>>95518722
>It's /better/ I suppose.
I'm just throwing stuff on the wall an see what sticks basically

>Why do you make small, medium, and large the same damage?
I'm trying to find a sweet spot between verisimilitude and easiness, in fact i may be more partial towards the first attempt.

>If a grizzly bear falls off a 2nd story roof, it will typically take much more severe injuries than a 5 year old who falls off the same roof.
A 5 years old is more likey to die while the bear is more likely to survive although heavily wounded. That said you're right maybe i need to adjust the table this way:

Size Fine (less than 3"): Fortitude vs DC 5+(1 * each 10ft, cap at 200ft) or 1d6-1 damage (min 0)
Size Fine (3" or more): falling dmg /8
Size Diminutive - Tiny: falling dmg /4
Size Small: falling dmg /2
Size Medium: falling dmg x1
Size Large: falling dmg x2
Size Huge - Gargantuan: falling dmg x3
Size Colossal: falling dmg x4

>I still lean more towards something like this as my starting point
Your proportion is the most correct (intially i was thinking about using the carry capacity multipliers and your approximation is very close to that), i just think i won't need that much precision in my games.

>And I'm not sure on the average HD by creature size to check at the upper end. I think this is a job for spreadsheets, and that a quick napkin attempt is only a starting point to check for sensible outcomes.
Go with it, i'm curious to see your work anon.

Back | Go to board

Board:

/tg/

Thread:

What made D'n'D 3.5 widely acclaimed for having THE most realistic combat?