falling object damage maximum

[freyar]

Here's the quote from the SRD:

Just as characters take damage when they fall more than 10 feet, so too do they take damage when they are hit by falling objects.

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).

Objects smaller than 200 pounds also deal damage when dropped, but they must fall farther to deal the same damage. Use Table: Damage from Falling Objects to see how far an object of a given weight must drop to deal 1d6 points of damage.

(table)

For each additional increment an object falls, it deals an additional 1d6 points of damage. Objects weighing less than 1 pound do not deal damage to those they land upon, no matter how far they have fallen.

Never mind the realism or not. Here's the question: I've bolded a parenthetical mentioning a 20d6 maximum for damage. Is that maximum (a) the max for the total amount of damage a falling object can do or (b) the max for the extra damage done for distance falling (so that a very heavy object could do more than 20d6 even if it falls only 10ft but cannot gain more than 20d6 extra damage from falling farther) or (c) something else entirely? I won't bias the discussion by saying what I think. Thanks!

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

I interpret it as a max on the damage only due to the distance fallen separate from the damage due to size, just because it's a parenthetical on the sentence about distance fallen. So a 2000lb object (10d6) falling 200 ft (20d6) does a total of 30d6 damage to those it falls upon.

Of course I have biases about falling by RAW, as well...

 

[FEADIN]

I think that 20d6 is the total maximum damage whatever the distance and the weight, it was already in 2nd edition.

 

[Dross]

I interpret it as a max on the damage only due to the distance fallen separate from the damage due to size, just because it's a parenthetical on the sentence about distance fallen. So a 2000lb object (10d6) falling 200 ft (20d6) does a total of 30d6 damage to those it falls upon.

I mostly to agree with this. As it reads the 20d6 max falling damage does not include the weight of an item. The 20d6 max is referenced withing the distance falling damage sentence. Note that if someone falls, the max damage is 20d6, which suggests some effort at consistency.

However I read if a 200lb object falls 10 feet, it deals 1d6 damage.
200lb fall 20 feet = 2d6 (weight 1d6, distance 1 additional 10 feet)
400lb fall 20 feet = 3d6 (weight 2d6, distance 1 additional 10 feet)
2000lb falls 200 feet = 29d6 (weight 10d6, distance 200 - 10 feet = 19d6).
2000lb falls 210 feet = 30d6 (weight 10d6, distance 210 - 10 feet = 20d6).

The Rules Compendium pg 52 has the max 20d6 damage as a separate, distinct sentence "A falling object can deal a maximum of 20d6 points of damage"
This I interpret as including the weight with the distance fallen.
so: 2000lb falls 200 feet = 29d6 (weight 10d6, distance 200 - 10 feet = 19d6) rounded to 20d6.

 

[Theo R Cwithin]

2000lb falls 200 feet = 29d6 (weight 10d6, distance 200 - 10 feet = 19d6).

Oops! Good catch, I stand corrected

... snip ...
Note that if someone falls, the max damage is 20d6, which suggests some effort at consistency.
... snip ...
The Rules Compendium pg 52 has the max 20d6 damage as a separate, distinct sentence "A falling object can deal a maximum of 20d6 points of damage"
This I interpret as including the weight with the distance fallen.
so: 2000lb falls 200 feet = 29d6 (weight 10d6, distance 200 - 10 feet = 19d6) rounded to 20d6.

Yes, I actually agree with you. I believe the intent of the rule is to cap it at 20d6-- and that appears to be clear from the RC quote. Again, good call!

It was just nice to see that the SRD wording a bit more loose and open to interpretation, since i think falling by RAW is a little wimpy. Yeah, I'm one of those horrible DMs who thinks falling & crushing should be quite a bit more brutal!

 

[freyar]

The Rules Compendium pg 52 has the max 20d6 damage as a separate, distinct sentence "A falling object can deal a maximum of 20d6 points of damage"
This I interpret as including the weight with the distance fallen.
so: 2000lb falls 200 feet = 29d6 (weight 10d6, distance 200 - 10 feet = 19d6) rounded to 20d6.

I'm a tad confused. Aren't you saying that the RC states that the max damage should be 20d6 including weight plus distance?

 

[Dross]

I'm a tad confused. Aren't you saying that the RC states that the max damage should be 20d6 including weight plus distance?

That is what mean:
RC states: no matter what 20d6 is the max. To exaggerate slightly: 2 million tonnes from 159,867 feet = 20d6 damage

Which is not what the SRD states (at least by my reading and the pedantry of where the "max at 20d6" sits in the sentence structure).

 

[kyonu]

See, I've house-ruled that. I agree about the 20d6 maximum for falling, as per gravity laws you can only fall so fast before you can't fall any faster.

What I added in, is every 200 pounds adds an additional 1d6, on top of the current 1d6 from standard body weight, as more weigh = faster dropping speed. Base PC 1d6 + 200ft = 20d6. 2000 lbs = 10d6, 200ft = 19d6, so it would be 29d6.