[Rq-rules] Re: Knockback and falling damage.
Brad Furst
esoteric2723 at comcast.net
Wed Jul 26 04:38:35 PDT 2006
Yes, it's square with respect to time, but we don't use time as a
measure for falling in gaming.
It's linear, with respect to distance, which is how we measure falls
in gaming.
:-)
Terminal velocity occurs falling from about 280 feet. More distance
than that is negligible to damage.
On Jul 25, 2006, at 10:49 PM, Tom Cantine wrote:
> I worked out the following table of damage scales for impact at
> various speeds, although I suppose I should expand it to take into
> account the enormous amounts of knockback a giant can deliver.
>
> Damage Equivalent speed Typical situation
> 1D3 1-2 m/SR Walking into wall; tripping over cat
> 1D4 3-4 m/SR Running into wall; falling from 1 m
> 1D6 5-6 m/SR Sprinting into wall; falling from 2-3 m.
> 2D6 7-8 m/SR Trotting horse.
> 3D6 9-10 m/SR Charging horse
>
> I based these values loosely on the falling damage rule, noting
> that every 3 m of height adds a d6 of damage, and so I inferred
> that damage is linear with kinetic energy. Actually, that seems
> pretty reasonable, all other things being equal.
>
> However, it seems to me that knockback distance is a linear
> function of velocity, not of kinetic energy (which is proportional
> to the square of velocity). To fling someone 60m would require a
> minimum velocity of about 45 m/s, which is about the speed one
> would attain after falling about 100 m. So damage on landing should
> be about 33d6.
>
> I don't think that damage should max out at 12d6, because the
> entire body is hitting a solid surface, and while 12d6 is every bit
> as lethal as 33d6, the degree of overkill is a useful indication of
> how recognizable the residue will be.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20060726/98e875be/attachment-0001.html
More information about the RQ-Rules
mailing list