Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Robert Watkins <bob@**.NTU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 22:14:34 +0930
Falling damage is a hard thing to figure out.

But here's some examples:

Many people fall down in bathtubs, breaking hips, knocking heads, etc. This
is a typical one meter fall.

If you slip and fall over on, say, wet concrete (that's concrete with water
on it, not concrete still setting), you can easily break an arm, or knock
yourself out.

Your average person with Body of 3 also has a Threat Rating of one (or, in
the case of PCs, a Combat Pool of 3). With a one meter fall, your average
person is going to, on average, get a moderate wound, occasionally get a
serious wound, and very rarely die. If you make a house rule of giving 2
extra dice for falling damage, you will usually get off with a light wound,
for a fall of one meter. Which sounds about right, which is why I did
that.

--
Robert Watkins bob@**.ntu.edu.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
Finger me for my geek code
Message no. 2
From: "Bracket <la7hfw@*****.ucc.hull.ac.uk>"
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 14:00:54 +0100
Reply to: Discussion of the Fantasy game ShadowRun
<SHADOWRN@***.SURFNET.NL>

On Tue, 7 Mar 1995, Robert Watkins wrote:

> Falling damage is a hard thing to figure out.
>
> But here's some examples:
>
> Many people fall down in bathtubs, breaking hips, knocking heads, etc. This
> is a typical one meter fall.
>
> If you slip and fall over on, say, wet concrete (that's concrete with water
> on it, not concrete still setting), you can easily break an arm, or knock
> yourself out.
>
> Your average person with Body of 3 also has a Threat Rating of one (or, in
> the case of PCs, a Combat Pool of 3). With a one meter fall, your average
> person is going to, on average, get a moderate wound, occasionally get a
> serious wound, and very rarely die. If you make a house rule of giving 2
> extra dice for falling damage, you will usually get off with a light wound,
> for a fall of one meter. Which sounds about right, which is why I did
> that.

That seems more reasonable. Do you award the extra dice for all falls, or
just those that are willingly undertaken? I think it makes a great deal
of difference.

The majority of people who slip on concrete, break bones in the bath (or
whatever) are not expecting to fall. I've sprained an ancle falling off
someone giving me a piggy-back, quite some time ago.

A voluntary fall [ie controlled], however, is much more controlable.
People routinely fall more than a metre jumping off a walls and similar -
and 98% of the time there is no problem. Going prone in a hurry could
count as a fall of about 1 metre, but people do it routinel (at least in
RPGs). Highly trained people often fall much greater distances without
apparently damaging themselves.

So, how about this:
Involuntary falls count as Body+Threat+2 dice to resist (number of metres
fallen) D [as you suggest].

Voluntary falls of under 2 metres are free (ie no damage), larger falls
being resisted with Body+Threat+Athletics+2 to resist (number of metres
fallen) D.

That way, falling of a 10m building is painful (10D), but jumping out of
a ground floor window (or carefully lowering from a 2nd floor [1st for
US people - buildings are numbered ground,2,3 etc here]) will not damage
the person.

Any comments?

-----------------------------------
Bert the Bracket
H.F.Wolverson@***.hull.ac.uk
-----------------------------------
"Live and learn. Die and forget.
Unless you happen to be an
expert system" - Decker proverb
Message no. 3
From: Mike Ruane <Nethicus@***.COM>
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 13:40:25 -0500
About all this falling damage stuff....

Don't forget the combat pool can assist in resisting damage. & the karma
pool. Hell, I rarely use my combat pool so I'd be more than happy to burn it
for 3 seconds to avoid breaking a bone.

Anyone can come down wrong on an ankle. Look at all the sports injuries.
Hell, these guys are pros but they're always suffering from sprains,
dislocations, etc, even though Mr. Tight End is *expecting* to hit the ground
after he makes that catch.

Some people are made of glass. Some people are made of steel. I'm made of
latex so I just flop around.

Mike, TGC

(sorry about the two copies, H.F. Didn't mean to send it directly to you the
first time...)
Message no. 4
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 14:26:07 -0500
On Tue, 7 Mar 1995, Bracket <la7hfw@*****.ucc.hull.ac.uk> wrote:

> > Your average person with Body of 3 also has a Threat Rating of one (or, in
> > the case of PCs, a Combat Pool of 3). With a one meter fall, your average
> > person is going to, on average, get a moderate wound, occasionally get a
> > serious wound, and very rarely die. If you make a house rule of giving 2
> > extra dice for falling damage, you will usually get off with a light wound,
> > for a fall of one meter. Which sounds about right, which is why I did
> > that.

> That seems more reasonable. Do you award the extra dice for all falls, or
> just those that are willingly undertaken? I think it makes a great deal
> of difference.
>
> The majority of people who slip on concrete, break bones in the bath (or
> whatever) are not expecting to fall. I've sprained an ancle falling off
> someone giving me a piggy-back, quite some time ago.

[snip stuff about controlled versus uncontrolled falls and the
differentces in damage between them...]


There's really no need to jack around the system for falling
damage, with one minor exception, or rather, addition.

Remember that the character gets the opportunity to roll an
Athletics test with a target number equal to the number of meters
fallen. Each success reduces the power level of the fall by one. If you
include the additional rule that any power level reduced to zero in this
manner means no damage (as opposed to a minimum target number of 2 for most
attacks), then you have effectively added the concept of "controlled
falling" into the game. Even with no Athletics skill, one can still
default from Quickness. For a 1 meter fall, even someone with no
Athletics skill at all only needs to roll a single 5 on a Quickness test
to avoid damage. Sore butt and bruised pride, but no damage.
I have been using this rule in both campaigns I run, and it works
really well. Maybe that's what the original intent of allowing an
Athletics check was, but it is never explicitly stated in the rules.

Marc
Message no. 5
From: Damion Milliken <adm82@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 23:47:51 +1000
Marc A Renouf writes:

> Remember that the character gets the opportunity to roll an
> Athletics test with a target number equal to the number of meters
> fallen. Each success reduces the power level of the fall by one. If you
> include the additional rule that any power level reduced to zero in this
> manner means no damage (as opposed to a minimum target number of 2 for most
> attacks), then you have effectively added the concept of "controlled
> falling" into the game. Even with no Athletics skill, one can still
> default from Quickness. For a 1 meter fall, even someone with no
> Athletics skill at all only needs to roll a single 5 on a Quickness test
> to avoid damage. Sore butt and bruised pride, but no damage.
> I have been using this rule in both campaigns I run, and it works
> really well. Maybe that's what the original intent of allowing an
> Athletics check was, but it is never explicitly stated in the rules.

Ingenius idea Marc. I've never used the falling rules, but I have noticed
that they are a little skewiff. This might make them quite manageable.
What's more its simple and easy and still retains all the original rule.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong E-mail: adm82@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+@ H s++:-- !g p0 !au a18 w+ v(?) C++ US++>+++ P+ L !3
E? N K- W M@ !V po@ Y+ t+ 5 !j R+(++) G(+)('''') !tv(--@)
b++ D B? e+ u@ h* f+ !r n----(--)@ !y+
Message no. 6
From: Guy Swartwood <gswartwo@*********.WICHITAKS.ATTGIS.COM>
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 12:39:00 PDT
I don't remember seeing any discussion on this subject, so I will ask. I
finally got a look at FoF falling damage rules.

The paraphrase was that falling damage was D damage. The power was like 1/2
distance in meter / 10 (If I remember it right).

From what rules I remember, this falling damage supports Darwin's theory of
evolution, because the uncoordnated would die rather quickly. If you fell
over (tripped, whatever) you would receive 0D damage. You would be using
your bod to resist the damage. Children usually have 1 bod (AFAIK, and my
group debated this for a long time ourselves, we feel that this is correct).
If a child had 1 bod, that child would get to roll only 1 die (no pool).
Stagging is two successes, therefore they would die. Heck, mages with low
bods better not trip twice in a row.

My buds were explaining this rule to me and they researched all the books.
It is possible they could have missed something, but I doubt it (not from
these rules rapers). I also took a quick glance at the jumping rules and I
found two extremes. It was very easy to either not being able to jump up at
all (via formula they showed) or make Shaq/Jordon/insert your favorite high
jumping basketball player bad, really bad.

Any insight would be appreciated.

Guy Swartwood corporate decker by day, shadowrunner by night
wildman@******.net
gswartwo@*********.wichitaks.attgis.com
Message no. 7
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:24:27 +0200
>The paraphrase was that falling damage was D damage. The power was like 1/2
>distance in meter / 10 (If I remember it right).
>
>From what rules I remember, this falling damage supports Darwin's theory of
>evolution, because the uncoordnated would die rather quickly.

Exactly. That's why I modified it a bit...

Distance fallen (meters) Damage
up to 1 meter 1D6M
1 to 3 meters (1/2 distance)S
4+ meters (1/2 distance)D

So only if you fall 4 or more meters do you take Deadly damage. For falling
1 meter or less, the Power is a die roll, so it can vary from situation to
situation. The Rule of Six applies to this die roll, so you _can_ end up
taking 15M for falling off the curb :)

Anyway, the full house rules for this are in Project 3, available from my
home page.


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
she's just as bored as me
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 8
From: The Digital Mage <mn3rge@****.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 13:35:53 +0100
On Wed, 31 May 1995, Guy Swartwood wrote:

> I don't remember seeing any discussion on this subject, so I will ask. I
> finally got a look at FoF falling damage rules.
>
> The paraphrase was that falling damage was D damage. The power was like 1/2
> distance in meter / 10 (If I remember it right).
I will shortly be putting up my own modifications to the FoF rules (which
first appeared in Shadowtech under the Hydraulic Leg Jack). But basically
I have the damage category vary with the height fallen:

Fall< or = 3 metres is Light
Fall< or = 6 metres is Moderate
Fall< or = 9 metres is Serious
Fall< or = 18 metres is Deadly
Fall> 18 metres is Deadly +1 stage per 9 metres extra.

RE Jumping Rules in FoF
> found two extremes. It was very easy to either not being able to jump up at
> all (via formula they showed)
There was a typo in that paragraph, they put the HALF bit in fornt of the
wrong attribute (I can't be too specific as I don't have FoF with me).

> Any insight would be appreciated.
Along with falling damage I will also be putting up my jumping rules (pre
FoF) on my WWW site shortly.

The Digital Mage : mn3rge@****.ac.uk
Shadowrun Web Site under construction at
http://www.bath.ac.uk/~mn3rge/Shadowrun.html
Message no. 9
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.UMICH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 14:32:35 -0400
On Thu, 1 Jun 1995, Gurth wrote:

> >From what rules I remember, this falling damage supports Darwin's theory of
> >evolution, because the uncoordnated would die rather quickly.

> Exactly. That's why I modified it a bit...
>
> Distance fallen (meters) Damage
> up to 1 meter 1D6M
> 1 to 3 meters (1/2 distance)S
> 4+ meters (1/2 distance)D

This is totally unnecessary. Why add more rules to something
that's already taken care of. Read the rules for reducing falling damage
and you'll see what I mean. If (by your Athltics/Quickness/whatever you
default to) roll reduces the power level of the damage to 0 or less, you
take no damage. You hit the ground and roll or whatever. As you can
easily see by looking at the skill web, even a paltry athletics skill or
moderately high quickness will result in no damage from low falls.
Hence: don't fix what ain't broken.

Marc
Message no. 10
From: Guy Swartwood <gswartwo@*********.WICHITAKS.ATTGIS.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 1995 15:59:00 PDT
Mark wrote ---
>> >From what rules I remember, this falling damage supports Darwin's theory
of
>> >evolution, because the uncoordnated would die rather quickly.
>
>> Exactly. That's why I modified it a bit...
>>
>> Distance fallen (meters) Damage
>> up to 1 meter 1D6M
>> 1 to 3 meters (1/2 distance)S
>> 4+ meters (1/2 distance)D
>
> This is totally unnecessary. Why add more rules to something
>that's already taken care of. Read the rules for reducing falling damage
>and you'll see what I mean. If (by your Athltics/Quickness/whatever you
>default to) roll reduces the power level of the damage to 0 or less, you
>take no damage. You hit the ground and roll or whatever. As you can
>easily see by looking at the skill web, even a paltry athletics skill or
>moderately high quickness will result in no damage from low falls.
> Hence: don't fix what ain't broken.
>
>Marc
To some degree it does fix some of the rules, but in a case of low
quickness, low bod you will still die by the time you are 13, It is a GM
call on how you do it.

Guy Swartwood corporate decker by day, shadowrunner by night
wildman@******.net
gswartwo@*********.wichitaks.attgis.com
Message no. 11
From: Robert Watkins <bob@**.NTU.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 13:22:16 +0930
On the general falling rules debate... remember, some people DO break their
necks while tripping over their own shoelaces.

--
Robert Watkins bob@**.ntu.edu.au
Real Programmers never work 9 to 5. If any real programmers
are around at 9 am, it's because they were up all night.
*** Finger me for my geek code ***
Message no. 12
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 11:21:56 +0200
> This is totally unnecessary. Why add more rules to something
>that's already taken care of. Read the rules for reducing falling damage
>and you'll see what I mean. If (by your Athltics/Quickness/whatever you
>default to) roll reduces the power level of the damage to 0 or less, you
>take no damage. You hit the ground and roll or whatever. As you can
>easily see by looking at the skill web, even a paltry athletics skill or
>moderately high quickness will result in no damage from low falls.

Yes, well, no. You can make an Athletics test against a TN equal to the
number of meters you fall. Every success reduces the Power Level of the fall
by 1, but it doesn't mention that you don't take damage if it drops to or
below 0.

> Hence: don't fix what ain't broken.

Don't use what you don't like.


Gurth@******.nl - Gurth@***.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
she's just as bored as me
Geek Code v2.1: GS/AT/! -d+ H s:- !g p?(3) !au a>? w+(+++) v*(---) C+(++) U
P? !L !3 E? N++ K- W+ -po+(po) Y+ t(+) 5 !j R+(++)>+++$ tv+(++) b+@ D+(++)
B? e+ u+@ h! f--(?) !r(--)(*) n---->!n y? Unofficial Shadowrun Guru :)
Message no. 13
From: Gary Carroll <gary@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling damage
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 1995 09:18:36 -0700
>> This is totally unnecessary. Why add more rules to
>> something that's already taken care of. Read the rules for
>> reducing falling damage and you'll see what I mean. If (by
>> your Athltics/Quickness/whatever you default to) roll reduces
>> the power level of the damage to 0 or less, you take no damage.
>> You hit the ground and roll or whatever. As you can easily see
>> by looking at the skill web, even a paltry athletics skill or
>> moderately high quickness will result in no damage from low falls.
>Gurth:
>Yes, well, no. You can make an Athletics test against a TN equal
>to the number of meters you fall. Every success reduces the Power
>Level of the fall by 1, but it doesn't mention that you don't take
>damage if it drops to or below 0.
>> Hence: don't fix what ain't broken.
>Don't use what you don't like.

Why not jut run if it is below 1/2 your body in meters that it is only
stun damage.
i.e. body of (1)/2 = 1/2 > 0D = stun which means that you can only
fall and sprain your leg or hit your head and get knocked unconcious.
troll = body of (12)/2 = 6m or less is only stun damage 7m or more is
very painfull... *and remember this is for falling not for jumping*

Thanks
Gary C.
Geek Code v2.1: GCS/O d++(--) H>++ s-:>- g+(-) !p(1) au+>++
a-(?) w+(++/-) v(--/++) C++$ A++++/X++$/V++ P+++(-) L 3 N++(-)
E--- K- W+ M-(--) V-(--) -po+(po) Y+ t+ 5- !j R++(+) G(') tv b- D++(D)
B(!) e+>+++ u++(**) h f+(++) r n-(++) y?
Message no. 14
From: Marc A Renouf <jormung@*****.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 00:03:26 -0500 (EST)
On Wed, 24 Jan 1996, TopCat wrote:

> Don't know if any of you have checked out the falling rules for Shadowrun or
> not, but falling over an untied shoelace has a good chance of killing you.
[SNIP]
> Anyone out there use different falling rules?

I use the same rules, but I have added one little factor to
increase survivability from lower falls. As per the standard rules, you
are allowed an Athletics test with a target number equal to the number of
meters fallen. Each success takes 1 off the power level of the fall. My
added rule is that if you can reduce the power level to zero or lower,
you take no damage. Basically, you are able to hit the ground and roll
with it. Even if you don't have an Athletics skill, you can default from
Quickness at a +2 modifier.
That means that tripping (say a 2 meter fall) has a power level
of one. Even defaulting from Quickness, you only have to roll one
success to take no damage.
Generally, this doesn't help when you plummet from a forty-story
window (not much can help you then). When you jump down from one level to
another, however, you have a much higher chance of surviving or even
taking no damage. It makes sense, it's reasonable, and it's easy to
remember.

Marc
Message no. 15
From: "Steven A. Tinner" <bluewizard@*****.COM>
Subject: Falling Damage?
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 23:49:46 -0500
Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in SR???

My PC took a fall from 50 meters (He's a physad with Freefall 10) and I
couldn't figure out how much damage he took.

In fact, neither Bull or the GM could either.

Anyone got a page number for this? We wound up using the rules for
pedestrian/vehicle crashes in R2, but that seemed a little off ...

Thanks.

Steven A. Tinner
bluewizard@*****.com
http://www.ncweb.com/users/bluewizard
"Can you summon wizards, demon?"
Message no. 16
From: Duncan McNeill-Burton <dmcneill@************.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 23:54:01 -0500
Tinner didst querry unto the List:
>Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in SR???
>

They're in FoF on p76. The damage is Deadly, and the Power Level is half
the number of meters fallen. The PL can be reduced with an Athletics test
with a TN of the distance fallen. Each success knocks the PL down by one.

Later-
Duncan McNeill-Burton
-Berek Thunderfist, Wolf Lord of the Blackmane Company
-Freelance Corporate Espionage Agent
-Tech Priest in Training
http://attila.stevens-tech.edu/~dmcneill
"Your eyes shiver and you grit your teeth,
you've sold your soul, now cold blood's how you get relief."
-Ice T
Message no. 17
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 1997 22:00:52 -0700
At 23:49 11/8/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in SR???
>
>My PC took a fall from 50 meters (He's a physad with Freefall 10) and I
>couldn't figure out how much damage he took.

Page 76, FoF, has falling damage rules.

-Adam

-
http://shadowrun.home.ml.org \ TSS Productions \ The Shadowrun Supplemental
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ WildAngle@******** \ fro@***.ab.ca
From The Jury's Bench: http://www.interware.it/shadowrun/jurybench
Message no. 18
From: "Logan Graves <Fenris>" <logan1@*****.INTERCOM.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 00:07:17 -0500
In our last episode, Steven A. Tinner wrote:
>
> Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in SR???
>
> My PC took a fall from 50 meters (He's a physad with Freefall 10) and I
> couldn't figure out how much damage he took.
>

Sure it's there. Ya just got to know where to look. It's in the
Shadowtech Sourcebook, on the page with the Hydraulic Jacks. (It's also
on the Big Knobi Klub's "Engineers' Fun Page" <plug!>) Both of which
state that:

Fall Damage = "[.5 x meters fallen] D"

Maybe *that* oversite outta go on the SR3 Wishlist...
--Fenris
_______________________________________________logan1@*****.intercom.net
(>) If you don't like your job, you don't strike.
You just go in every day and do it *really*
half-assed. -- That's the American way!
(>) --H. Simpson
Message no. 19
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 11:24:15 +0100
Steven A. Tinner said on 23:49/ 8 Nov 97...

> Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in SR???
>
> My PC took a fall from 50 meters (He's a physad with Freefall 10) and I
> couldn't figure out how much damage he took.

That's in Fields of Fire, page 76. In short, divide the distance by 2 and
use that as the Power Level; the Damage Level is always D.

Now for my house rule, since with the BTB rule hardly anybody would
survive falling down the stairs:

Distance fallen Damage
up to 1 meter (1D6)M
1 to 3 meters 2S
4 or more meters (1/2 distance)D

Someone falling to the ground from a standing position would take (1D6)M
damage, except if he or she has Unarmed Combat skill (which usually means
you know how to fall without hurting yourself).
If you jump out of a first-story (sorry, second story to Americans :)
window the damage is S, which is also survivable to people with a low
Body.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Would it make you feel much better, if it was you against the world?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 20
From: Mon goose <landsquid@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 1997 15:20:27 PST
>> Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in
SR???
>>
>> My PC took a fall from 50 meters (He's a physad with Freefall 10) and
I
>> couldn't figure out how much damage he took.
<snipped how theyhandled it using vehicle collision>

>
>That's in Fields of Fire, page 76. In short, divide the distance by 2
and use that as the Power Level; the Damage Level is always D.
>
>Now for my house rule, since with the BTB rule hardly anybody would
>survive falling down the stairs:
>
>Distance fallen Damage
>up to 1 meter (1D6)M
>1 to 3 meters 2S
>4 or more meters (1/2 distance)D
>
>Someone falling to the ground from a standing position would take
(1D6)M damage, except if he or she has Unarmed Combat skill (which
usually means you know how to fall without hurting yourself).

So when you suffer knockdown, you can take MORE damage? Does impact
stil count? If yes, then its no biggy.

>If you jump out of a first-story (sorry, second story to Americans :)
>window the damage is 2S, which is also survivable to people with a low
Body.
>

If you JUMP, isn't there a chance you will take no damage, if you
land right? 2s is pretty trivial for tough folks, but what about 6 year
old gymnasts?

I like the idea of using the vehicle collision speed table annd speed
as power. I'd say the ground usually is as hard as a vehicle, so damage
is raised one level. If its quite soft, or water, keep the base damage.
Now if I could only remember the formula for speed vs distance
fallen.Knockdown speed would, IMHO, depend on the force what knocked
youdown- say half the TN of the KD test.


Mongoose / Technological progress is like an ax in the hands
of a psychotic - Einstein

get sucked into -The Vortex- Chicago's shadowland BBS
http://www.concentric.net/~evamarie/srmain.htm


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 21
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 11:38:53 +0100
Mon goose said on 15:20/ 9 Nov 97...

> >Someone falling to the ground from a standing position would take
> >(1D6)M damage, except if he or she has Unarmed Combat skill (which
> >usually means you know how to fall without hurting yourself).
>
> So when you suffer knockdown, you can take MORE damage?

Yes, to represent that you can land quite badly if you're sudenly thrown
to the ground.

> Does impact stil count? If yes, then its no biggy.

Impact armor counts, just like per the rules in FoF. Falling such a short
distance is "no biggy," most of the time, no.

> >If you jump out of a first-story (sorry, second story to Americans :)
> >window the damage is 2S, which is also survivable to people with a low
> >Body.
>
> If you JUMP, isn't there a chance you will take no damage, if you
> land right?

Which is represented by the Body test to resist the damage, isn't it? If
you want to add in some skill in landing right, I'd say use an Athletics
test; if it succeeds, you take no damage from landing at all -- you end up
on your feet and in a good enough state to walk away. Fail the
Athletics test and you have to resist damage.

> 2s is pretty trivial for tough folks, but what about 6 year
> old gymnasts?

Using the Athletics test, they can land perfectly...

> I like the idea of using the vehicle collision speed table annd speed
> as power. I'd say the ground usually is as hard as a vehicle, so damage
> is raised one level. If its quite soft, or water, keep the base damage.
> Now if I could only remember the formula for speed vs distance
> fallen.Knockdown speed would, IMHO, depend on the force what knocked
> youdown- say half the TN of the KD test.
>
>
> Mongoose / Technological progress is like an ax in the hands
> of a psychotic - Einstein
>
> get sucked into -The Vortex- Chicago's shadowland BBS
> http://www.concentric.net/~evamarie/srmain.htm
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
So what if we're making a scene now?
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 22
From: Mike Bobroff <AirWisp@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 1997 09:15:04 -0500
In a message dated 97-11-08 23:49:36 EST, you write:

> Am I missing something, or are there NO rules for falling damage in SR???
>
> My PC took a fall from 50 meters (He's a physad with Freefall 10) and I
> couldn't figure out how much damage he took.
>
> In fact, neither Bull or the GM could either.
>
> Anyone got a page number for this? We wound up using the rules for
> pedestrian/vehicle crashes in R2, but that seemed a little off ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Steven A. Tinner

Steve, in Fields of Fire, they mention the rules for falling damage ... and
it is (# of meters)D ... and there are other things associated with it ...

Mike
Message no. 23
From: "J. Keith Henry" <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage?
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 18:17:03 -0500
In a message dated 97-11-09 00:16:35 EST, bluewizard@*****.COM writes:

>
> Anyone got a page number for this? We wound up using the rules for
> pedestrian/vehicle crashes in R2, but that seemed a little off ...
>
Falling Damage is under the "Hydraulic Jacks" of Shadowtech, page 43...

I know, someone else probably answered it, but I'm a few days behind.

-K
Message no. 24
From: HAUPT ULRICH FB08 <sandman@****.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 14:34:19 MEZ-1MESZ
Hi!

I've thought about a better way to calculate the damage by falling. I
know there are some house rules but none of them satisfied me. So I
have developed three slightly different systems and want to ask you
about your opinion. Maybe you have better system than mine so please
let me know.

1st method
Simply apply damage using the following table

Distance in Meters Damage

1 2L
2 3M
3 4M
4 5S
5 6S
6-10 6-10 T
11+ (6+m)/2 T


2nd method
This is a mixture of the first and the third method. The ground
attacks with a skill of 6. The target number is 4. The damage code is
as follows:

Distance in Meters Damage

1 2L
2 3L
3 4M
4 5M
5 6M
X XM
(maybe less at hights over 10 meters)

This counts for stoney floor like non-asphalted streets. For granite
you could add 2 points to skill or 4+ for the spiked pit. To simulate
soft ground you can reduce the skill (skill of two for the great
trash can everyone knows from the movies).


3rd method
The damage results as an attack from the ground. The ground has a
damage code of (hight)M and a "skill" equal to the hight. The target
number is determined by the consistence of the floor.

kind of TN
water 6
mud 5
farmland 4
stoney earth 3
stones, asphalt 2

Additional covering of the ground could be done by lowering or
increasing the damage level of the damage code (3T for the spiked
3 meter pit) (hi Spike - are you down there ;-) )



I sympathise with the last one for its simplyness and variability.
The second one could be worked out more realistic but in my opinion
it's to complicate and unpractically for game play.

Any comments ?

Sandman
Message no. 25
From: Craig J Wilhelm Jr <craigjwjr@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 08:57:44 -0400
>3rd method
>The damage results as an attack from the ground. The ground has a
>damage code of (hight)M and a "skill" equal to the hight. The target
>number is determined by the consistence of the floor.
>
>kind
of                  
TN
>water                      
6
>mud                        =
5
>farmland                 
4
>stoney earth            3
>stones, asphalt        2

I actually think I'll use this method, I'm pretty dissapointed by the FoF
rules. However, I think I'll change the damage code to L.


Craig "Knee Deep in the Blood of Swine" Wilhelm

Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
UIN: 1864690
-------------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
v3.12
GAT/$ d- s+:+ a- C+++ U--- P+ L- E-- W++ N++
o K- w+ O> !M-- !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5+++
X-- R++ tv b++ DI-- D+(Q2++) G++ e++ h* r y++**
--------------END GEEK CODE BLOCK--------------
Message no. 26
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:42:35 -0400
At 02:34 PM 4/6/98 MEZ-1MESZ, you wrote:
>Hi!
>
>I've thought about a better way to calculate the damage by falling.


Wouldn't just rolling the dice be better? I mean...less bruises and all....



Nigel
Message no. 27
From: Paul Yan <bushidoboy@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 08:08:12 -0700
---Craig J Wilhelm Jr <craigjwjr@*********.NET>
wrote:
> >3rd method
> >The damage results as an attack from the
ground. The ground has a
> >damage code of (hight)M and a "skill" equal
to the hight. The target
> >number is determined by the consistence of
the floor.
> >
> >kind
of                  
TN
>
>water                      
6
>
>mud                        
5
>
>farmland                 
4
> >stoney earth            3
> >stones, asphalt        2
>
> I actually think I'll use this method, I'm
pretty dissapointed by the FoF
> rules. However, I think I'll change the damage
code to L.
>

If the height is the skill rating, and as
well as the damage code, and the target number
is based on the floor consistancy, then a
asphalt floor and a fall 10 feet is equal to 10M
(or L, which ever you prefer) with a target
number of 2???
Shouldn't here be a group stage instead?
For every 10-20 feet, a rise in the damage code
and a bonus to the TN. That way, a fall of only
10-20 feet can't be that deadly, when the player
wishes to drop to a landing underneath them.


===
-Paul H. Yan a.k.a. Bushidoboy@**********.com/
======={=================="

Cleanliness is next to impossible.
-- O'Reilly's law of the kitchen


_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 28
From: Ulrich Haupt <sandman@****.UNI-OLDENBURG.DE>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 18:16:42 +0100
> Shouldn't here be a group stage instead?
> For every 10-20 feet, a rise in the damage code
> and a bonus to the TN. That way, a fall of only
> 10-20 feet can't be that deadly, when the player
> wishes to drop to a landing underneath them.

I should point out two things:

1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!

2. This rule are concerned for unwillingly uncontrolled
falling. Jumping down should end in less damage if any. Of course
(IMO) you can jump 2 meters / 6-7 feet without harming yourself!


Sandman
Message no. 29
From: Spider Murphy <crickel@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 15:49:41 -0500
Woo hoo! A falling damage table that doesn't result in 1 body mages
tripping over a stick and killing themselves because they can't resist
1D!

OTOH... what about jumping? Do you get to add an Athletics test anywhere?

Spider Murphy
Message no. 30
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 14:59:19 -0600
At 18:16 06/04/98 +0100, you wrote:

>1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
> I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
> be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!

SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.

>2. This rule are concerned for unwillingly uncontrolled
> falling. Jumping down should end in less damage if any. Of course
> (IMO) you can jump 2 meters / 6-7 feet without harming yourself!

Easily that many. I would hazard a guess that a normal male could jump
down 15 feet and absorb most of the shock properly, with a few seconds to
prepare.

-Adam J
-
http://www.interware.it/users/adamj \ fro@***.ab.ca \ ICQ# 2350330
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ FreeRPG Webring \ TSS Productions
The Shadowrun Supplemental \ SR Archive Co-Maintainer \ RPGA Reviwer
Message no. 31
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 09:29:50 +1000
> >1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
> > I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
> > be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!
>
> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.

Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)

Lady Jestyr

- I'm in touch with my Inner Klingon... -
| Elle Holmes | jestyr@**********.com | http://jestyr.home.ml.org |
| Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster | GeoCities Leader | RPGA Reviewer |
Message no. 32
From: Wyrmy The powerful <elfman@*****.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 18:36:01 -0500
> Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
I say feet are more logical.It is after-all, the length of a mans
foot.Whats not logical about that ?:^)
>
> - I'm in touch with my Inner Klingon... -
I am intouch with my inner Romulan,and now I will fight you,and Die
patheticaly at your hands:)!
--
If you are a dreamer come in,
If you are a dreeamer, a wisher,
A liar, a magic jelly bean buyer,
Come In!
-What should be the motto of all internet users.
Message no. 33
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 09:47:12 +1000
> > Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> > rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>
> I say feet are more logical.It is after-all, the length of a mans
> foot.Whats not logical about that ?:^)

*cough* I'll assume you're joking here. :) Anyway, just ask the
scientists which is the S.I. unit for length. :)

> >
> > - I'm in touch with my Inner Klingon... -
>
> I am intouch with my inner Romulan,and now I will fight you,and Die
> patheticaly at your hands:)!

*rofl*

Lady Jestyr

- I'm in touch with my Inner Klingon... -
| Elle Holmes | jestyr@**********.com | http://jestyr.home.ml.org |
| Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster | GeoCities Leader | RPGA Reviewer |
Message no. 34
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 09:51:12 +1000
Lady Jestyr writes:
>> >1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
>> > I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
>> > be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!
>>
>> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.
>
>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)


Well, the cubit was more logical than the foot. It's a lot more convenient
to measure with your forearms than your feet. Try measuring a line on a wall
with your feet one day!

And what's logical about the meter? The current defination is as arbitary
_now_ as the foot is(both are based on historical units of measure). Sure,
at _one_ time it was defined as a millionth of the distance from the North
Pole to the Equator, or whatever, but it was never accurate as that, anyway.
:)
Message no. 35
From: Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 23:35:02 EDT
In a message dated 4/6/98 6:30:27 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU writes:

> Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>
> Lady Jestyr
>
Hey now, not all North Americans are so inflexible. I -LIKE- my
metric/english conversions calculator.

-K
Message no. 36
From: The Vagabond <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 20:52:32 PDT
>Easily that many. I would hazard a guess that a normal male could jump
>down 15 feet and absorb most of the shock properly, with a few seconds
to
>prepare.

I agree, but not without rolling an Athletics(they can have a
concentration on Falling) skill. When an Airborne soldier makes a
landing with a parachute, the impact is roughly like that of falling off
a wall 8 feet high, and many have broken ankles, knees, or hips from not
doing it right. It takes training to do it right, and if you frag up
you get hurt. That should be reflected somehow in game mechanics.

-Vagabond <nomad74@*******.com> <ICQ 4297972>
___________________________________________________________
"Sure, there's an order to the universe, but this time I
think the Big Guy forgot the pepperoni."
-Liam Bough


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 37
From: The Vagabond <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 21:28:16 PDT
>> >1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
>> > I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
>> > be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!
>>
>> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.
>
>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)

Adam, if I may?
I believe Mr. Jury was saying it was annoying because his
country(Canada) uses the metric system. America is the only country up
this way that doesn't. Although that's supposed to be changing
gradually over the next many years.
Canada and Mexico both use the metric system.



-Vagabond <nomad74@*******.com> <ICQ 4297972>
___________________________________________________________
"Sure, there's an order to the universe, but this time I
think the Big Guy forgot the pepperoni."
-Liam Bough


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 38
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 23:27:36 -0500
> Adam, if I may?
> I believe Mr. Jury was saying it was annoying because his
> country(Canada) uses the metric system. America is the only country up
> this way that doesn't. Although that's supposed to be changing
> gradually over the next many years.
> Canada and Mexico both use the metric system.

Of course, they've been saying we'll slowly switch over to the metric system
since before I was born, and I never learned anything but English Standard.

***************
Rev. Mark Hall, Bardagh
aka Pope Nexx Many-Scars
************
Yet, I'm also a man who's constantly strivin' for a perfection I'll never
achieve... and probably wouldn't even recognize it if I did.
-Logan, in issue 124 of "Wolverine"
***********
Am Moireach Mor!
Message no. 39
From: Adam J <fro@***.AB.CA>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 01:21:19 -0600
At 21:28 06/04/98 PDT, you wrote:
>>> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.
>>
>>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
>>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)

Elle, don't give me any lip, or I'll, I'll, I'll.. ummm.. yeah.. :)

> Adam, if I may?
> I believe Mr. Jury was saying it was annoying because his
>country(Canada) uses the metric system. America is the only country up
>this way that doesn't. Although that's supposed to be changing
>gradually over the next many years.

You may..but you're wrong.

I just don't think in metres. Even though it's the official unit of
measure and stuff here, I prefer inches/feet, and, oddly enough,
kilometres. :)

-Adam J
-
http://www.interware.it/users/adamj \ fro@***.ab.ca \ ICQ# 2350330
ShadowRN Assistant Fearless Leader \ FreeRPG Webring \ TSS Productions
The Shadowrun Supplemental \ SR Archive Co-Maintainer \ RPGA Reviwer
Message no. 40
From: The Vagabond <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 02:06:21 PDT
>I just don't think in metres. Even though it's the official unit of
>measure and stuff here, I prefer inches/feet, and, oddly enough,
>kilometres. :)

Nope, looks like I was right. Since Americans use the mile.
Kilometers are part of the metric system. :P



-Vagabond <nomad74@*******.com> <ICQ 4297972>
___________________________________________________________
"Sure, there's an order to the universe, but this time I
think the Big Guy forgot the pepperoni."
-Liam Bough


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 41
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 14:50:30 +0100
Lady Jestyr said on 9:29/ 7 Apr 98...

> Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)

So why do you still think of people as "X feet Y inches" tall? :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
You're listening to ME now?
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 42
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 14:50:30 +0100
Wyrmy The powerful said on 18:36/ 6 Apr 98...

> I say feet are more logical.It is after-all, the length of a mans
> foot.Whats not logical about that ?:^)

I don't know about yours, but MY feet are not even close to 30.48 cm
long...

My principal irritation with the English system of measurements are all
the varying multipliers. One foot is 12 inches, but there are only 3 feet
in a yard. And how many yards in a mile? And so on. At least with the
metric system, all you do is multiply by 10 a couple of times and you're
where you want to be.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
You're listening to ME now?
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 43
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 14:50:30 +0100
Adam J said on 14:59/ 6 Apr 98...

> >1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
> > I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
> > be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!
>
> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.

No, what's damn annoying is the tendency in recent sourcebooks to use
those &@$^#% imperial measurements in the fictional parts. Luckily not in
the rules (yet), else we'd probably end up with a mess of CP2020-like
proportions.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
You're listening to ME now?
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 44
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 11:00:39 -0400
At 09:29 AM 4/7/98 +1000, you wrote:
>> >1. I must must admit that I didn't think flexible enough!
>> > I live in Germany and when I wrote hight I assumed it to
>> > be measured in METERS not in feet. Sorry for that!
>>
>> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.
>
>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>





Ain't our fault that the rest of the world sucks and just does not do
anything correctly.


Nigel
Message no. 45
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 11:15:41 -0400
>>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
>>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>
> Adam, if I may?
> I believe Mr. Jury was saying it was annoying because his
>country(Canada) uses the metric system. America is the only country up
>this way that doesn't. Although that's supposed to be changing
>gradually over the next many years.
> Canada and Mexico both use the metric system.
>
>


**sound of a rocker creaking***


Listen kiddies...the metric system ain't gonna hit the US...thats
right...lemme tell ya why. A few years back, they tried...they tried
teachin' it in the schools and tried changin' stuff. It created
confusion..so they stopped...base line is....NO good fer honest american is
gonna wanna do stuff the same was as those heathen ferriners. Gaddangit, we
busted hump to get freedom frem them brits an' wha' not, we does stuff
-our- way....mainly cause we is the best...ya get it???


Nigel..
Message no. 46
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 11:17:45 -0500
On 7 Apr 98 at 11:00, Chris Lubrecht wrote:

> Ain't our fault that the rest of the world sucks and just does not
> do anything correctly.

Perfectly well spoken by a publically educated, untraveled American.
No wonder they hate us...


--

-----------------------------------------------------------------
- DREKHEAD - |"Let's face it. Sometimes your a
- drekhead@***.net - | pigeon, and sometimes your the
*-ShadowRN - GridSec Division-* | statue."
"To Protect and To Serve" |-Unknown
=================================================================
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
Message no. 47
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 11:39:24 -0400
Vagabond wrote:
>>> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.
>>
>>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
>>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>
> Adam, if I may?
> I believe Mr. Jury was saying it was annoying because his
>country(Canada) uses the metric system. America is the only country up
>this way that doesn't. Although that's supposed to be changing
>gradually over the next many years.

Well, as a country, officially, Canada is metric. However, those
people who grew up on Imperial tend to stick with it. I have no
idea how many wet ounces in a quart (and how many dry ounces it
weighs!), but 1 liter of water massing 1 kilo is trivial.

> Canada and Mexico both use the metric system.

Well, to be fair, the Americans do use some metric - their dollar
is divided into 100 cents whereas the Canadian dollar is divided
into 70.53 cents. :-)

James Ojaste
Message no. 48
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 16:48:16 +0100
And verily, did Wyrmy The powerful hastily scribble thusly...
|
|> Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
|> rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)

|I say feet are more logical.It is after-all, the length of a mans
|foot.Whats not logical about that ?:^)

Couldn't agree more....
Imperial measurements forever....
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 49
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 12:45:43 -0400
At 11:17 AM 4/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
>On 7 Apr 98 at 11:00, Chris Lubrecht wrote:
>
>> Ain't our fault that the rest of the world sucks and just does not
>> do anything correctly.
>
>Perfectly well spoken by a publically educated, untraveled American.
>No wonder they hate us...


Actually quite well traveld thank you..(Denmark, Germany, England,
Mexico...plus diffrent places within the US). Oh wait..I'm not done. I also
have three diffrent degrees..a BA in Theater, A BS in English and a M.Ed in
...gasp..Education...guess that would have made me a public school teacher
at one time in my life.


I just don't take well to people bashing on my country, and find no need to
suck up to the European view on things.


Now..take a lesson son. The phrasing, spelling and word choice of my
statement makes it a joke....

...or do I need to coat it in ":) :) :) :) :) :) :) " for you to understand?


Nigel
Message no. 50
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 13:50:37 -0500
On 7 Apr 98 at 12:45, Chris Lubrecht wrote:

> I just don't take well to people bashing on my country, and find no
> need to suck up to the European view on things.

There was no bashing going on. Legitimate complaints, yes.
Criticisms. Yes. Bashing? No. And it was always lighthearted. Get a
grip.

> Now..take a lesson son. The phrasing, spelling and word choice of my
> statement makes it a joke....
> ...or do I need to coat it in ":) :) :) :) :) :) :) " for you to
> understand?

Unless someone knows you, they are not familiar with your writing
style. That is why it is common netiquette (and generally observed on
this list) to use smileys to indicate sarcasmism. Otherwise, your
intent can be misconstrued.

It was such a misunderstanding of your message that illicited the
response I gave. Without the smiley's, it was simply an asinine
thing to say.

So ka?

--

-----------------------------------------------------------------
- DREKHEAD - |"Let's face it. Sometimes your a
- drekhead@***.net - | pigeon, and sometimes your the
*-ShadowRN - GridSec Division-* | statue."
"To Protect and To Serve" |-Unknown
=================================================================
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
Message no. 51
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 14:39:30 -0400
At 01:50 PM 4/7/98 -0500, you wrote:
>On 7 Apr 98 at 12:45, Chris Lubrecht wrote:
>
>> I just don't take well to people bashing on my country, and find no
>> need to suck up to the European view on things.
>
>There was no bashing going on. Legitimate complaints, yes.
>Criticisms. Yes. Bashing? No. And it was always lighthearted. Get a
>grip.


Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.

>
>> Now..take a lesson son. The phrasing, spelling and word choice of my
>> statement makes it a joke....
>> ...or do I need to coat it in ":) :) :) :) :) :) :) " for you to
>> understand?
>
>Unless someone knows you, they are not familiar with your writing
>style. That is why it is common netiquette (and generally observed on
>this list) to use smileys to indicate sarcasmism. Otherwise, your
>intent can be misconstrued.


Wrong. Common netiquette says nothing about me useing smilies. You jumped
to a conclusion son. I used enough clues in that small fragment to show it
to be a joke...not to mention that it was such an asinine thing to say,
that I would probably not be on the list if I had ment it truthfully.


>
>It was such a misunderstanding of your message that illicited the
>response I gave.


I can understand misunderstandings...but a more careful reading, and some
thought, would have prevented such.


Without the smiley's, it was simply an asinine
>thing to say.
>
>So ka?


Wrong again. Without a more careful reading, it was a stupid way to judge
the statement. Kids today..you want everything quick..sheesh.
Message no. 52
From: Jeremiah Stevens <jeremiah@********.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 14:44:15 -0400
>
> Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
> libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
> from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.

Better dead than metric? It just doesn't have that ring to it...
Message no. 53
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 15:09:17 -0400
Chris Lubrecht wrote:
>>> I just don't take well to people bashing on my country, and find no
>>> need to suck up to the European view on things.
>>There was no bashing going on. Legitimate complaints, yes.
>[snip]
>Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
>libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
>from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.

Bashing = poking? All of a sudden, "gay-bashing" takes on a whole
new meaning. :-)

>>> Now..take a lesson son. The phrasing, spelling and word choice of my
>>> statement makes it a joke....
[snip]
>>Unless someone knows you, they are not familiar with your writing
>>style. That is why it is common netiquette (and generally observed on
>this list) to use smileys to indicate sarcasmism.
>[snip]
>Wrong. Common netiquette says nothing about me useing smilies. You jumped
>to a conclusion son. I used enough clues in that small fragment to show it
>to be a joke...not to mention that it was such an asinine thing to say,
>that I would probably not be on the list if I had ment it truthfully.

Sorry, but I didn't catch that either - I realize that I speak up
infrequently enough on this list to insert liberal emoticons or
else many would probably get pissed pretty quickly. As to "asinine",
your comment was not a poor fit with what many people think of when
they think of Americans (ick that's a messy sentence, but it's hard
not to piss people off on subjects like these).

Many people see Americans as very...patriotic. As in, "We're the
best country in the world and we've got the nukes to prove it!".
The stereotypical American isn't very cultured or appreciate the
cultures and customs of other countries. So I (not knowing you or
your opinions on the subject) took your statement at face value.
Sorry.
>
>>It was such a misunderstanding of your message that illicited the
>>response I gave.
>
>I can understand misunderstandings...but a more careful reading, and some
>thought, would have prevented such.

I for one resent that. One data point does not a conclusion provide.
>
> Without the smiley's, it was simply an asinine
>>thing to say.
>>
>>So ka?
>
>Wrong again. Without a more careful reading, it was a stupid way to judge
>the statement. Kids today..you want everything quick..sheesh.

I, for one, was brought up in a culture where quick was God. Fast-
food, flickering commercials, microwaves.

I have taken a profession where speed is incredibly important - nobody
will accept a word-processor that can only handle one keystroke a
second.

For safety's sake, why not just assume that we're all morons and
include a smiley or two, okay? :-)

James Ojaste
Message no. 54
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 15:02:13 -0400
At 02:39 PM 4/7/98 -0400, you wrote:

>>There was no bashing going on. Legitimate complaints, yes.
>>Criticisms. Yes. Bashing? No. And it was always lighthearted. Get a
>>grip.
>
>
>Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
>libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
>from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.

Great. I'm a Republican and a patriot. What does that say?

And being a patriot doesn't mean country right or wrong. There are a lot
of things wrong with this country that needs to be fixed. Admitting that
doesn't make me less of a patriot than you.

Is constructive criticism bashing? No. Part of the problem with both
political parties, and indeed, people and governments across the globe get
so stuck with their rigid patriotism they can't accept constructive
criticism; to some that's tantamount to treason.

>>Unless someone knows you, they are not familiar with your writing
>>style. That is why it is common netiquette (and generally observed on
>>this list) to use smileys to indicate sarcasmism. Otherwise, your
>>intent can be misconstrued.
>
>Wrong. Common netiquette says nothing about me useing smilies. You jumped
>to a conclusion son. I used enough clues in that small fragment to show it
>to be a joke...not to mention that it was such an asinine thing to say,
>that I would probably not be on the list if I had ment it truthfully.

It may or may not be common or proper or official netequette. But you have
to remember there is exactly zero context for intent or meaning in mere
typed words. Yes, some of that can be inferred from word selection, but
not a lot of people are going to catch subtlties like that. When dealing
with the Internet, it's sometimes better to use the big broad strokes of
the pen that emoticons allow. That way you *know* you won't be misunderstood.

>Wrong again. Without a more careful reading, it was a stupid way to judge
>the statement. Kids today..you want everything quick..sheesh.

Without a more careful reading...you realize of course, that you are guilty
of that as well? As we all are sometimes?

But Drekhead is right. Some people can get away with writing like you do,
because their audience knows exactly what they are getting into. RL
example: Don Rickles. If you don't know going in that you are paying to
have the man insult you in ways you didn't think possible, you would be
horrified. But his audience knows what they are looking for.

Same sort of thing here. Your condescending attitude (what's this "Kids
today" crap? Take that crap out of here, it has no place.) could very well
just be an act and if we only read between the lines and analyzed your
posts, we could see what you are really saying.

But we don't know you. Most of us simply don't have the time to analyze
each and every e-mail spewed out of this list. We simply can't notice all
the subtlties of your postings. And so without broad based signals like
emoticons, we're bound to misunderstand you.

If you hate emoticons, simply drop a "just kidding" or two in. Or be so
incredibly selective about your word choice there is simply no way you can
be misunderstood.

It's the realities of the modern Internet. Deal with it, or leave us
"kids" to our own devices.

Erik J.

Some of us find the "kids" thing rather insulting, since we are long past
puberty and college ourselves...
Message no. 55
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 13:34:50 -0600
Ojaste,James [NCR] wrote:
/
/ For safety's sake, why not just assume that we're all morons and
/ include a smiley or two, okay? :-)

I am not a fraggin moron. I'm just drawn that way. ;)

In all seriousness, adding emoticons in some form are advised.
Otherwise it's like doing a high wire act without a net. See what
happens when you fall? :)

If you don't like smileys then use <grin>s or HTML <friendly
sarcasm></friendly sarcasm> or clearly state that you're "just
kidding" whenever you make a broad critical statement in jest.

Like James said, assume everyone reading your email is a moron. And
assume every email you read is written by a nice person <g>.

-David
--
"Hold a true friend with both hands."
- Nigerian Proverb
--
ShadowRN GridSec
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 56
From: Chris Lubrecht <lubrecht@***.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 16:27:24 -0400
At 02:44 PM 4/7/98 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>> Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
>> libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
>> from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.
>
>Better dead than metric? It just doesn't have that ring to it...


Ahhh but it is the feeling behind it :)



Hoo rah
>
>
Message no. 57
From: The Vagabond <nomad74@*******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 14:42:02 PDT
>Well, to be fair, the Americans do use some metric - their dollar
>is divided into 100 cents whereas the Canadian dollar is divided
>into 70.53 cents. :-)

Canadian dollar? I thought they used beer as currencey? <g>
Not that is a bad thing, mind you...


-Vagabond <nomad74@*******.com> <ICQ 4297972>
___________________________________________________________
"Sure, there's an order to the universe, but this time I
think the Big Guy forgot the pepperoni."
-Liam Bough


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Message no. 58
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 23:35:00 +0100
And verily, did Chris Lubrecht hastily scribble thusly...
|Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
|libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
|from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.

I suggest you tone down your opinions a bit then.
A lot of us like poking fun at america...

|Wrong again. Without a more careful reading, it was a stupid way to judge
|the statement. Kids today..you want everything quick..sheesh.

Kids? HA!
I thought it was pretty assanine, and I am far from a 'kid'.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 59
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 23:44:19 +0100
And verily, did Erik Jameson hastily scribble thusly...
|Some of us find the "kids" thing rather insulting, since we are long past
|puberty and college ourselves...


Y'can say that again...
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 60
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 08:51:26 +1000
Chris Lubrecht writes:
>Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry, I'm not
>libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if someone
>from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.


Chris, if you can't handle someone pointing out that the decision of the
people of the USA (in deference to the Canadians, I won't say American) to
not adopt the metric system, but instead put up with a system like the
Imperial _English_ measurement system, then you'll _really_ have trouble
when it comes to decisions that the USA makes that actually have a bit of
logic behind them that we bash, too (not that there are many of those...).

To put it bluntly, the IE system is a load of antiquated historical crap.
And the US itself uses metric for real work, like scientific analysis. How
many feet in a light-year? And how many moles of iron are there in a ounce
(Troy ounce, of course). And which weighs more, a pound of feathers or a
pound of gold?

Tell me, would you have a problem when I use my fake Southern drawl for
roleplaying NPC "good ol' boys"?

>>Unless someone knows you, they are not familiar with your writing
>>style. That is why it is common netiquette (and generally observed on
>>this list) to use smileys to indicate sarcasmism. Otherwise, your
>>intent can be misconstrued.
>
>
>Wrong. Common netiquette says nothing about me useing smilies. You jumped
>to a conclusion son. I used enough clues in that small fragment to show it
>to be a joke...not to mention that it was such an asinine thing to say,
>that I would probably not be on the list if I had ment it truthfully.


Common netiquette says that if you do not put in visual, _obvious_ clues
(such as emoticons), then it is _your_ fault that it is misinterpreted. It's
hard to read sarcasm in person, sometimes, let alone without the
body-language and tonal clues. If you don't use emoticons, such as smilies,
then you are likely to be miscontrued.


(Oh, I left the smilies out of my first two paragraphs of reply, so if
you're annoyed with what I've written right now, go back and re-read it)
Message no. 61
From: Caric <caric@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 15:51:30 -0700
---Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK> wrote:
>
> And verily, did Chris Lubrecht hastily scribble thusly...
> |Actually..it is bashing..lighthearted or no. I'm a patroit, sorry,
I'm not
> |libral..I'm right wing. I am a republican and proud of it. So if
someone
> |from elsewhere wants to poke at my country..it becomes bashing.
>
> I suggest you tone down your opinions a bit then.
> A lot of us like poking fun at america...

I must agree with Spike...us Americans on the list enjoy poking fun at
Brits and Canucks just as much, it's been a cornerstone of our net
relationship as long as i've had any contact on this list. Although
perhaps we've been to gentle on the Aussies :)

(Note I didn't mention anything about certain people sitting on Dikes :)

Caric

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 62
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:12:26 +1000
Caric writes:
>
>I must agree with Spike...us Americans on the list enjoy poking fun at
>Brits and Canucks just as much, it's been a cornerstone of our net
>relationship as long as i've had any contact on this list. Although
>perhaps we've been to gentle on the Aussies :)
>
>(Note I didn't mention anything about certain people sitting on Dikes :)


That's _dykes_ (both meanings), and they sit behind them (they drive _on_
them). And we Aussies poke fun at the lot of you. :)

And if anyone starts hassling us Aussies, we'll sic our killer drop-bears on
you.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 63
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:17:31 -0400
At 03:51 PM 4/7/98 -0700, you wrote:

>I must agree with Spike...us Americans on the list enjoy poking fun at
>Brits and Canucks just as much, it's been a cornerstone of our net
>relationship as long as i've had any contact on this list. Although
>perhaps we've been to gentle on the Aussies :)
>
>(Note I didn't mention anything about certain people sitting on Dikes :)


You mean those folks down in Oz that we keep reminding to put a shrimp on
the barbie for us? Heh.

Most Aussies I've encountered are too laid back to really care much anyway.
Might be a healthy attitude.

And as far as them dike folk...honestly, I'm not too sure *how* to poke fun
at them.

Hey, didn't the Oscar winner for Best Foreign Film come from over yonder?
Now he was a bit dorky, but it was refreshing to see after all that
Hollywood slickness.

Can't call them limeys...can't call them frogs...gee, aren't there any
epithets directed at Holland/Netherlands? Either those folks have been
totally inoffensive over the years or the insults never made their way this
side of the pond.

Aren't we just the spitting image of the kind and benevolent United
Nations? ;-)

Erik J.

"People are so stupid they should pay me to listen to their opinions. If
you disagree, you can call my phone poll at 555-DOG-BERT. Each call costs
two dollars."

"I'm voting twice!"

-today's daily calendar cartoon
Message no. 64
From: Craig J Wilhelm Jr <craigjwjr@*********.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:25:47 -0400
Paul Yan wrote:
> If the height is the skill rating, and as
> well as the damage code, and the target number
> is based on the floor consistancy, then a
> asphalt floor and a fall 10 feet is equal to 10M

That's 10 meters. ( Unlike some people I'm an american who can think
equally will in metric and impereal.)

> (or L, which ever you prefer) with a target
> number of 2???
> Shouldn't here be a group stage instead?
> For every 10-20 feet, a rise in the damage code
> and a bonus to the TN. That way, a fall of only
> 10-20 feet can't be that deadly,

Again, that's why it's in meters... :)
But seriously, I like keeping it one damage code for simplicity. Also a
10 meter uncontrolled fall usually ends up in someone dying or seriously
bashed up. Think about it this way. You fall 10 meters, you have to
resist a 10L attack where the attacker (the ground) scored an average of
8 successes which is going to bring it 2 past deadly, so you'll have to
get at least 4 successes to stage it to serious. Also this system is
geared toward PCs who have far better than average stats plus karma.

For regular people: Stand up on the roof of a 3 storey building and
look down, it's a long way to go. It'll take you a whole second to reach
the ground, by which time you'll be travelling 10m/second which
translates to a little more than 22MPH (or 36KPH:). Ouch... Then add to
that falling at some random angle. More ouch...

--

Craig "Knee Deep in the Blood of Swine" Wilhelm

Those who would give up a little freedom for security
deserve neither freedom nor security
-Benjamin Franklin
UIN: 1864690
-------------BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
v3.12
GAT/$ d- s+:+ a- C+++ U--- P+ L- E-- W++ N++
o K- w+ O> !M-- !V PS+ PE Y+ PGP++ t--- 5+++
X-- R++ tv b++ DI-- D+(Q2++) G++ e++ h* r y++**
--------------END GEEK CODE BLOCK--------------
Message no. 65
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:24:38 +1000
> >>> SR uses meters all the time. Damn annoying if you ask me.
> >>
> >>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> >>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>
> Elle, don't give me any lip, or I'll, I'll, I'll.. ummm.. yeah.. :)

Help help, I'm being oppressed! ;)

> > Adam, if I may?
> > I believe Mr. Jury was saying it was annoying because his
> >country(Canada) uses the metric system. America is the only country up
> >this way that doesn't. Although that's supposed to be changing
> >gradually over the next many years.
>
> You may..but you're wrong.
>
> I just don't think in metres. Even though it's the official unit of
> measure and stuff here, I prefer inches/feet, and, oddly enough,
> kilometres. :)

Excuse me, Mr. Assistant Fearless Leader, sir, but has anyone ever told
you you're strange? :)

Lady Jestyr

- I'm in touch with my Inner Klingon... -
| Elle Holmes | jestyr@**********.com | http://jestyr.home.ml.org |
| Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster | GeoCities Leader | RPGA Reviewer |
Message no. 66
From: Nexx <nexx@********.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 18:19:10 -0500
>I must agree with Spike...us Americans on the list enjoy poking fun at
>Brits and Canucks just as much, it's been a cornerstone of our net
>relationship as long as i've had any contact on this list. Although
>perhaps we've been to gentle on the Aussies :)
>

Funny, I've always preferred poking fun at Americans... and I was a US Army
brat for the first 16 years of my life, so don't get any funny ideas.

Now then, if you'll pardon my French:
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH SHADOWRUN?!?!?

Excuse me, I must of had several megabytes of pointless crap stuck in my
throat.

***************
Rev. Mark Hall, Bardagh
aka Pope Nexx Many-Scars
************
Yet, I'm also a man who's constantly strivin' for a perfection I'll never
achieve... and probably wouldn't even recognize it if I did.
-Logan, in issue 124 of "Wolverine"
***********
Am Moireach Mor!
Message no. 67
From: Lady Jestyr <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:25:22 +1000
> > Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> > rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
>
> So why do you still think of people as "X feet Y inches" tall? :)

Ummm... complete irrationality? :)

Lady Jestyr

- I'm in touch with my Inner Klingon... -
| Elle Holmes | jestyr@**********.com | http://jestyr.home.ml.org |
| Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster | GeoCities Leader | RPGA Reviewer |
Message no. 68
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 00:31:15 +0100
And verily, did Craig J Wilhelm Jr hastily scribble thusly...
|
|Paul Yan wrote:
|> If the height is the skill rating, and as
|> well as the damage code, and the target number
|> is based on the floor consistancy, then a
|> asphalt floor and a fall 10 feet is equal to 10M
|
| That's 10 meters. ( Unlike some people I'm an american who can think
|equally will in metric and impereal.)

Simple. 10 Meters0 feet (approx)
Still prefer good ol' imperial though...
(And I'm not a Yank)

|> (or L, which ever you prefer) with a target
|> number of 2???
|> Shouldn't here be a group stage instead?
|> For every 10-20 feet, a rise in the damage code
|> and a bonus to the TN. That way, a fall of only
|> 10-20 feet can't be that deadly,
|
| Again, that's why it's in meters... :)

And what's wrong with Yards all of a sudden?
:)

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 69
From: Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:39:58 -0400
At 09:12 AM 4/8/98 +1000, you wrote:

>That's _dykes_ (both meanings), and they sit behind them (they drive _on_
>them). And we Aussies poke fun at the lot of you. :)

I thought that might be the spelling, but honestly I was afraid I was wrong
and confuse someone ;-)

the double entendres are just too much for me to deal with right now...

>And if anyone starts hassling us Aussies, we'll sic our killer drop-bears on
>you.

Heh. Put some drop-bears on the barbie too while your at it. Have a
shrimp and drop-bear kabob.

Damn. You know, most of you damn Aussies are just so damn mellow we don't
have any really good zingers for you. And that barbie thing is getting old
even over here.

Come on, do something stupid so we can have something to go on!

Erik J.

The Land Down Under - the land where women glow and men chunder!

(and yes, I know what "chunder" means)
Message no. 70
From: Robert Watkins <robert.watkins@******.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 09:52:45 +1000
Erik Jameson writes:
>>And if anyone starts hassling us Aussies, we'll sic our killer drop-bears
on
>>you.
>
>Heh. Put some drop-bears on the barbie too while your at it. Have a
>shrimp and drop-bear kabob.


*chuckle* What other animal do people pay to pick up so that they can pee on
you? And koalas are too stringy to eat properly (not that I've tried, of
course. Mind you, kangaroo meat is nice. Bit strong tasting, though)

>Come on, do something stupid so we can have something to go on!


Well, I'm sure there'll be lots of Aussie jokes floating around for the
Sid-e-knee Olympics.

>Erik J.
>
>The Land Down Under - the land where women glow and men chunder!
>
>(and yes, I know what "chunder" means)


"You'd better run, you'd better take cover!" (Why? Well, the men chunder,
don't they... that'd make me take cover)

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons robert.watkins@******.com
Message no. 71
From: Justin Bell <justin@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:26:31 -0500
At 12:31 AM 4/8/98 +0100, Spike wrote:
# And verily, did Craig J Wilhelm Jr hastily scribble thusly...
# |
# |Paul Yan wrote:
# |> If the height is the skill rating, and as
# |> well as the damage code, and the target number
# |> is based on the floor consistancy, then a
# |> asphalt floor and a fall 10 feet is equal to 10M
# |
# | That's 10 meters. ( Unlike some people I'm an american who can
think
# |equally will in metric and impereal.)
#
# Simple. 10 Meters0 feet (approx)
# Still prefer good ol' imperial though...
# (And I'm not a Yank)

that's just because you are a member of the Empire, and metric is French
;)
--
/- justin@****.mcp.com -------------------- justin@******.net -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Simon & Schuster | Attention span is quickening. |
|Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\------------ http://www.mcp.com/people/justin/ ---------------/
Message no. 72
From: Justin Bell <justin@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:27:37 -0500
At 09:52 AM 4/8/98 +1000, Robert Watkins wrote:
# Erik Jameson writes:
# >The Land Down Under - the land where women glow and men chunder!
# >
# >(and yes, I know what "chunder" means)
#
#
# "You'd better run, you'd better take cover!" (Why? Well, the men chunder,
# don't they... that'd make me take cover)

ummm,
"I come from a land down under
Where beer does flow and men chunder
Can't you hear, can't you hear the thunder?
You better run, you better take cover."

--
/- justin@****.mcp.com -------------------- justin@******.net -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Simon & Schuster | Attention span is quickening. |
|Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\------------ http://www.mcp.com/people/justin/ ---------------/
Message no. 73
From: Justin Bell <justin@******.NET>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:25:08 -0500
At 09:12 AM 4/8/98 +1000, Robert Watkins wrote:
# Caric writes:
# >
# >I must agree with Spike...us Americans on the list enjoy poking fun at
# >Brits and Canucks just as much, it's been a cornerstone of our net
# >relationship as long as i've had any contact on this list. Although
# >perhaps we've been to gentle on the Aussies :)
# >
# >(Note I didn't mention anything about certain people sitting on Dikes :)
#
#
# That's _dykes_ (both meanings), and they sit behind them (they drive _on_
# them). And we Aussies poke fun at the lot of you. :)
#
# And if anyone starts hassling us Aussies, we'll sic our killer drop-bears on
# you.

don;t forget the Yowies
--
/- justin@****.mcp.com -------------------- justin@******.net -\
|Justin Bell NIC:JB3084| Time and rules are changing. |
|Simon & Schuster | Attention span is quickening. |
|Programmer | Welcome to the Information Age. |
\------------ http://www.mcp.com/people/justin/ ---------------/
Message no. 74
From: Jeremiah Stevens <jeremiah@********.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 21:26:18 -0400
> # Still prefer good ol' imperial though...
> # (And I'm not a Yank)
>
> that's just because you are a member of the Empire, and metric is French
> ;)

Yeah, it's all that damn Wellington's fault. If he hadn't kicked Bonnie's
ass, then we'd all be using the metric system...
Message no. 75
From: Caric <caric@********.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 19:30:56 -0700
> >That's _dykes_ (both meanings), and they sit behind them (they drive
_on_
> >them). And we Aussies poke fun at the lot of you. :)
>
> I thought that might be the spelling, but honestly I was afraid I was
wrong
> and confuse someone ;-)

You know I thought about that when I originally posted, but then I figured
ah what the hell it passed the spell check. :)


Caric-the-I-wasn't-inferring-this-once-and-I-still-got-in-trouble-shaman
Message no. 76
From: Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 00:01:12 EDT
In a message dated 4/7/98 10:15:01 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
lubrecht@***.NET writes:

> **sound of a rocker creaking***

***sound of termites chewing at the slides***

> Listen kiddies...the metric system ain't gonna hit the US...thats
> right...lemme tell ya why. A few years back, they tried...they tried
> teachin' it in the schools and tried changin' stuff. It created
> confusion..so they stopped...base line is....NO good fer honest american is
> gonna wanna do stuff the same was as those heathen ferriners. Gaddangit, we
> busted hump to get freedom frem them brits an' wha' not, we does stuff
> -our- way....mainly cause we is the best...ya get it???

Gosh, I remember that. It was sort of fun to learn everything in two forms,
even if it was in mid-po-dunk-USA in a town that had more stray dogs than it
had people.

And as for being the best, I can no longer find it in good conscious to
believe in that little bit of idulgence.

-K (but it was a funny "old fogey" imitation)
Message no. 77
From: Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 00:17:48 EDT
In a message dated 4/7/98 1:38:48 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
lubrecht@***.NET writes:

> Wrong again. Without a more careful reading, it was a stupid way to judge
> the statement. Kids today..you want everything quick..sheesh.
>
Nigel/Chris, I have only a simple statement to this.

"Kids" are only as impatient as their "Parents" were for them to grow
up and
get out of their hair where they could be ignored. And please note, I may or
may not be as old as you, but I am not a "Kid" by any measure ...

Erik ... guy, please, back off of this. Nigel has his opinions and you have
yours. Let is rest guy. You are starting to be painted as badly as he is.
And -I- know better than that, even if I don't agree with your viewpoints, I
still know it.

Breathe...this kind of bickering and name-calling is why I backed off for a
while when I did. It was defeating the purpose of entertainment in general.

Please
-K
Message no. 78
From: Ereskanti <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 00:29:32 EDT
In a message dated 4/7/98 2:06:57 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA writes:

> Bashing = poking? All of a sudden, "gay-bashing" takes on a whole
> new meaning. :-)

JAMES!!!! That was bad, absolutely hideous....

> Sorry, but I didn't catch that either - I realize that I speak up
> infrequently enough on this list to insert liberal emoticons or
> else many would probably get pissed pretty quickly. As to "asinine",
> your comment was not a poor fit with what many people think of when
> they think of Americans (ick that's a messy sentence, but it's hard
> not to piss people off on subjects like these).

How is this for a sad state of "Reputable Affairs" for the 'American Nation'.
A guy from Algeria knows several of the more interesting words from "Beavis
and Butthead" (I know I'm gonna regret bringing this up). To me personally,
that may contain humor, but does NOT contain something I want my nation known
by.

> Many people see Americans as very...patriotic. As in, "We're the
> best country in the world and we've got the nukes to prove it!".
> The stereotypical American isn't very cultured or appreciate the
> cultures and customs of other countries. So I (not knowing you or
> your opinions on the subject) took your statement at face value.
> Sorry.

I think I agree with James here. The statements were poorly made Nigel/Chris.

> I have taken a profession where speed is incredibly important - nobody
> will accept a word-processor that can only handle one keystroke a
> second.

Oh geesh, get it AWAY!!! :)

> For safety's sake, why not just assume that we're all morons and
> include a smiley or two, okay? :-)
> James Ojaste

Oh boy, now things are bad. James, don't ever give someone with that
personality 'permission' to make an 'assumption', certain things will show
more than they already do.

-K
Message no. 79
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 12:53:54 +0100
Caric said on 15:51/ 7 Apr 98...

> (Note I didn't mention anything about certain people sitting on Dikes :)

That only works if the people you're aiming it at, understand it's meant
for them.

Oh bugger...

:)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
You're listening to ME now?
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 80
From: Zixx <t_berghoff@*********.NETSURF.DE>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 20:34:58 +0000
On 8 Apr 98 at 9:24, Lady Jestyr wrote:

> > >>Aw, poor little North Americans... never mind the fact that most of the
> > >>rest of the world uses metres (a much more logical unit of measure ;)
> >
> > Elle, don't give me any lip, or I'll, I'll, I'll.. ummm.. yeah.. :)
>
> Help help, I'm being oppressed! ;)

The clouds open and some guy in a pink and blue spandex-suit lands between
terrified Lady and the evil kid.

"Fear not! Zixx-man's here to save you!"

The freak pull giant orange gun out of his left shoe and fires a burning
system-directory at the oppressor.


...I'll now go and get a life-time ticket for some well-known stairs....



Tobias Berghoff a.k.a Zixx
ICQ: 9293066

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK------------
GAT/CS/S/IT d--- s+:-- !a>? C++(++++)
UL++(++++) P+ L++ E W+ N+ w---() O-
M-- PS+(+++) PE- Y+>++ t+(++) 5+ X++
R* tv b++ DI(+) D++ G>++ e>+++++(*)
h! r--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK-------------
Message no. 81
From: Stephen Delear <c715591@******.MISSOURI.EDU>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 21:26:50 -0500
At 08:51 AM 98-04-08 +1000, you wrote:

>
>Chris, if you can't handle someone pointing out that the decision of the
>people of the USA (in deference to the Canadians, I won't say American) to
>not adopt the metric system, but instead put up with a system like the
>Imperial _English_ measurement system, then you'll _really_ have trouble
>when it comes to decisions that the USA makes that actually have a bit of
>logic behind them that we bash, too (not that there are many of those...).

Almost all US decisions make sence you just have to be an american to
comprehend them : - )

SteveD


Stephen Delear
University of Missouri-Columbia
Check out my Photo Message Board at http://www.missouri.edu/~c715591
"Sometimes I do get to places just when God's ready to have somebody click
the shutter" Ansel Adams
Message no. 82
From: DV8 dv8@***.nl
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:16:32 +0100
G'day all,

I was in a game last sunday and one of the NPC's fell from a n'th storey
building and I was trying to find the falling rules and I couldn't find
them. Could someone either point me to where they are or give me a quick
rundown? I remember that falling always does Deadly Stun damage but that the
target number for resisting the damage is related to the length of the fall.

Regards,

DV8

"Abashed the Devil stood,...and felt how awful Goodness is,..."
- John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 83
From: Peter Kristiansen sds@**.auc.dk
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:49:59 +0100
From: "DV8" <dv8@***.nl>
> G'day all,
>
> I was in a game last sunday and one of the NPC's fell from a n'th
storey
> building and I was trying to find the falling rules and I couldn't
find
> them. Could someone either point me to where they are or give me a
quick
> rundown? I remember that falling always does Deadly Stun damage but
that the
> target number for resisting the damage is related to the length of the
fall.
>
I must admit that the part of deadly stun I cannot remember. >>Checking
Shadowrun Companion page 46 left column - at the bottom<< Nope no
mentioning of stun damage, but the power is equal to half the number of
meters fallen (subtract half impact armor), and the damage is:
1-2 meters fallen : L
3-6 meters fallen : M
7-20 meters fallen : S
21+ meters fallen : D

--- Peter (sds) Kristiansen ---
Message no. 84
From: DV8 dv8@***.nl
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:00:50 +0100
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Kristiansen" <sds@**.auc.dk>
> I must admit that the part of deadly stun I cannot remember. >>Checking
> Shadowrun Companion page 46 left column - at the bottom<< Nope no
> mentioning of stun damage, but the power is equal to half the number of
> meters fallen (subtract half impact armor), and the damage is:
> 1-2 meters fallen : L
> 3-6 meters fallen : M
> 7-20 meters fallen : S
> 21+ meters fallen : D

Hmm...perhaps I was mistaken...but thanks for the info. Is this the 2nd Ed.
Companion or the 3rd Ed.?

Regards,

DV8

"Abashed the Devil stood,...and felt how awful Goodness is,..."
- John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 85
From: NeoJudas neojudas@******************.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 05:04:40 -0500
From: "Peter Kristiansen" <sds@**.auc.dk>
Subject: Re: Falling Damage

> I must admit that the part of deadly stun I cannot remember. >>Checking
> Shadowrun Companion page 46 left column - at the bottom<< Nope no
> mentioning of stun damage, but the power is equal to half the number of
> meters fallen (subtract half impact armor), and the damage is:
> 1-2 meters fallen : L
> 3-6 meters fallen : M
> 7-20 meters fallen : S
> 21+ meters fallen : D

IF I remember correctly, falling damage has never been (speaking by the
rules) "stun damage", but always physical damage (wasn't there rules in
Shadowtech as well?). Not necessarily a good thing mind you, but it seems
to be the way its been now for many years.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
J. Keith Henry ("K" "NeoJudas")
Hoosier Hacker House (www.hoosierhackerhouse.com)
THREEH.COM (www.threeh.com)
Message no. 86
From: Sinabian@***.com Sinabian@***.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:08:57 EST
In a message dated 10/31/2000 1:24:44 AM Mountain Standard Time, dv8@***.nl
writes:

> I was in a game last sunday and one of the NPC's fell from a n'th storey
> building and I was trying to find the falling rules and I couldn't find
> them. Could someone either point me to where they are or give me a quick
> rundown? I remember that falling always does Deadly Stun damage but that
the
> target number for resisting the damage is related to the length of the
fall.

I had a great big ol' pink troll phys adept jump from the top of a 3-story
building once...cracked the pavement, set off car alarms all over town, and
measured on the Richter scale, but didn't take even one box of damage!
(course I'm not entirely sure I GMed it right, but she did have an ungodly
body score)
Message no. 87
From: Scott M Harrison Scott_Harrison@*****.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:34:08 -0500
<fontfamily><param>Helvetica</param>

On Tuesday, October 31, 2000, at 09:08 AM, Sinabian@***.com wrote:


<italic>In a message dated 10/31/2000 1:24:44 AM Mountain Standard Time, dv8@***.nl
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>writes:</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>


<italic></italic></color><italic>> I was in a game last sunday
and one of the NPC's fell from a n'th
storey</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>> building and I was trying
to find the falling rules and I couldn't
find</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>> them. Could someone either
point me to where they are or give me a
quick</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>> rundown? I remember that
falling always does Deadly Stun damage but that
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>the</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>> target number for resisting
the damage is related to the length of the
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>fall.</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>


<italic></italic></color><italic>I had a great big ol' pink troll
phys adept jump from the top of a 3-story
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>building once...cracked the
pavement, set off car alarms all over town, and
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>measured on the Richter scale,
but didn't take even one box of damage!
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>(course I'm not entirely sure I
GMed it right, but she did have an ungodly
</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>

<italic></italic></color><italic>body
score)</italic><color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>


This should be no problem. 3-storey building is probably about 10 meters. If the physad
has 5 levels of Freefall you need not even think about rolling damage since 10 meters is
ignored by Freefall. Only past 3-storey heights would the troll start worrying, and then
impact armor can help. For example, a 6-storey building is 20 meters and 10 are ignored
from the Freefall. Therefore, the fall for the troll is considered 10 meters. Now let's
assume we do not try to make an Athletics test, and the troll has 4 points of impact
armor.


Under SR2 with the rules from Fields of Fire the 10 meter fall is a 5D attack. Reduced by
1/2 impact armor becomes 3D. On average someone will need 12 body to get 8 successes to
ignore damage.


Under SR3 with the rules from Shadowrun Companion the 10 meter fall is a 5M attack.
Reduce by 1/2 impact armor becomes 3M. On average someone will need 6 body to get 4
successes to ignore damage.


Of course people can interpret the rules in SR3 to say that the damage from a 20 meter
fall should really start at S instead of M even though Freefall reduces the damage. But
even in this case the SR3 rules are kinder on falling characters.


Recap of rules:


Both: All damage is physical and not stun.


SR2: 1/2 height in meters is Power of D attack.

SR3: Use the table provided earlier for type of attack. Power is still 1/2 height in
meters.


Both: Reduce Power by 1/2 of impact armor </color>(round
down)<color><param>0000,0000,0000</param>.


Both: You can make an athletics test target number of height in meters to reduce Power of
attack for each success on athletics test.


Various other points like number of actions, etc. are discussed more in depth in the
books.


--Scott
Message no. 88
From: Sinabian@***.com Sinabian@***.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 09:45:14 EST
Okay...going just by the paste of my last message to the board, and if I am
I'm sorry...but am I sending in HTML? Cause damn that was annoying to read!
Message no. 89
From: DV8 dv8@***.nl
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 15:50:58 +0100
> Under SR2 with the rules from Fields of Fire the 10 meter fall is a 5D
attack.

That's where I got the rule from! I guess that's horribly out of date. [DV8
just managed to pick up Fields of Fire a little while ago... :)]

Regards,

DV8

"Abashed the Devil stood,...and felt how awful Goodness is,..."
- John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 90
From: robert frazine shade@*****.edu
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:11:42 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Scott M Harrison wrote:
>
>
> Both: Reduce Power by 1/2 of impact armor

I know the rules call for this, but I have difficulty understanding why
Impact Armor aids in a fall. Generally, Impact armor is designed to
spread the force of impact in order to minimalize damage. In the case of
falling, the victim's entire body feels the force of impact, so how does
the armor aid in minimalizing damage?

I think this is a rule that Fasa dropped the ball on. Armor should
not aid a person falling.

Shade
Message no. 91
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 07:14:19 -0800
Sinabian@***.com wrote:

> Okay...going just by the paste of my last message to the board, and if I am
> I'm sorry...but am I sending in HTML? Cause damn that was annoying to read!

I think your last post was HTML. I don't know. Netscape Messanger doesn't have
a problem with HTML.
You'll have to wait for the screams of anger from the people using message
services that don't support HTML for confirmation.
--
--Strago

All Hail Apathy! Or don't. Whatever. -abortion_engine

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2+ SR3++ h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN+ SRFF W+ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++
d+) gm+ M P
Message no. 92
From: Strago strago@***.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 07:18:20 -0800
robert frazine wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Scott M Harrison wrote:
> >
> >
> > Both: Reduce Power by 1/2 of impact armor
>
> I know the rules call for this, but I have difficulty understanding why
> Impact Armor aids in a fall. Generally, Impact armor is designed to
> spread the force of impact in order to minimalize damage. In the case of
> falling, the victim's entire body feels the force of impact, so how does
> the armor aid in minimalizing damage?
>
> I think this is a rule that Fasa dropped the ball on. Armor should
> not aid a person falling.
>

What about as padding? If you had the choice between falling onto the
concrete or falling onto a thin pad, which would you choose? I'd take the
pad, just because that's one more thing between my bones and the concrete.
And with most standard armors, 1/2 impact would only be 1. So it doesn't
matter all that much, anyway, in the long run.

>
> Shade

--
--Strago

All Hail Apathy! Or don't. Whatever. -abortion_engine

SRGC v0.2 !SR1 SR2+ SR3++ h b++ B- UB- IE+ RN+ SRFF W+ sa++ ma++ ad+ m+ (o++
d+) gm+ M P
Message no. 93
From: Iridios iridios@********.net
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:25:35 -0500
Sinabian@***.com wrote:
>
> Okay...going just by the paste of my last message to the board, and if I am
> I'm sorry...but am I sending in HTML? Cause damn that was annoying to read!

No your post was fine, it was Scott Harrison's post that came in as
HTML.


--
Iridios
--
Evolution is a harsh mistress.

Visit "The ShadowZone"
http://members.nbci.com/Iridios/ShadowZone

Sig by Kookie Jar 5.97d http://go.to/generalfrenetics/
10:19:45 AM/97:01:03 (1) [no thud]
Message no. 94
From: robert frazine shade@*****.edu
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 10:31:14 -0500 (EST)
On Tue, 31 Oct 2000, Strago wrote:

> robert frazine wrote:
>
> >
> > I think this is a rule that Fasa dropped the ball on. Armor should
> > not aid a person falling.
> >
>
> What about as padding? If you had the choice between falling onto the
> concrete or falling onto a thin pad, which would you choose? I'd take the
> pad, just because that's one more thing between my bones and the concrete.
> And with most standard armors, 1/2 impact would only be 1. So it doesn't
> matter all that much, anyway, in the long run.


True, padding would help somewhat, but I don't think Impact armor should
count as padding, as the victim is wearing the armor. I think falling onto
a mattress should aid a fall, I just don't think that an Armored vest
should help, let alone a full on stormtrooper outfit.

--Shade
Message no. 95
From: Phil Smith phil_urbanhell@*******.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 18:42:20 GMT
>From: "DV8" <dv8@***.nl>
>I was in a game last sunday and one of the NPC's fell from a n'th storey
>building and I was trying to find the falling rules and I couldn't find
>them. Could someone either point me to where they are or give me a quick
>rundown? I remember that falling always does Deadly Stun damage but that
>the
>target number for resisting the damage is related to the length of the
>fall.

You'd be after pg 46 SRComp (SR3 edition). It changed from (meters fallen)D
stun to a range of damage codes based on the distance fallen, because
technicly the old way if you fell out of bed you resist 1D.

Phil

Dying is an art like everything else.
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.

Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.
Message no. 96
From: Peter Kristiansen sds@**.auc.dk
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 00:24:18 +0100
From: "NeoJudas" <neojudas@******************.com>
[SNIP]
>
DOH! sorry for replying to your mail NJ but I accidently deleted DV8's
mail..
But to your (DV8) question of which companion it was in: Of course I
should have told that it was 3rd edition... The things "some" people
take for granted..

--- Peter (sds) Kristiansen ---
Message no. 97
From: Simon and Fiona sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 21:09:43 +1100
-----Original Message-----
From: Sinabian@***.com <Sinabian@***.com>
To: shadowrn@*********.com <shadowrn@*********.com>
Date: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 1:11 AM
Subject: Re: Falling Damage

>
>I had a great big ol' pink troll phys adept jump from the top of a 3-story
>building once...cracked the pavement, set off car alarms all over town, and
>measured on the Richter scale, but didn't take even one box of damage!
>(course I'm not entirely sure I GMed it right, but she did have an ungodly
>body score)
>

A three storey building probably wouldn't hurt a troll too much if he did it
right, they're bloody big. By swinging down an arm's length from the roof
edge (which big ol' pink doesn't seem to have done, but anyway) their feet
would only be about a storey and a half up, and I used to jump that far from
roofs as a slightly odd early teen without a problem.
That said, I think there are times when you just have to have logic
overturning rules, and have the guy's ankle twist painfully, leaving him
moaning on the sidewalk for a minute or two (I also know all about that) and
leaving him lame until healed. More than about 15 storeys, and I'd say that
unless the character makes a big karma sacrifice, he splats. I have heard
about AD&D characters jumping off mountains and landing only mildly hurt
down the bottom to save time climbing, and Rifts characters shooting
themselves point-blanc in the head to prove a point (who said that?). Games
should not go that way unless you _really_ want them to.
Message no. 98
From: Nexx nexx@********.net
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 05:15:26 -0600
----- Original Message -----
From: "Simon and Fiona" <sfuller@******.com.au>

> unless the character makes a big karma sacrifice, he splats. I have heard
> about AD&D characters jumping off mountains and landing only mildly hurt
> down the bottom to save time climbing,

Of course... you can only take 20d6 falling damage, and a high-con fighter
can manage that fairly easily...

> and Rifts characters shooting
> themselves point-blanc in the head to prove a point (who said that?).
Games
> should not go that way unless you _really_ want them to.

Because of Palladium's SDC vs. MDC rules, I have had characters who could
literally shoot an entire belt of .50 calibre ammo into their own face and
them go out dancing.

Of course, either of those situations make about as much sense as
Shadowrun's old rule that all falling damage was automatically Deadly
physical damage, meaning the average human would take a serious wound
falling out of bed, since they could only get 3 successes to stage down the
1D damage...

***
Skald-Mark Mjöksiglandi
a.k.a. Nexx
a.k.a. Mark Hall
***
"If I lose the light of the sun, I will write by candlelight, moonlight, no
light. If I lose paper and ink I will write in blood on forgotten walls. I
will write always. I will capture nights all over the world and bring them
to you."
-Henry Rollins
***
http://www-personal.interkan.net/~nexx/index.html
Updated October 5th, 2000
Message no. 99
From: Simon and Fiona sfuller@******.com.au
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 22:30:24 +1100
-----Original Message-----
From: Nexx <nexx@********.net>
To: shadowrn@*********.com <shadowrn@*********.com>
Date: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 10:22 PM
Subject: Re: Falling Damage


>Of course, either of those situations make about as much sense as
>Shadowrun's old rule that all falling damage was automatically Deadly
>physical damage, meaning the average human would take a serious wound
>falling out of bed, since they could only get 3 successes to stage down the
>1D damage...
>


Of course. The bit I said about throwing the rules away in favour of logic
works both ways.
Message no. 100
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 13:50:21 +0100
According to Simon and Fiona, on Wed, 01 Nov 2000 the word on the street was...

> A three storey building probably wouldn't hurt a troll too much if he did it
> right, they're bloody big. By swinging down an arm's length from the roof
> edge (which big ol' pink doesn't seem to have done, but anyway) their feet
> would only be about a storey and a half up, and I used to jump that far from
> roofs as a slightly odd early teen without a problem.

But you don't weigh half a ton (or a quarter of a ton, if you use FASA's
figures). Big animals can't fall as far as smaller ones can, relatively
speaking, and walk away uninjured. Still, trolls' greater toughness probably
compensates enough for the higher chance of injury.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
The less of a life, the more mail you read.
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+@ UL P L+ E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X+ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 101
From: Paul Collins paulcollins@*******.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 08:12:04 +1100
---- Original Message -----
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
To: <shadowrn@*********.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 11:50 PM
Subject: Re: Falling Damage


According to Simon and Fiona, on Wed, 01 Nov 2000 the word on the street
was...

> A three storey building probably wouldn't hurt a troll too much if he did
it
> right, they're bloody big. By swinging down an arm's length from the roof
> edge (which big ol' pink doesn't seem to have done, but anyway) their feet
> would only be about a storey and a half up, and I used to jump that far
from
> roofs as a slightly odd early teen without a problem.

But you don't weigh half a ton (or a quarter of a ton, if you use FASA's
figures). Big animals can't fall as far as smaller ones can, relatively
speaking, and walk away uninjured. Still, trolls' greater toughness probably
compensates enough for the higher chance of injury.


This is all from memory here, but speaking from a relative point of view,
the damage taken from a fall from any distance, has more to do with the
square or cube of the surface area of the body (ie: the skin) than any
inate toughness. or maybe it's the cube. New Scientist had an article on
this about a year ago. About why a fall that a mouse could walk away from
would splat a horse.

But it might take me a while to track it down for sure.



Annachie

------------------------------------------------

-----Quondo Omni Flunkus Moritati
Message no. 102
From: Jah Elf jah_elf@*****.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 21:26:27 -0800 (PST)
Re: Falling Damage
> A three storey building probably wouldn't hurt a troll too much if he

> did it right, they're bloody big. By swinging down an arm's length
>from the roof edge (which big ol' pink doesn't seem to have done, but
>anyway) their feet would only be about a storey and a half up, and I
used to jump that far from roofs as a slightly odd early teen without a
problem. But you don't weigh half a ton (or a quarter of a ton, if you
use FASA's figures). Big animals can't fall as far as smaller ones can,
relatively speaking, and walk away uninjured. Still, trolls' greater
toughness probably compensates enough for the higher chance of injury.

> This is all from memory here, but speaking from a relative point
of
> view, the damage taken from a fall from any distance, has more
to > do with the square or cube of the surface area of the body
(ie: the skin) than any inate toughness. or maybe it's the cube. New
Scientist had an article on this about a year ago. About why a fall
that a mouse could walk away from would splat a horse.
> But it might take me a while to track it down for sure.


Annachie,

Hope you can locate said article. I'd be interested in the scientific
analysis of of the question.

If there is any factor that is pretty darn consistent on this ball of a
planet is gravity. Perhaps it is one of the few things we actually can
hold as a constant, but the speed of acceleration is variable.

Regarding Impact Armor and falling, As a person who is quite
experienced with falling (via 7 years of regular martial arts
practice), I can say from experience that impact armor makes a big
difference. However, that is given that the armor fits properly and
contains sufficient padding against the skin (i.e. taking break falls
in someone else's Bogu [Japanese Kendo armor] on hardwood floors is NOT
a good idea.)

Even a Judo Gi, which is double knit cotten laced together in
criss-cross pattern, allows for significantly harder falls and sliding
rolls than a basic Karate Gi, which is just one thin layer of cotten.
I typically practice on a canvas covered foam rubber mat (which indeed
does make the most difference), but even still thicker clothing can
really save the joints and skin.

The SR3 1/2 Impact Armor in falling rule is legitimate, though I feel
strongly that some allowances should be made for Athletics or maybe
even Unarmed Combat successes. Knowing how to fall can also make a
world of difference when the "rubber meets the road," because landing
on your side with the impact disperesed evenly throughout the body is
MUCH wiser than, say, landing on you head.

Does combat pool count for anything when resisting falling damage?
That may be one other way for accounting for natural body awareness, if
not for training.

Pointy Ears and All,
-Jah Elf



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
>From homework help to love advice, Yahoo! Experts has your answer.
http://experts.yahoo.com/
Message no. 103
From: Paul Collins paulcollins@*******.com
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 10:42:41 +1100
>
> Annachie,
>
> Hope you can locate said article. I'd be interested in the scientific
> analysis of of the question.
>

I found reference to it at
http://www.newscientist.com/ns/19990403/rulingpass.html

It's actually an article about scaling of biological organisms, but
interesting none the less.

Annachie
Message no. 104
From: Trollrunner@***.com Trollrunner@***.com
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 17:12:30 EST
I was reading the back log of posts and came across this topic. Some people
were calling for the real world "rules" for falling. Here's my take.
According to physics, the momentum of an object is:
mass x vel. and if I remeber correctly, the force of an impact is determined
by momentum over time.
In other words, if a troll and a human (both average) fall the same distance,
the troll (having a higher mass) will hit with a higher force as their
velocities will be equal (ignoring air resistance and such).

but now that I think of it I believe the formula I am looking for is mv^2/t
but HS physics was 5 years ago. anyway, thats how it works! I think...

Big Q
Message no. 105
From: Wordman wordman@*******.com
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:37:40 -0500
> Here's my take.
> According to physics, the momentum of an object is:
> mass x vel. and if I remeber correctly, the force of an impact
> is determined by momentum over time.

I don't think that is true. Force is an instantaneous quality. Force over
time is something else (power, I think, or maybe work).

> In other words, if a troll and a human (both average) fall the
> same distance, the troll (having a higher mass) will hit with
> a higher force as their velocities will be equal (ignoring
> air resistance and such).

The troll will have a much higher kinetic energy = (mv^2)/2. Naturally,
velocity is a measure of acceleration over time. Gravity has linear
acceleration, so this is easy to figure out (barring air resistance).
Gravity on earth gives a = 10 m/sec/sec. Since this acceleration is linear,
v = t sec * 10 m/sec/sec = 10t m/sec, where t is the duration of the fall
(in seconds). (In an atmosphere, t will have an upper bound.)

So KE = (mv^2)/2 = (m (10t)^2)/2 = 50mt^2

That value would be in square meter kilograms per second squared, which is
probably some unit of measure or another, and might need converted.

Wordman
Message no. 106
From: Graht graht@******.net
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 19:10:40 -0700
Trollrunner@***.com wrote:
>I was reading the back log of posts and came across this topic. Some people
>were calling for the real world "rules" for falling. Here's my take.
>According to physics, the momentum of an object is:
>mass x vel. and if I remeber correctly, the force of an impact is determined
>by momentum over time.
>In other words, if a troll and a human (both average) fall the same distance,
>the troll (having a higher mass) will hit with a higher force as their
>velocities will be equal (ignoring air resistance and such).
>
>but now that I think of it I believe the formula I am looking for is mv^2/t
>but HS physics was 5 years ago. anyway, thats how it works! I think...

Or, you could use statistics which says that 50% of all falls from a height
of 20 feet result in death... I have no idea what that means, but like
Dolly Parton, there it is :)


-Graht
--
ShadowRN GridSec
The ShadowRN FAQ: http://shadowrun.html.com/hlair/faqindex.php3
Geek Code: GCS d-( ) s++:->+ a@ C++>$ US P L >++ E? W++>+++ !N o-- K-
w+ o? M- VMS? PS+(++) PE+(++) Y+ !PGP t+(++) 5+(++) X++(+++) R+>$ tv+b++
DI++++ D+(++) G e+>+++ h--->---- r+++ y+++
http://www.users.uswest.net/~Graht
"My assistant, Bob the dinasaur, will now demonstrate
how to give a cat a 'fur wedgie.'"
Message no. 107
From: Jonathan Choy jjchoy@*********.net
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:40:32 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wordman" <wordman@*******.com>
To: <shadowrn@*********.com>
Sent: 27 November 2000 6:37 PM
Subject: RE: Falling damage


> > Here's my take.
> > According to physics, the momentum of an object is:
> > mass x vel. and if I remeber correctly, the force of an impact
> > is determined by momentum over time.
>
> I don't think that is true. Force is an instantaneous quality. Force over
> time is something else (power, I think, or maybe work).
>
> > In other words, if a troll and a human (both average) fall the
> > same distance, the troll (having a higher mass) will hit with
> > a higher force as their velocities will be equal (ignoring
> > air resistance and such).
>
> The troll will have a much higher kinetic energy = (mv^2)/2. Naturally,
> velocity is a measure of acceleration over time. Gravity has linear
> acceleration, so this is easy to figure out (barring air resistance).
> Gravity on earth gives a = 10 m/sec/sec. Since this acceleration is
linear,
> v = t sec * 10 m/sec/sec = 10t m/sec, where t is the duration of the fall
> (in seconds). (In an atmosphere, t will have an upper bound.)
>
> So KE = (mv^2)/2 = (m (10t)^2)/2 = 50mt^2
>
> That value would be in square meter kilograms per second squared, which is
> probably some unit of measure or another, and might need converted.
>
> Wordman

Hmm, been a little while since I did physics and calculus, but.... damn, the
mud I'm a wizard on has a useful crowd on it ;>

http://library.thinkquest.org/10796/ch3/ch3.htm
Position:
s = Vinitial * t + 1/2 acceleration * time ^2
Vt = Vinitial + acceleration * time

Falling speeds are upper-bounded based on the surface area of the object,
and i'm sure that trolls have ... interesting... drag coefficients that
would make modeling them amusing (people are amusing enough already...)

Forces are measured in Newtons, or ((kg * meter) / (second)) - that is, 1 N
is the amount of force required to accelerate a 1 kg mass by 1m/s in 1
second.

The linear acceleration of gravity makes the equations non-hairy, except
that the troll, while massing more, also has a MUCH higher surface area
(+50% in each direction of size will give +125% surface area.) I _don't_
remember the derivation to convert surface area to drag coefficient, but if
it is linear to surface area, then +125% surface area might reduce the
troll's terminal velocity _below_ that of the human.

Your equation for KE is correct, however, as mentioned above, if the surface
area of the troll is a significant enough factor (which I doubt), the
troll's KE will only be (comparatively) slightly higher than the human -
also assuming we have a long enough fall (i e halo drop) to reach terminal
velocity.

KE is measured in Joules, which are kg * meter^2 / second^2... which looks
like a force multiplied by a distance to me.

More useful:
Force of deceleration = Vfinal * Mass - assuming duracrete or whatever that
won't deform when Troll T makes Crater C in Surface S....

Tetsujin no Oni
Jonathan Choy
'I _used_ to be an engineering major. I got better.'
Message no. 108
From: caelric@****.com caelric@****.com
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 16:08:13 -0800
At 09:40 AM 11/28/00 -0500, Jon Choy wrote:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wordman" <wordman@*******.com>
>
>
>> > Here's my take.
>> > According to physics, the momentum of an object is:
>> > mass x vel. and if I remeber correctly, the force of an impact
>> > is determined by momentum over time.
>>
>> I don't think that is true. Force is an instantaneous quality. Force over
>> time is something else (power, I think, or maybe work).

Actually, the real definition of force is dp/dt, or change in momentum p
over change in time t. The d's stand for the delta or differential. So,
yes, the first guy got it right. This is why falling on a softer surface
hurts less: it spreads out the time of impact, thus creating less total
force, thus damage.


The reason this definition of force is important rather than the normal one
of F=ma (force equals mass times acceleration) is that occasionally you
will have a changing mass, and thus you need change in moementum rather
than just change in velocity (dv/dt=a) One example is rockets going into
orbit; they lose a huge percentage of their mass in fuel (90% or so, IIRC)
as they blast off.

>
>KE is measured in Joules, which are kg * meter^2 / second^2... which looks
>like a force multiplied by a distance to me.

Work is a form of energy, and work can be defined as force times distance,
and the kinetic energy you gain from falling is also the work done by the
force of gravity. So, yes, KE can be force times distance

Mostly, you got the units right; I think you messed up Newtons,
however...they are (in the SI system) kg*meters/(second^2)

Joules, yes.

Dave, an astrophysicist, sort of
Message no. 109
From: Sebastian Wiers m0ng005e@*****.com
Subject: Falling damage
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:20:30 -0600
:Falling speeds are upper-bounded based on the surface area of the object,
:and i'm sure that trolls have ... interesting... drag coefficients that
:would make modeling them amusing (people are amusing enough already...)

A large surface area increases drag. The termianl velocity is dependant on
both drag AND mass. Simply put, once the body is falling fast enough that
its drag though the air equals its weight, there is no net force, so it will
fall no faster.

:The linear acceleration of gravity makes the equations non-hairy, except
:that the troll, while massing more, also has a MUCH higher surface area
:(+50% in each direction of size will give +125% surface area.) I _don't_
:remember the derivation to convert surface area to drag coefficient, but if
:it is linear to surface area, then +125% surface area might reduce the
:troll's terminal velocity _below_ that of the human.

A plus 50% size increas in all directions also results in a 337.5% increase
in mass / weight. While drag is proportionate to surface area, the
hypothetical trolls terminal velocity will still be HIGHER, not lower.
This holds obviously true in life- a bug is blown away easily in a wind (and
has a low termial velocity), but an elephant is not. Generally speaking, a
mouse can survive impact at terminal velocity unharmed, a cat breaks many
bones but might survive, a human dies in mostly one piece, and a horse
"splashes" on impact if it falls far enough to reach termial velocity.

-Mongoose
Message no. 110
From: Pepe Barbe a19960615@****.edu.pe
Subject: Falling Damage
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:53:09 -0500
Hello,

A few days ago there was a post about realistic falling damage. I replied
it with some ideas, but it never reached the list (I think I have been
having problems with my STMP). So I will send it again to see what you
think about it. It is not as realistic as I think someone asked for ... but
how much realistic can you get in game? Also, this rule won't consider
Terminal Velocity issues

In case of a free fall, the velocity in a given time is: i.v=a*t, where v
is the speed, a is the acceleration (which will be the accelaration of
gravity) and t is the time falling.

The position in a given time, assuming the character parts from position 0
and has 0 intial velocity would be: ii.x=a*t^2/2, where, x is the position
in length units, t is time, and a is accelration (gravity, of course).

If we solve for t in equation (ii.) and replace it in (i.) we get the
following:
v=(2*a*x)^0,5
That would be the velocity in function of the amount of meters travelled.
In the case of a free fall a is gravity which, with a little rounding, is
equal to 10 m/s^2 or 90 m/turn^2,. Finally v=(180*X)^0,5, v is in m/turn.

For actual damage due to the impact I think its all right to use the impact
rules in the Vehicles and Drones Chapter in SR3, with the following
modifications:

Speed - Damage Level
13 - 18 Light (L)
19 - 30 Moderate (M)
31 - 50 Serious (S)
51+ Deadly (D)

The power level of the damage equals to Speed/10 (Round Up) + 6. Impact
armor does reduce the power.

Pepe

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Falling Damage, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!