem. Just ... no. Fire giants would own you by dropping from 10' ledges. Dragons would fall instead of using a Crush attack. Druids would shred you at 5th level by spontaneously summon nature's ally III to get a giant eagle, order it up 200', and then power-dive in a kamikaze attack for falling damage. Indoors/underground, just use earth elementals to drop out of the walls and ceiling. Fighters would abandon using mere swords, instead resorting to contraptions that would drop rocks on their opponents' heads. Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria. (Heh. You get the idea.)
tarkin 10-04-05, 11:41 AM	20d6 is intended by the game desigeners to be the max damage doable by any falling object. You can house rule that it is not, but that would be a house rule. Falling is by definition NOT an aimed thing, so it should be a Save to negate damage, not a BAB to hit roll. If you are attempting to control your movement, that would be called a Dive attack, not Falling. The basic "I drop a huge thing on someone" is a very abusive thing to attempt. It is trying to get around all sorts of in game limitations that exist for realism purposes. Net result: Strict -Loose Game: dropping an object - save to negate, 20d6 max damage, higher = lower DC, lower = hard DC save, but damage drops. Power Game: Maybe let people come up with some rules to let you increase your save DC, pretend the 20d6 limit only applies to one thing, not both weight and height. Anything Goes Game: Your rules are fine, bab to hit, plus unlimited damage.
Far_Traveler 10-04-05, 12:25 PM	Looking over the falling damage rules again, the only problem I can see is that it's for damage taken from being hit by a falling object. You're not really an object, you're a creature. Nitpicky and pedantic, I know, but still it feels like there should be a different set of rules, like when you use armed gnomes as thrown weapons. Also, it kinda looks like it might possibly shoulda coulda max out at 20d6 regardless. I realize it only says that in the distance fallen part, but it could be interpreted that it applies to the whole rule. As far as a save is concerned, it looks like it's up to the DM. These rules seem to be under the assumption that you've already failed whatever relevant save and this is your punishment. Reminds me of that scene in Fight Club with the giant bronze sphere, and they figured out that if they had used something made out of real bronze, it'd punch right through the fountain and into the parking garage below. you have forgotton the first and second rules in fight club: you do not talk about fight club!
Kibbo 10-04-05, 01:12 PM	Hi all, first post, one tiny point: I'm pretty sure that the additive multiplier rules would apply to stacking weight multipliers. This would give: RM:8 times normal weight. IB: 10 times normal weight. (10+8)*200lbs=3600lbs or 18d6 dmg as opposed to 10*8*200lbs=whatever the rediculous number cited above would be. Considering that you would need to be lvl 15, cast two spells, work yourself into position, and possibly expose yourself to damage, being prone, etc, this combo isn't too cheesy IMO.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-04-05, 03:31 PM	Also, the first 10 ft. being non-lethal is an optional rule Tyler. ...really? Lemme look... Oh, here it is. Page 303 top left, beginning of the Falling entry. "If a character deliberately jumps instead of merely slipping or falling, the damage is the same, but the first 1d6 is nonlethal damage." I knew I wasn't making things up.
Tyler Do'Urden 10-04-05, 03:34 PM	Hi all, first post, one tiny point: I'm pretty sure that the additive multiplier rules would apply to stacking weight multipliers. Actually, multipliers on real-world values (i.e. weight in pounds) work normally. When applying multipliers to real-world values (such as weight or distance), normal rules of math apply instead. A creature whose size doubles (thus multiplying its weight by 8) and then is turned to stone (which would multiply its weight by a factor of roughly 3) now weighs about 24 times normal, not 10 times normal.
Kendrick 10-04-05, 08:03 PM	The closest thing I found was falling damage by objects. The Crush special ability is a bit off. ... With that said. I see little reason to not assume that my character "creature" or not wouldn't do 80d6 damage to something he fell onto from 10ft. up, "object" or not. In doing so my character should only logically take 1d6 points of damage from a 10ft. fall. Now whether a creature that I fell on would get a reflex save or not that is up to my DM of course. Unfortunately for you, anything not explicitly given rules in the handbook is subject to DM fiat. It doesn't matter that you think it should do this because of the similarity to the falling object rule. A character is not (in rule terms) an object, and therefore you can't apply falling object rules to a character. You could ask your DM to institute a similar rule for "falling 16,000 pound PC damage". You could argue that it's "logical" because of the similarity to the falling object rule. But your DM probably wouldn't allow it. To sum up: This tactic is not acceptable according to the RAW. You can ask your DM to allow it, but you have no argument that it's already in the rules, which seems to be what you were trying to get affirmed by posting here.
Grug the Just 10-04-05, 09:44 PM	Well, when my DM and I first noticed this we thought it was pretty awesome, though unbalanced of course. Essentially, the reason I brought up here wasn't so I could use it, it was really more along the lines of "Huh, that's weird. Using the falling object rules my character could burst through a foot and a half of stone by adjusting his subjuctive directional gravity. Hey Opp, (My DM) mind if I "Kool-Aid Man" this astral monastery to the ground." To which he replied "Wow, you may be right, you should see what they say on the boards." Now, without a search funtion I looked 10 pages deep on several parts of this board to no avail. So, I posted in the most appropriate place in my opinion.
Kendrick 10-04-05, 10:13 PM	If your DM wants to let you play fast and loose with the rules it's fine as you wrote it. Strictly RAW, I don't believe it is. If you have fun with it and it doesn't ruin your game, it's a fairly reasonable house rule (fairly reasonable as in only requiring a small extrapolation from the RAW). I'd be careful with stuff like this, however, since it sounds very abusable.
rkr1970 10-05-05, 10:58 PM	And here I thought the discussions got out of hand when I put a 1 ton boulder with item cast on it into my sling...
Draco_Whitewind 10-06-05, 12:46 AM	indeed, the manual of the planes covers all. falling objects deal a max of 20d6 apparantly as writen. the astal has the same trait as the elemental plane of air. technically, if i remember right, it is pretty much a REACTION to change direction. in the astral/plane of air, you could will every direction to be an apparant down and hover, or just one and fall. hitting objects anchored would cause you damage. (such as buildings and land stationed, hovering, but immune to such traits via localized gravity), but technically, you could never gain apparant velocity. you are still a creature, not an object furthermore for the falling and damage rules, and that does matter if you want to be completely correct on rules. and also, changing direction I didn't think was more of an action. there are many abilities that allow you to act out of secquence, they could just choose to fall with you, or null their gravity. you'd strike them, and just pick them up in an apparant fall. ~Draco
Etiquette_Gnome 10-06-05, 12:13 PM	I still think the Hulking Hurler or even this Iron Body-combo stuff has nothing on my old technique. Use shapechange to turn into a 200' x 200' x 200' cube of solid gold, use a stilled dimension door to appear 10' above someone, and crush them....if you use the 200lb per 1d6 method, you have several million d6s being thrown around. Otherwise, you could use common sense and assume anything beneath it is dead.
CaoSlayer 10-06-05, 12:46 PM	yes, you also deal the falling damage to yourself, not the weight damage, so thats 1d6 for you buddy! That it is true if the floor can stand the blow, otherwise the floor will clumble and you will end hammered into the floor unnable to get up.
The Laughing God 10-06-05, 01:15 PM	would the char be strong enough to even move himself?
JoeX 10-06-05, 01:28 PM	Using the falling object rules my character could burst through a foot and a half of stone by adjusting his subjuctive directional gravity. You also take 80d6 points of damage anytime you do that...
Grug the Just 10-06-05, 10:58 PM	indeed, the manual of the planes covers all. falling objects deal a max of 20d6 apparantly as writen. the astal has the same trait as the elemental plane of air. technically, if i remember right, it is pretty much a REACTION to change direction. in the astral/plane of air, you could will every direction to be an apparant down and hover, or just one and fall. hitting objects anchored would cause you damage. (such as buildings and land stationed, hovering, but immune to such traits via localized gravity), but technically, you could never gain apparant velocity. you are still a creature, not an object furthermore for the falling and damage rules, and that does matter if you want to be completely correct on rules. and also, changing direction I didn't think was more of an action. there are many abilities that allow you to act out of secquence, they could just choose to fall with you, or null their gravity. you'd strike them, and just pick them up in an apparant fall. ~Draco I do like the max 20d6 rule if really makes it a lot less of a worth while use of a 5th and 8th level spells. I disagree that using the falling objects rule would apply damage to the falling creature and the fallen upon as well. That would imply that a 200lb. orc would take an extra d6 damage for any fall up to 190ft. But then again, thats what I get for such a weird scenario. I'll bring all I've gotten here up to my DM. -Grug
rkr1970 10-07-05, 12:40 AM	I still think the Hulking Hurler or even this Iron Body-combo stuff has nothing on my old technique. Use shapechange to turn into a 200' x 200' x 200' cube of solid gold, use a stilled dimension door to appear 10' above someone, and crush them....if you use the 200lb per 1d6 method, you have several million d6s being thrown around. Otherwise, you could use common sense and assume anything beneath it is dead. Shapechange allows you to become any single, non-unique CREATURE! what creature is a 200'^3 gold cube? And, since the only component to dimension door is verbal, what good does casting it stilled do? I think someone's DM needs to get on the ball here!
Tyler Do'Urden 10-07-05, 12:58 AM	Use shapechange to turn into a 200' x 200' x 200' cube of solid gold, use a stilled dimension door to appear 10' above someone, and crush them....if you use the 200lb per 1d6 method, you have several million d6s being thrown around. Otherwise, you could use common sense and assume anything beneath it is dead. 48,196,000d6, average damage 168,686,000, the word "creature" notwithstanding. You turned into a 200' cube of gold and your party members didn't try to sell pieces of you?
Etiquette_Gnome 10-07-05, 02:25 AM	Sorry, mistype there. I didn't have the PHB on hand and all I could remember was that it had one component and got it mixed up. Also, you're right on the creature part. I must have gotten mixed up with 3.0, which I'm sure allowed objects. I'm certain there are golems of sufficient size to get the effect you want anyway, crushing someone underneath your weight. Or, you could use Polymorph Any Object on a small rock to make a disc of lead roughly 15' in diameter and 5' thick, right when you're flying over someone's head. Should deal over 5000d6 damage, which is enough for the job.
CaoSlayer 10-07-05, 06:04 AM	also with the school change of dim. door, you now cant use a conjuration spell to make anything apear in the mid air. It is a shame, I loved the combo d. door + feather fall for an archer character.