Repelling Blast is already awesome, and can obviously be used to push stuff off cliffs for extra damage.
If the target is zero to five feet away from a wall or other solid object, would you have it take damage from crashing into the obstacle?
intently wrote:
intently wrote:
mrpopstar wrote:
Not unless the surface has some feature to cause it (e.g. a spiked shield hanging on the wall), and even then I would usually allow a dex save to avoid some or all of the damage. I sometimes include a description of the impact as part of the attack narrative ("the orc's head bounces off the wall with a thud, and he slumps to the ground"), but this damage abstraction is already included in the normal damage roll.
You can just as easily hurt yourself getting flung 10 feet and not hitting anything (twisted ankle, broken neck) as you can if you run into something. The damage caused by effects with forced movement already accounts for this.
OoftaMeg wrote:
a normal push (like the eldritch blast do) do not cause extra damage by the book.. But as a Dm you are entitle to change that (excepted in AL)
Now like already said if you push him on a wall of spike, wall of flamme, a pit fall, moonbeam area etc... then yes additional damage will occur, but those will not be caused byt eh eldritch blast but by the spike, flamme, pitfall, etc... Most of those effect will have rule and description within the module, spell description etc...
I wouldn't impose any extra damage.
Yeah, but the simulationist in me just finds it odd. There's no official ruling for this so I was trying to use logic. I know that's crazy talk. 
If movies have taught me anything, it's that you can survive being thrown by a blast and then be killed when you hit the wall (unless you're Iron Man but I digress). Well, that and in real life people get injured all the time because they slam into a solid object.
Using total distance minus amount you could be thrown is assuming you're skidding along the ground as you go slowing yourself down. If lofted into the air, you would just take damage as if you had fallen the whole distance (not the distance travelled before hitting).
I'm also assuming being thrown into a hard object (a wall) not another creature, etc.
Or just ignore it since this is just my house rule. 
Well, Repelling Blast seems good enough without adding extra damage. Thanks for the feedback.
add damage for falling 10 feet. Add damage to people in the way as if someone fell on them. Add more damage if you fall into a spiked wall, a suit of armor with blades, a fire place, a pit, off a cliff, into a river of lava, or into a companion that has their pointy weapons drawn toward you. Typically, +1d6 is sufficient. hit a bush, a sand pile, or a small tree? No bonus damage. Hit a giant super tree, brick wall, or cave surface? then damage yes.
this is how we do it, because it makes sense. Being thrown 10 feet back is a crazy amount of force.
If it took you one second to move that 10 feet, it'd be the equivalent of moving 6.8 mph. I guess it depends on how long you think it takes the spell to move a target 10 feet.
I use the falling damage formula, but I don't apply it to the damage travelled before hitting the obstacle. I apply it to the distance prevented by the obstacle.
For example, if the target is knocked back 20 feet, but is stopped by an immovable object after 5 feet, the remaining 15 feet become falling damage.
OoftaMeg wrote:
Xeviat-DM wrote:
Would four blasts move the target 40 feet?
If it's 1 second and 6.8 mph, I doubt that would cause damage in the real world unless the wall had some other property (flaming spikes).
If it's .5 seconds and 13.7 mph it might cause damage. Having actually run into a wall at full speed during basketball practice, I doubt I took more than 1 point of damage in D&D terms as the force of the blow was spread over my entire body and my pride was more wounded than I was. If my head hit, maybe.
Maybe a Dex save? I think if you were wearing any kind of body and head protection (aka armor) - unlike me wearing shorts and t-shirt - it'd be unlikely you'd take damage at 13.7 mph.
So let's see...
A speed of 10 ft/s corresponds to falling 1.5 ft.
20 ft/s = fall of 6 ft
30 ft/s = fall of 14 ft
40 ft/s = fall of 25 ft
50 ft/s = fall of 40 ft
So if you want to look at it that way, you'd need a pretty decent push.
guachi wrote:
guachi wrote:
As an engineer I appreciate all the math in this thread 
But I think Repelling Blast is too good if it can be so easily used to cause extra damage. It would be better than Agonizing Blast!
Now I just have to figure out some logic to justify this decision.
intently wrote:
My HotDQ group had a situation where Repelling Blast was used on our Rogue, dumping her into an underground lake. Nobody thought to apply any falling damage at all.
Because our (her?) big upcoming problem was the Drowning rules: she was Paralyzed at the time.
My fully-armored Paladin jumped in after her. (With a rope tied around my chestplate.)