Falling damage: all the right angles?

[Ragitsu]

Presumably, if a character tumbles/slides down a steep enough surface, they will still take some sort of falling damage.

 

But...is there an angle they can coast down on and land without hurting themselves? Are any special traits needed to pull off this stunt?

[Pattern Ghost]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Gliding might work if you wanted to model it with a power.

 

Cinematically, it's usually shown as someone using friction or grabbing objects to slow their descent.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Well, on the fly I'd let them use it as a bonus to Acrobatics/Breakfall to reduce the damage, either by allowing the Breakfall to occur as normal (more or less) or turning it into Knockback or Knockdown, etc.

 

If you want to get technical, I guess you COULD try and say that a right angle= 100% (so, the full force of whatever velocity they have going for them) and then correlate from there. So a 45 degree slope would equate half damage (45 being half of 90) and so on.

 

Not sure if that helps.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I'm thinking that what I want will end up being a variation of the Slow Fall ability from D&D 3.5.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Well, on the fly I'd let them use it as a bonus to Acrobatics/Breakfall to reduce the damage, either by allowing the Breakfall to occur as normal (more or less) or turning it into Knockback or Knockdown, etc.

 

If you want to get technical, I guess you COULD try and say that a right angle= 100% (so, the full force of whatever velocity they have going for them) and then correlate from there. So a 45 degree slope would equate half damage (45 being half of 90) and so on.

 

Not sure if that helps.

 

 

I think their is an unstated fact about >90 degree angles - when you hit, you still aren't finished falling. If you hit a 45 degree angle, you will still be rolling down the ground, just with all the bumps and scrapes that come with sliding down a hill at high speed. So, any damage differences would seem to be made up for by the aspect of continuing damage.

 

At the end of the day (or fall), I think the damage shouldn't change based on the initial angel of collision. You either will take all the damage at once, or you will take damage over a longer period of time. And the damage over time will probably be higher on total dice but there will be more moments of application and each application will be lower.

[Christopher]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I'm thinking that what I want will end up being a variation of the Slow Fall ability from D&D 3.5.

In the end was does the damage is the acceleration. Just using 1m of Flight or Gliding automatically prevents you from accelerating further, and allow you to reduce your speed by 1m/Full Move.

Parachutes (6E1 228) are build as Flight, Gliding. The example build would allow you to reduce your Falling speed by 12m/phase.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

If you hit a 45 degree angle' date=' you will still be rolling down the ground, just with all the bumps and scrapes that come with sliding down a hill at high speed. So, any damage differences would seem to be made up for by the aspect of continuing damage.[/quote']

 

The surface (such as a broken segment of a super highway) could also be flat.

 

Parachutes (6E1 228) are build as Flight' date=' Gliding. The example build would allow you to reduce your Falling speed by 12m/phase.[/quote']

 

Does that require contact with a surface? D&D 3.5 Slow Fall does.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

The surface (such as a broken segment of a super highway) could also be flat.

 

I'm going to make a quick assumption on what you mean here because it isn't quite clear. You want to reference that the surface one lands on at the 45 degree angle could be flat. And from that you want to dispute the idea of "bumps and scrape that come with sliding down a hill at high speed"? Is that correct?

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I'm going to make a quick assumption on what you mean here because it isn't quite clear. You want to reference that the surface one lands on at the 45 degree angle could be flat. And from that you want to dispute the idea of "bumps and scrape that come with sliding down a hill at high speed"? Is that correct?

 

It just seemed like you had a hill (naturally formed?) in mind (which most times doesn't have perfectly flat slopes), when that's not the only angled surface a character could fall down.

 

In any case, the impacted surface at the bottom would definitely be flat.

[Christopher]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Does that require contact with a surface? D&D 3.5 Slow Fall does.

Not until you limit it so that it does!

 

Note that D&D Slow Fall is a all or nothing things. You either are conscious when you hit the ground (no damage), or not (full damage). Hero allows you to gradually decelerate once you are conscious (again).

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

It needs to be limited. Any suggestions on a price reduction?

[Christopher]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

It needs to be limited. Any suggestions on a price reduction?

How common are vertical walls when falling?

This in part depends on how much Knockback you can recieve: When pushed ten meters out of the building, there will be no wall nearby.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

It just seemed like you had a hill (naturally formed?) in mind (which most times doesn't have perfectly flat slopes), when that's not the only angled surface a character could fall down.

 

In any case, the impacted surface at the bottom would definitely be flat.

 

Well, although it is true that I did have a 'naturally formed hill' in mind. I don't know if the kind of angle surface affects my statement. That is why I was perplexed by your response. Indeed, I still am.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Well' date=' although it is true that I did have a 'naturally formed hill' in mind. I don't know if the kind of angle surface affects my statement. That is why I was perplexed by your response. Indeed, I still am.[/quote']

 

It does.

 

Also, it depends on whether or not you roll or slide down.

[Ternaugh]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

It does.

 

Also, it depends on whether or not you roll or slide down.

 

Back around 2000, my brother-in-law was a dam tour guide over at Hoover Dam. From the roof of the visitor center, he pointed out a series of discolorations on the front of the dam. Seems that someone thought that it would be a good thing to commit suicide by jumping off of one of the walls at the top of the dam. Because the dam face is curved, the person actually slid down about 700ft of rough concrete, leaving the bloody skid marks almost the whole way down*.

 

JoeG

*The line skips in a few places where he apparently bounced a few times.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Back around 2000, my brother-in-law was a dam tour guide over at Hoover Dam. From the roof of the visitor center, he pointed out a series of discolorations on the front of the dam. Seems that someone thought that it would be a good thing to commit suicide by jumping off of one of the walls at the top of the dam. Because the dam face is curved, the person actually slid down about 700ft of rough concrete, leaving the bloody skid marks almost the whole way down*.

 

JoeG

*The line skips in a few places where he apparently bounced a few times.

 

A shame he wasn't playing HERO.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

In a rather gory way, Ternaugh conveyed my point. Any surface curved enough to slow your decent is flat enough to cause harm. The difference is you are exchanging instantaneous harm for a more durative harm. There are benefits to it, the same way there are minuses to it. And you can bounce off of even baby smooth granite. Because no mater how flat and seamless a surface is, the human body isn't. Imagining a situation where you are in the perfect sweet spot of a smooth and properly angled surface, well trained and clothed person, and have such a long distance as to be able to slow down enough that by the time the surface levels out you aren't still moving at deadly speeds is such a convoluted condition as to not be reasonable to contemplate in anticipatable situations.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

In a rather gory way' date=' Ternaugh conveyed my point. Any surface curved enough to slow your decent is flat enough to cause harm. The difference is you are exchanging instantaneous harm for a more durative harm. There are benefits to it, the same way there are minuses to it. And you can bounce off of even baby smooth granite. Because no mater how flat and seamless a surface is, the human body isn't. Imagining a situation where you are in the perfect sweet spot of a smooth and properly angled surface, well trained and clothed person, and have such a long distance as to be able to slow down enough that by the time the surface levels out you aren't still moving at deadly speeds is such a convoluted condition as to not be reasonable to contemplate in anticipatable situations.[/quote']

 

TMR. Also, if I was looking for that degree of it, i'd play GURPS.

 

Start of the following video is the kind of scenario i'm envisioning: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=WZOQsdzXx8Q#t=0s

 

How common are vertical walls when falling?

 

The campaign is urban based, so this sort of occurrence is occasional.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I watched the first 30 seconds of the video where they are sliding. Is that the stop you wanted me to watch?

 

Assuming it is:

 

First, we don't see them falling and landing on an angled surface, we see them sliding. That is an important point. It is like trying to compare skiing down a slope and being dropped of a helicopter from a hundred feet and skiing down a slope. That is to say that they aren't comparable. One doesn't have initial velocity - the falling velocity - to compare. Next, we are talking about a CGI rendering of a game not real life footage. Real World and Game World physics are not always the same. And last but certainly not least, you seem to be operating under the assumption that the person sliding down is not taking damage. I can assure you that the act of sliding down that kind of surface is harming his clothes at a minimum and he is probably picking up a few bruises to boot.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I watched the first 30 seconds of the video where they are sliding. Is that the stop you wanted me to watch?

 

Assuming it is:

 

First, we don't see them falling and landing on an angled surface, we see them sliding. That is an important point. It is like trying to compare skiing down a slope and being dropped of a helicopter from a hundred feet and skiing down a slope. That is to say that they aren't comparable. One doesn't have initial velocity - the falling velocity - to compare. Next, we are talking about a CGI rendering of a game not real life footage. Real World and Game World physics are not always the same. And last but certainly not least, you seem to be operating under the assumption that the person sliding down is not taking damage. I can assure you that the act of sliding down that kind of surface is harming his clothes at a minimum and he is probably picking up a few bruises to boot.

 

Again, TMR. I'm also not factoring in things like friction and air resistance, because it doesn't serve my interests.

[Manic Typist]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I think their is an unstated fact about >90 degree angles - when you hit' date=' you still aren't finished falling. If you hit a 45 degree angle, you will still be rolling down the ground, just with all the bumps and scrapes that come with sliding down a hill at high speed.[/quote']

 

Well, that's exactly my point. The fact is that, in general, the overall damage will be less though if you hit at a less severe angle. Rather than represent that by reducing the damage in increments, which would be a hassle. So I'd just do it all in one go, since in HERO one powerful blast and "Death by a Thousand Cuts" can both be represented by the same 10d6 KA.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Ah, sorry for the misunderstanding, Manic. I was getting a slightly different impression on what you said.

[Sougen]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Again' date=' TMR. I'm also not factoring in things like friction and air resistance, because it doesn't serve my interests.[/quote']

 

TMR? What does this mean?

 

And why are you not calculating in things like friction and air resistance? Why just not calculate in gravity and solve the whole issue of falling.

[Ragitsu]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

Too Much Realism.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Falling damage: all the right angles?

 

I have an issue with Hero falling damage. It is not unrealistic, necessarily, but it certainly does not fit in well with the rest of the system.

 

It is certainly true that falling 200 metres will be a very different experience if you fall 200 metres and hit a perpendicular surface or if you do it all rolling and bouncing down a 45 degree slope. It certainly matters a lot given that if you use multiple impacts you will get your defence multiple times.

 

I would certainly break up long falls down slopes into several smaller impacts. The question is how you actually accomplish that. You could go for some sort of mathematical solution, but a quick and dirty fix might be to do this:

 

1. Work out your maximum fall velocity based purely on the vertical distance you travel (not how long the slope is).

2. Work out how many d6 damage that would do you (subject to a 30d6 cap).

3. Work out how steep the slope is and use the table below to work out how many individual impacts you take on the way down (X).

4. Divide your TOTAL damage by that X and apply the result as X individual lots of damage, each of which get your normal defences.

 

NB technically the angle should also affect your maximum velocity but doing it this way is probably quicker and easier. Also note that this is completely non-scientific, it is meant to re-create a more cinematic reality.

 

[TABLE]

[TR]

[TD]Angle of slope in degrees[/TD]

[TD=width: 86][/TD]

[TD=width: 86]Number of impacts[/TD]

[TD=width: 86][/TD]

[TD=width: 86]Notes[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]0 to 20[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Infinite[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]Just stand up, dammit![/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]20 to 40[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]8[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]40 to 60[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]4[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]60 to 80[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]2[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]80 to 90[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]1[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD]...at the bottom![/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

 

Example: you are falling down a 45 degree slope. It is 300 metres long, so the 'vertical drop' is 150 metres, which would result in a 50 metre per segment fall, doing 25d6. As the slope is between 40 and 60 degrees, you break that into 4 individual impacts doing 6d6, 6d6, 6d6 and 7d6 damage. A normal with 2pd would take an average of 17 Body and probably die anyway, but a character with 5pd would 'only' average 5 Body. Of course they would also take an average of 67 Stun, so they would be comatose.

 

You might also allow some sort of acrobatics roll at each impact to slow or stop the fall.

 

There are lots of other ways to do it, for example you could just assume that the angle of slope affects acceleration and maximum velocity (which is probably a more 'real physics' approach) and, say, subtract 2 metres per segment from the maximum velocity per 5 degrees and subtract 1 metre per segment per 10 degrees from acceleration and apply a single hit based on the new calculated velocity - again not a 'proper' calculation, but easy enough for dramatic purposes:

 

Using the above example, the 45 degree slope subtracts (45/5*2)= 18 metres per segment from the maximum velocity (50 metres per segment) for a maximum damage value of 32/2 = 16d6 and you only accelerate at 5 metres per segment, not 10.