No damage from falling

[prestidigitator]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Did you realize I don't HAVE a scientific calculator?

You're typing on one.

[radioKAOS]

Re: No damage from falling

 

So in game, using that oh so tasty Terminal Velocity Chart....

 

This number is actually just used for the damage inflicted, it doesn't change the actual speed at which they fall, does it?

 

Somehow I am getting a headache reading this... lol

 

Awesome stuff guys.

[Lucius]

Re: No damage from falling

 

So in game, using that oh so tasty Terminal Velocity Chart....

 

This number is actually just used for the damage inflicted, it doesn't change the actual speed at which they fall, does it?

 

Somehow I am getting a headache reading this... lol

 

Awesome stuff guys.

 

Yeah, me too.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary says "You think YOU have a problem? I have TWO headaches."

[prestidigitator]

Re: No damage from falling

 

So in game, using that oh so tasty Terminal Velocity Chart....

 

This number is actually just used for the damage inflicted, it doesn't change the actual speed at which they fall, does it?

It changes the actual (maximum) speed at which they fall, and thus they will take different damage. You could go with standard acceleration (velocity increases by 5" per Segment) and just cap the velocity at the modified terminal velocity if you don't want to mess with the complex formulas for the acceleration I showed above. Like I said, that part probably is going a little overboard.

 

I didn't actually mess with structural integrity. I assume PD and Body and such can take care of that.

 

Somehow I am getting a headache reading this... lol

 

Awesome stuff guys.

Thanks. Don't hurt your brain too much over it. No need.

[radioKAOS]

Re: No damage from falling

 

It changes the actual (maximum) speed at which they fall' date=' and thus they will take different damage. You could go with standard acceleration (velocity increases by 5" per Segment) and just cap the velocity at the modified terminal velocity if you don't want to mess with the complex formulas for the acceleration I showed above. Like I said, that part probably [i']is[/i] going a little overboard.

 

I didn't actually mess with structural integrity. I assume PD and Body and such can take care of that.

 

 

Thanks. Don't hurt your brain too much over it. No need.

 

Ok, here's a part that really screwed with me 'ead.

 

The terminal velocity of an object falling towards the ground, in non-vacuum, is the speed at which the gravitational force pulling it downwards is equal and opposite to the atmospheric drag (also called air resistance) pushing it upwards. At this speed, the object ceases to accelerate downwards and falls at constant speed. An object moving downwards without power at greater than the terminal velocity (for example because it previously used power to descend, it fell from a thinner part of the atmosphere or it changed shape) will slow down until it reaches terminal velocity.

 

For example, the terminal velocity of a skydiver in a normal free-fall position with a closed parachute is about 195 km/h (120 Mph). It would take about 5.5 seconds to reach that speed. This speed increases to about 320 km/h (200 Mph) if the skydiver pulls in his limbs—see also freeflying. This is also the terminal velocity of the Peregrine Falcon diving down on its prey.

 

The reason an object reaches a terminal velocity is because the drag force resisting motion is directly proportional to the square of its speed. At low speeds the drag is much less than the gravitational force and so the object accelerates. As it speeds up the drag increases, until eventually it equals the weight. Drag also depends on the cross-sectional area. This is why things with a large surface area such as parachutes and feathers have a lower terminal velocity than small objects like bricks and cannon balls.

 

Seems like Drag/Air Resistance is one of the, if not the most important factor. Notice the freeflying human and the peregrine falcon both reach terminal velocity at 320kmph. The weight obviously doesn't affect it that much [in this example anyhow] - a peregrine falcon weighs in around 1 kg [Males weigh 570-710 grams; the noticeably larger females weigh 910-1190 grams] while a human weighs much more than that [female averaging 62kg, and men averaging 78kg].

[Dust Raven]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Ok, here's a part that really screwed with me 'ead.

 

 

 

Seems like Drag/Air Resistance is one of the, if not the most important factor. Notice the freeflying human and the peregrine falcon both reach terminal velocity at 320kmph. The weight obviously doesn't affect it that much [in this example anyhow] - a peregrine falcon weighs in around 1 kg [Males weigh 570-710 grams; the noticeably larger females weigh 910-1190 grams] while a human weighs much more than that [female averaging 62kg, and men averaging 78kg].

 

The weight/mass still plays a role in determining terminal velocity, but only in relation to how it determins drag when combined with the object's surface area. A human has more mass, which means it has more inertia when falling, meaning gravity pulls harder on it than it does the falcon. However, the human also has more surface area, which creates more drag. It's really just an odd coicidence that a freeflying human and a diving falcon have the same terminal velocity.

[prestidigitator]

Re: No damage from falling

 

As DR said. The way I would put it is that the falcon is considerably smaller, which would normally mean its terminal velocity is smaller (as my equations and proposed system above indicate), but the falcon is also considerably more aerodynamic (well it had better be, right?), which decreases air resistance. Recall my basic assumption that the general aerodynamic shape of the object doesn't change; only its size and mass.

 

Note also that in Hero terms this is covered quite nicely without having to take shape into consideration: the falcon isn't in free fall, it is using its Flight to dive! That represents well enough that the falcon is quite aerodynamic IMO. Are they given about 20" of Flight? I'm being too lazy to dig my Bestiary from the bottom of the stack.

 

I also probably wouldn't have a great problem with characters increasing their terminal velocity (and acceleration to some degree) by adopting a more more aerodynamic falling position, but they'd better understand that their velocity (unlike the falcon's) is still considered uncontrolled since they aren't using Flight, and they'd better darn well find a way to pull themselves out of it at the right moment unless they can withstand the copious amounts of damage. It makes for the cool dramatic scene of a (non-flying) hero jumping off the building to grab the falling normal before whipping out their swingline or whatever (well, okay: we have to exaggerate things a lot further than is physically realistic to get that scenario if it's only building height, but that's another topic...).

[radioKAOS]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Ahh I was just having another brainspasm with thinking about density vs. drag...

 

But then I thought that both density and drag are determined by using the volume of the object in question, of course then I thought, 'no, it's surface area, not actual volume' so again my brain hurts.

 

So proportionally, the elephant's mass is greater than it's drag, moreso than the human's. Therefore it's terminal velocity is greater?

 

Wiki had an interesting way of determining a very close approximation of terminal velocity.

 

Approximating terminal velocity is much more easily done than calculating the terminal velocity because of the difficulty in finding the value of Cd. One simple small scale method is to hang an object out of a car window by a thin string. The terminal velocity of the object is the speed of the car when the object hangs at a 45° angle. This can be easily proven mathematically because it is when the atmospheric drag (in the horizontal direction) is equal to the force of gravity. It is when air resistance and gravity is the same.

 

Of course that might be a little difficult to do with an elephant.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: No damage from falling

 

For example, the terminal velocity of a skydiver in a normal free-fall position with a closed parachute is about 195 km/h (120 Mph). It would take about 5.5 seconds to reach that speed. This speed increases to about 320 km/h (200 Mph) if the skydiver pulls in his limbs—see also freeflying. This is also the terminal velocity of the Peregrine Falcon diving down on its prey.

Wow! I never realized the sizable difference in terminal velocity such a position change makes. The HERO rules don't take this into consideration at all, and considering that TV nearly doubles when you curl up into the fetal position, as opposed to speading out your arms and legs, maybe it should.

 

Bad guy throws you out of a plane. You're fully conscious, so you spread out to decrease your terminal velocity as much as possible. You hit the ground at about 27"/segment = 27d6 damage.

Bad guy ties you up in a tight ball and throws you out of a plane. You hit the ground at about 45"/segment = 45d6 damage.

Bad guy throws you out of a plane. You are unconscious and your body is limp, your limbs flail about as you fall. Your velocity as you hit is likely somewhere between the above two speeds.

 

That's a big difference! A superhero might survive the first, but not the second. I know it adds more complication to the game, but maybe this could be taken into consideration for some games/genres/worlds/adventures.

[Dust Raven]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Wow! I never realized the sizable difference in terminal velocity such a position change makes. The HERO rules don't take this into consideration at all' date=' and considering that TV nearly doubles when you curl up into the fetal position, as opposed to speading out your arms and legs, maybe it should.[/quote']

 

I agree. It's one of the things that has always bother me in the back of my mind about the falling rules. Then again, attempting to take into consideration the effects of different body/object shapes and provide some kind of standard rule that presents an accurate model for determining terminal velocity is nearly impossible. After all, a simple change like a humanoid character with wings, or one that is twice is twice as dense than normal, will make a subtle but significant difference. The current rules are scientifically innacurate, but I for one can't recall any time in any source material where a difference in terminal velocity made a difference, other than to catch up with an already falling object/character. The damage one takes upon impact is almost always either deadly or it doesn't matter and was never considered (making terminal velocity irreleavant).

[prestidigitator]

Re: No damage from falling

 

I just figure the terminal velocity is that of the character in the least aerodynamic position they can manage, and assume that their fall will coincide with this most of the time unless they actively try to increase their speed as I described above. It doesn't change much and leans in favor of the player/character, so I think it works.

[prestidigitator]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Ahh I was just having another brainspasm with thinking about density vs. drag...

 

But then I thought that both density and drag are determined by using the volume of the object in question, of course then I thought, 'no, it's surface area, not actual volume' so again my brain hurts.

 

So proportionally, the elephant's mass is greater than it's drag, moreso than the human's. Therefore it's terminal velocity is greater?

Right. Area is proportional to the square of length, volume (mass, if density is constant) is proportional to the cube of length. Therefore the bigger a creature gets, generally the higher the velocity needs to be for air resistance to counter its weight.

[SteveZilla]

Re: No damage from falling

 

None of this address the problem I have always had with Hero falling chart. I've posted it many times before, but no one seems to care. The chart states that you fall 5 inches (10 meters) in your first segment (second). Someone obviously saw 10m/s/s and said, ah-ha! you fall ten meters in your first second. No. You have a velocity of 10m/s. But you started with a velocity of 0 m/s. You accelerated evenly throughout the second and only fell the average of your velocity: 5 meters or 2.5 game inches. This error is propagated throughout the chart. The velocities are correct, but the distance fallen is incorrect and it has been in every edition.

 

Every time I have brought this up, the reaction has been, "meh. It works for me."

 

Keith "lone voice howling in the wilderness" Curtis

 

I hadn't seen any of those times. I'm right there with you on the gross inaccuracy of the falling chart! You are alone no more!

[SteveZilla]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Because Gliding and Flight' date=' when used to "go upwards," just reduce your downward velocity by an amount equal to the combat move. So, your power write-up would knock off -1" from the 30" terminal velocity.[/quote']

 

That presumes that one waits until they have achieved terminal velocity before starting to use this power.

 

Edit: I hand't read all the posts, so didn't know that someone had already pointed this out.

 

Even worse' date=' falling occurs -EVERY SEGMENT-, while this power write-up works only on your Phase.[/quote']

 

If you are using flight or gliding, you are no longer accelerating in the fall.

[SteveZilla]

Re: No damage from falling

 

But then I thought that both density and drag are determined by using the volume of the object in question' date=' of course then I thought, 'no, it's surface area, not actual volume' so again my brain hurts.[/quote']

 

Actually, it's effectively the cross sectional area, not surface area of the object.

 

Drag Equation

 

Wiki had an interesting way of determining a very close approximation of terminal velocity.

 

Yes, they did.

 

Oh, another way to survive terminal velocity damage:

 

Healing 1d6, Resurrection (Regeneration, 1 Body per Turn) - Zero END(+½), Persistent(+½), Extra Time(1 Turn; -1¼), Self Only(-½)

 

21 Points. Sooner or later, you will get up and walk away.

 

Edit for poor spelling from typing too fast. :|

[prestidigitator]

Re: No damage from falling

 

Actually, it's effectively the cross sectional area, not surface area of the object.

 

Drag Equation

Sure. Both are generally going to be proportional to length squared though.