D&D 5E Non-trivial climbing during combat

5ekyu · Oct 11, 2018

Rya.Reisender said:
Good point! Since I allow to use dash without extra roll, then failure also mean no extra roll when dashing.

I usually do lower than 5 = fall, 5-9 = can't move and 10 = succeed (that's the handling that's suggested in Lost Mine of Phandelver for a particular situation).

It's hard to think of a setback that still involves progress. Like "you manage to climb the rope, but you burned your hands, let's roll 1d6 fire damage" doesn't seem to make much sense. And I'm not a big fan of randomly make monsters appear as setback either. Basically wasting time is progress with setback too, but in combat it just means setting out a round.

Well, sure, the setback needs to make sense but... what if the setback is "you make it further up the wall but..."

a huge chunk of rock from the unstable section your character is climbing breaks away and crashes to the floor making a lot of noise (possibly alerting others) and/or making further climbs much more difficult as the section is more unstable (disadvantages on the further checks) and/or making the ledge above unstable.

I use setbacks when it helps add to the scene more of the sense of "problem" and drama than just failure would. if "just failure" is boring, go with setback. That prevents in my experience treating "uncertain outcomes" as trivial.

"All the characters are searching the room? Everyone? Great! Roll your checks and let me know who fail?" and "everybody is trying insight checks to see if the merchant is lying? GREAT! Roll your checks and let me know who fail?" get much different reactions in a game where "progress with setback" is established.

Rya.Reisender · Oct 11, 2018

For me it's not a question of requiring an action. Using your movement to climb results in me asking for a roll, but that doesn't mean it consumes an action. A roll doesn't need to be tied to an action, it's just tied to an uncertain result.

If the player succeeded and reaches the top he could still attack for example.

Why I'm not allowing seeing "Dash" as another attempt is not because the action was already used, but rather because I see ability checks not connected to an action but rather to check an uncertain result and the roll result already made the uncertain result certain, so it's hard for me to see how using the Dash action could make the result uncertain again.

iserith · Oct 11, 2018

Rya.Reisender said:
For me it's not a question of requiring an action. Using your movement to climb results in me asking for a roll, but that doesn't mean it consumes an action. A roll doesn't need to be tied to an action, it's just tied to an uncertain result.

If the player succeeded and reaches the top he could still attack for example.

Why I'm not allowing seeing "Dash" as another attempt is not because the action was already used, but rather because I see ability checks not connected to an action but rather to check an uncertain result and the roll result already made the uncertain result certain, so it's hard for me to see how using the Dash action could make the result uncertain again.

What's making the climb's outcome uncertain though is that something about the climb makes it uncertain (e.g. few handholds or slippery), given an attempt to climb normally. Otherwise, it just costs you half your speed to climb, no roll. A player might remove that uncertainty with a spider climb spell or some other approach.

aco175 · Oct 11, 2018

Now if the roll was to cross a rickety bridge 50ft long. Would I have the PC roll once and double move (move and dash action) using their whole turn but is now over the bridge or roll twice and have 2 turns used to make it across. I think in this scenario I would have only one turn used. I would most likely make the players choose to make it across in one turn by rolling a check or spend two rounds and not bothering to roll.

billd91 · Oct 11, 2018

iserith said:
What's making the climb's outcome uncertain though is that something about the climb makes it uncertain (e.g. few handholds or slippery), given an attempt to climb normally. Otherwise, it just costs you half your speed to climb, no roll. A player might remove that uncertainty with a spider climb spell or some other approach.

It might not be something inherent about the surface, though, that made the climb uncertain. It could be just the fact that there's a swirling melee going on that interfered with the PC trying to make the climb. In that case, another climb check would be appropriate for a second attempt to clamber up the surface.

Satyrn · Oct 11, 2018

billd91 said:
It might not be something inherent about the surface, though . . .

Well, that's just gonna entrench [MENTION=97077]iserith[/MENTION]'s distaste for examples even more.

iserith · Oct 11, 2018

billd91 said:
It might not be something inherent about the surface, though, that made the climb uncertain. It could be just the fact that there's a swirling melee going on that interfered with the PC trying to make the climb. In that case, another climb check would be appropriate for a second attempt to clamber up the surface.

Perhaps. We lack the context to say for sure. Note that I said "something about the climb makes it uncertain" which doesn't rule out "swirling melee around the climber." The specific examples I provided are not exhaustive. They are specifically called out in the rules though, for what it's worth.

Bawylie · Oct 13, 2018

Rya.Reisender said:
Let's say it was established that climbing something requires a successful DC 10 Athletics check and the PC failed that check during combat. Would you allow the PC to roll again on the same turn when he uses the Dash action to retry?

Yes

cmad1977 · Oct 13, 2018

I mean... assuming that I required a roll at all and didn’t just allow climb speed... yes. I’d allow a second attempt with the ‘dash’ type action.

D&D 5E Non-trivial climbing during combat

5ekyu

Hero

Rya.Reisender

Explorer

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

aco175

Legend

billd91

Not your screen monkey (he/him)

Satyrn

First Post

iserith

Magic Wordsmith

Bawylie

A very OK person

cmad1977

Hero

Similar Threads