How to make an encounter with falling great distances interesting and dangerous, but not deadly?

Coroc said:

One advice: Do not try to cover everything in advance, meaning guessing every possible misshap your group might or might not make.

Because: What happens if you all laid it out perfectly and your players decide to kill some bird man to craft themselves emergency parachutes?

Just use the standard falling rules for distance, give saving throws (dex) if the landing spot is soft then with advantage, especially since you seem to provide unlimited rests.

Click to expand...

My job as DM isn't to define what the players can do. It is to create interesting and entertaining things for them to interact with. I was struggling here and hence my solicitation for help.

What happens if they do that? I run with it.

That's a big assumption about how I run my game. Kir Sabal is this adventure's "Rivendell."

Dioltach said:

How about the time lost from falling and having to climb all over again? Perhaps a storm is brewing, or enemies are coming from below?

Click to expand...

Well, the ascent takes about 1 hour + 10 minutes for each failed ability check. The way it's handled in the book is three ability checks, and if you fall you don't fall all the way, you instead either take 3d6 (i.e. fall 30') or take an exhaustion level (i.e. emulating a more complicated tumble, having to reset anchor lines, and climb back up switchbacks).

Because I just ran an extensive combat last session, I'm looking to change up pacing here. Threat of enemies below would present this as backdrop to a combat, and I'd like to avoid combat as a possibility for pacing.

Impending storm is a possibility.

Sadras said:

Level of Exhaustion, Equipment/Clothing damage or loss, Lingering Injury, Time (Daylight loss), Time (Environmental Factors - powerful wind strikes the cliff side every hour, making checks harder), Time (Sunburn), Inspiration Loss, Hit Dice.

Click to expand...

Good ideas, Sadras Especially like wind buffeting the cliffs about every hour.

clearstream said:

Unless there is time pressure, this is hard to make interesting. Some tension factors -

• Each success moves the characters higher up, making failure successively more catastrophic... though I guess anything above about 120' could be deadly.
• 550'/30 = 18 so potentially there are 18 checks here... no one is going to make (1-DC)^18 checks successfully...
• You've hinted there are checks characters can make to help their chances. Each such check should take a turn to make. Such as a turn taken to place a stay or anchor.

Okay, suppose characters sensibly rope themselves together and/or use anchor points to limit their maximum fall. The wall takes 18 climbs and there are three numbers to consider.

1. Wall DC (say 10 for the first 6 climbs, 15 for the second 6, and 20 for the last 6). This is the chance of no progress for a character. It gets harder as higher for, you know, tension.
2. Wall DC -5 (5, 10, 15). This is the chance of a fall using the DMG guideline for a catastrophe.
3. If there is a fall, you need to know how hard it is to stop, and what can stop it. One option is stays or anchors. Those might be made with Intelligence (Sleight of Hand) as recommended in Xanathar's for Tying Knots. It's up the characters how many stays they set. Another is they might rope themselves together, in which case it would be something like a Strength (Athletics) to stop a fall with a catastrophe being to also fall. Or both. Perhaps it is simply 5/10' fallen + 5 per extra character falling? So if a character has a stay or a character they are roped to 20' below them, they are saved on a DC 10. The stay breaks or the other character falls on a DC 5. I think for simplicity I would not use the -5 guide here, but just a succeed or fail... with fail meaning plunging to death. Or you do, meaning a simple fail is their fall continues but is effectively restarted at the height of the stay, while only a fail by 5 means they plunge to death?

Anyway... this doesn't really come to life unless there is a time and/or resource pressure so that they can't just set a million anchors. How much rope do they have? How many turns do they have? Imagine they had 60 turns, then they could fix a stay every 30' (18 turns) allowing them to make no progress on 24 separate turns of climbing (two characters making no progress on the same turn is the same as one).

I think something like this - generous chances to not fall and backstops to be caught if falling - while keeping the danger absolute: if there is a cascade of calamities you are dead. Could work. It's a lot of checks to make, but should be quick if you just get everyone to roll for each turn simultaneously, and get them to declare stays, but not roll for them unless they are needed. You'll need a way to keep track of progress. If they come up with something clever then that can be incorporated as a reduced DC or extra save.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your insights! So, I definitely am not looking to make this a dice-rolling smorgasbord; 18 check would be an absurd exercise in "when do I fail?", and it's evident the adventure writers realized that too, which is why they wrote the ascent as just 3 checks. However, their design kind of neuters the tension of the ascent.

Yep, my players have established a moving anchor-and-rope system as standard operating procedure in these kinds of situations. Party is equipped with a bunch of pitons (stays) & five lengths of 50' rope. Grung Druid PC has climb speed and can transform into an ape with climb speed that can carry another character up on her back (so long as climb doesn't exceed 3 hours – max time limit on her wild shape – no problem). The rest use rope system. I'm thinking of this anchor system as the last line of defense – it's the backup if they can't react to the fall in another way before the stay catches.

Actually, combining what you're saying with [MENTION=6688277]Sadras[/MENTION]' idea, the loss of pitons/rope could be a consequence of certain failed checks.

I deliberately want to avoid combat or the risk of it as a time pressure (because pacing reasons & several players leap into combat if a situation smells like a fight & aarakocra would sound alarm and launch counter-offensive), however as [MENTION=21843]Dioltach[/MENTION] mentioned I could do something with inclement weather. Generally speaking, the situation as presented is a roughly 1-2 long difficult/technical climb, no external pressures.

I'll be tracking their progress on a map of Kir Sabal which I'm printing at 18" x 32" and mounting to foam core, creating backing so it stands up at the table, and cutting little slits along the walkways and sticking/adhering cardboard through to simulate the walkways. Players will move their minis along these walkways. And I have some invisible flight stands we can use for stuff that doesn't fit the mold.

darkbard said:

Why not implement this as a 4E style Skill Challenge? Predetermine the number of successful skill checks before three failures, but don't predetermine which skills can be implemented; let that be determined by the players' declared actions. Consequences for individual failures, i.e., before failing the SC entirely, could be some predetermined range of falling damage for the individual PC, burning a hit die, stepping up the next skill check to a higher DC, etc. Failing the SC entirely could be stumbling into a combat encounter unprepared at some point of progress along the way, height determined by how many successful checks they have made towards completing the challenge. Then, climbing the rest of the way is cut off to them, but (failing forward) they have the opportunity to ascend through other means (perhaps through some item or route revealed after defeating the combat), or descend without risk of injury, or ... you get the idea.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I have some experience with skill challenges. The X successes before Y failures, poor odds of player success, and fixation on rolling sans narrative really turned me off to the way I've seen them handled.

Generally speaking, however, yes I'm looking to design this as a non-combat challenge which involves the possibility for creative skill/tool checks (as well as creative spell use, creative equipment use, etc), interesting (but not death) consequences for a failed check, and meaningful choices.

SkidAce said:

I use "sliding" damage where appropriate instead of falling. Unless its a catastrophe, like falling into space, then failing to catch edge, sliding damage slowly atrits their hp.

In your scenario, I would have long rests either give exhaustion or not recover all hp, only HD spent.

Edit: sliding damage is half what falling would be, its like tumbling down the hill a ways.

Click to expand...

Hmm, you mean change how long rests work just for this location? I'm not inclined to do that, feels like I'd be pulling the rug out from under the players.

And we've had plenty of other situations (ambush, hazards, thundering canyons with booming laughter, nightmares) that have impeded long rests in the past, not to mention a curse spreading through the jungle slowly making it harder to find suitable camp sites to rest.

Do the PCs need something from the aarakocra? You could make each fall (and how the PC deals with it) affect the group's prestige or reputation in the aarakocra's eyes, providing a modifier on social interactions when they try to negotiate.

Psych challenge:

As the PCs get higher up, their anxiety about falling increases. Ask them to give you an embarrassing fact or anecdote about their characters for each waypoint, which is where they'll make their fear checks. Fail a fear check, and you get to choose which embarrassing message the PC reveals as he screams for his life, as in:

"I DON'T WANT TO DIE! I [embarrassment]!"

Quartz said:

Why are you doing this in the first place? Unless it adds to the fun of the gaming session, cut it. You want them to get to the top so they get to the top. Have them each make an appropriate skill check to determine whether or not they encountered a set-back, and let the player narrate the setback and the cost at which they overcame it.

Click to expand...

Good question. There are a couple reasons:

1. Illustrating that the location is quite hard to reach, thus explaining why it's sustained itself as such a rare sanctuary amidst an increasingly hostile and undead-filled jungle.
2. Illustrating the isolated/watchful nature of the aarakocra – they're not cruel or militant in repelling potential guests, but they are cautious of outsiders, so they don't help the PCs ascend, they want to see the PCs succeed on their own, to prove themselves worthy of being in the presence of a living saint. Useful for the PCs to know in their dealings with the aarakocra.
3. Setting up an attack on the aarakocra monastery when the PCs make a return trip there. In the adventure, they have a strong motivation to get a ritual McGuffin at another location so the presiding aarakocra saint can bestow them with flight. When they return, (foreshadowed) gargoyles strike. And the party would face the ascent with the time pressure of combat happening up above (and the ascent would likely be simplified/changed, so as not to just be a repeat of the same).
4. And lastly... this part isn't in the book's presentation of Kir Sabal... I'd like to weave an exploration narrative into their ascent. Like when I ran a pit trap and the pit's floor collapsed, dropping the PCs into an elven ruin they could explore & uncover the mysteries of. I'd like for falling to potentially (depending on reaction chosen by players) reveal lore about the monastery, the aarakocra's place in the setting, prophecies, foreshadowing, etc. Make falling not just soaking up some damage, but falling into something of interest or potentially complication.

As for the "let the players narrate it" advice, while appreciated, I'm not sure that it suits the majority of players in my group. One loves it. But another really hasn't grasped the non-gamist side of D&D. Another cracks jokes about abusing narrative free reign when I've tried similar things in the past. Another is a fellow DM who just wants to enjoy playing. Another's military schedule is so intense, he doesn't have the bandwidth for that by the time he's at the table. No fault of their own. I think it's good advice, generally, I may have to try again... Previously, in our second session, I did a flashback sequence in which the players narrated the story of their first dungeon to a NPC, using cards I made with leading prompts like "At the climax of the dungeon we confronted _______." Several commented that it was fun, but jarring, wished they knew it was coming in advance, and that they liked the prompts I made which seemed to help them.

You should design a reward for completing the task within a specific time frame. Maybe the bird people will offer more help and give more respect if they complete it faster.

Then, give them two ways to ascend - and easier longer route where the risk of falling is a minor set-back (represented as 1 or two levels of exhaustion, or loss of HP or spells) but no real chance for succeeding within the deadline because it might take several days (going up a path around the mountain.)

The second way is much quicker but deadlier. Harder rolls, higher falls, more risk. Falling is a major set-back but with a chance of succeeding even if they fail the first time because they can climb it in 6-12 hours. (following a multi-pitch climbing route)

In this scenario, falling doesn't represent character death, it represents a serious set-back. IF the character loses all their HPs, they are not dead but unconscious and now they have to carry them or wait for him to wake up, the character has broken a leg and is at 1/2 movement or has broken an arm and some of the challenges require the other PCs to haul the PC up etc...The injured player has mechanical penalties that last days (this is homebrew now, obviously). And having to start over will be even harder because that storm is setting in and the winds are getting high and the rock is getting wet.

If you give the players two options, they can choose the easy way and you can hand-wave the journey and dealing with the NPCs will become the harder challenge. If they choose the difficult way, the reap the benefit at the end.

The important thing is the players choose whether they want this to a challenge that takes centre stage.