D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[iserith]

LOL at this point obviously climbing and other special movement forms should be moved to the "fix" D&D thread:

D&D General - Let's Talk About How to "Fix" D&D

I know. "Fix" implies there is something "wrong" and that's okay. We are allowed to not like the way a thing is done in D&D (or any other game). But it also suggests something positive: that by tweaking or changing a thing, we can make the game better for our own purposes. So here are the...

www.enworld.org

What needs fixing about it? The rules work fine as is in my experience. Under these rules, not every climb requires an ability check, just the ones where something interesting is happening beyond just the climb. The rules pushing DMs to describe more interesting and engaging challenges for the players to overcome rather than just thinking "if climb, then climb check" is a good thing in my book.

 

[Charlaquin]

What needs fixing about it? The rules work fine as is in my experience. Under these rules, not every climb requires an ability check, just the ones where something interesting is happening beyond just the climb. The rules pushing DMs to describe more interesting and engaging challenges for the players to overcome rather than just thinking "if climb, then climb check" is a good thing in my book.

Also notably, if you want every (or any given) climb to require a check, just establish complicating factors that make the climb an engaging challenge.

 

[iserith]

Also notably, if you want every (or any given) climb to require a check, just establish complicating factors that make the climb an engaging challenge.

Yeah, one wonders why there is any resistance at all to the rules pushing this. It's a game of imagination - imagine a difficult situation about the climb that makes it dramatic!

 

[DND_Reborn]

Also notably, if you want every (or any given) climb to require a check, just establish complicating factors that make the climb an engaging challenge.

Because it gets back to the crux of the issue. Why can't the climb, itself, be the challenge without needing "other factors" to complicate it. Climbing is hard enough for a lot of people IRL, (yeah, yeah, I know--but the PCs are "heroes" ) so it can be challenging to PCs as well.

(Note: I am not saying the DC should be high, just that the climb becomes an obstacle. PCs with little or no modifier will find it potentially problematic. If you use the concept of failure by a certain amount equals a fall or slip or whatever, or maybe a natural 1 or something, it becomes an encounter worth playing out. Otherwise, it is just a narration:

DM: You managed to break open the small window. Now what?
Players: We throw our grappling hook through the window after making certain it is secure to the silk rope.
DM: Ok, after a couple tries you manage to get it through the window and it catches.
Players: We check it to make sure it feels secure and then climb up to the window if it is.
DM: Sure, it holds nicely. After about 10 minutes you manage to get everyone through the window, although the Firbolg was a bit of a squuze!
(Players laugh)

There is nothing wrong with this, of course, if that it what you want. I want it to be uncertain, so the PCs might need to find another way in.

Anyway, all I have to do as DM is decide some factor (height/distance, for example) is enough to warrant the call for a check. I don't need anything else, regardless of what others believe the rules say.

It gets into the same spirit as was commented in another thread about the overabundance of magic in a Fantasy game. My preference is for a more mundane setting so magic is special--not mundane and blah, and climbing any significant distance (subject to each individual DM's discretion) is engaging.

I don't think many people would attempt to climb 80 feet up a knotted rope without some form of safety line, etc. Why? Because falling from such a height is stressful, and that makes it challenging.

 

[Imaculata]

I don't think many people would attempt to climb 80 feet up a knotted rope without some form of safety line, etc. Why? Because falling from such a height is stressful, and that makes it challenging.

First of all, why would anyone fall from a knotted rope? Let alone an adventurer.

Second, do you consider stress a factor with all challenges? Do you raise the DC for a jump across a pit, when it has snakes in it?

I'm getting the impression that you want the die roll to be the challenge here, and not a challenge to be the challenge. That does not seem in line with the 5e design philosophy.

 

[Charlaquin]

Because it gets back to the crux of the issue. Why can't the climb, itself, be the challenge without needing "other factors" to complicate it. Climbing is hard enough for a lot of people IRL, (yeah, yeah, I know--but the PCs are "heroes" ) so it can be challenging to PCs as well.

The climb can be challenging to the PCs without necessarily requiring a check to resolve. In my opinion, if a check is happening, it should be because there are meaningful stakes. Something to lose if you fail. Otherwise, why bother?

(Note: I am not saying the DC should be high, just that the climb becomes an obstacle. PCs with little or no modifier will find it potentially problematic. If you use the concept of failure by a certain amount equals a fall or slip or whatever, or maybe a natural 1 or something, it becomes an encounter worth playing out. Otherwise, it is just a narration:

DM: You managed to break open the small window. Now what?
Players: We throw our grappling hook through the window after making certain it is secure to the silk rope.
DM: Ok, after a couple tries you manage to get it through the window and it catches.
Players: We check it to make sure it feels secure and then climb up to the window if it is.
DM: Sure, it holds nicely. After about 10 minutes you manage to get everyone through the window, although the Firbolg was a bit of a squuze!
(Players laugh)

There is nothing wrong with this, of course, if that it what you want. I want it to be uncertain, so the PCs might need to find another way in.

I would much prefer the example narration over the same scene but where everyone rolls a d20 first. Why waste the table time rolling against a trivial DC, maybe having someone slip a bit, maybe take a point of rope burn damage, roll again, and pass? I’d rather narrate quickly past this and get to a scene with more interesting dramatic stakes faster. Or, increase the dramatic stakes in the rope climbing scene so it’s more interesting than “how many d20s will you have to roll before reaching the inevitable conclusion?”

Anyway, all I have to do as DM is decide some factor (height/distance, for example) is enough to warrant the call for a check. I don't need anything else, regardless of what others believe the rules say.

That’s true regardless of what the rules actually say too. It’s your game, do what you want.

It gets into the same spirit as was commented in another thread about the overabundance of magic in a Fantasy game. My preference is for a more mundane setting so magic is special--not mundane and blah, and climbing any significant distance (subject to each individual DM's discretion) is engaging.

I don’t see the connection. What does the prevalence of magic have to do with it?

I don't think many people would attempt to climb 80 feet up a knotted rope without some form of safety line, etc. Why? Because falling from such a height is stressful, and that makes it challenging.

I don’t think many people would do most anything D&D adventures routinely do. But unless there’s some meaningful dramatic tension, I don’t want to waste time rolling dice to see how many times I fail to do the thing I’m guaranteed to eventually succeed at.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Why would anyone fall from a knotted rope?

Why does anyone trip while walking or going up or down stairs? It happens.

It isn't likely of course, and 95+% or better things work out fine for most routine tasks; but like critical fumbles in combat, I like having the chance there because it adds to the tension, however rare, IME.

I'm getting the impression that you want the die roll to be the challenge here, and not a challenge to be the challenge.

No, the die roll just determines the outcome of the challenge. If you, as a DM, decide the outcome is determined to be successful, there is no need to roll, just as no point in rolling if the success is impossible in your determination. If you, as DM, decide the outcome is uncertain (for whatever reason), you ask for a roll. Each DM will be more or less likely to ask for a check depending on what they want their game experience to be like, and what the consider "factors" worth asking for a roll.

With relatively easy tasks, the DC can be set low enough (say 5-10) that depending on the modifier of the PC attempting it, it might be automatic, such has having a +4 or better Str (Athletics) modifier for a DC 5 climb. Unless you house-rule a nat 1 fails, they can't fail in the task so have no point in rolling. But if a PC is only +2 or something, a low enough roll can fail.

 

[Imaculata]

Why does anyone trip while walking or going up or down stairs? It happens.

But do you make your players roll for those things? I'm assuming you don't.

 

[Charlaquin]

Why does anyone trip while walking or going up or down stairs? It happens.

Sure, but it’s also not something I have the slightest interest in simulating in my fantasy roleplay. Just like we don’t narrate every time our characters use the bathroom, we don’t roll to see if they trip every time they go up or down stairs. It’s not an interesting part of the narrative, and in fact it can ruin the tone of an otherwise dramatic adventure.

It isn't likely of course, and 95+% or better things work out fine for most routine tasks; but like critical fumbles in combat, I like having the chance there because it adds to the tension, however rare, IME.

Does it really though? I don’t feel like a very small chance for something stupid to happen adds tension. It might, at best, add humor. At worst, it just adds a random chance to create an uncomfortable tonal clash.

No, the die roll just determines the outcome of the challenge. If you, as a DM, decide the outcome is determined to be successful, there is no need to roll, just as no point in rolling if the success is impossible in your determination. If you, as DM, decide the outcome is uncertain (for whatever reason), you ask for a roll. Each DM will be more or less likely to ask for a check depending on what they want their game experience to be like, and what the consider "factors" worth asking for a roll.

With relatively easy tasks, the DC can be set low enough (say 5-10) that depending on the modifier of the PC attempting it, it might be automatic, such has having a +4 or better Str (Athletics) modifier for a DC 5 climb. Unless you house-rule a nat 1 fails, they can't fail in the task so have no point in rolling. But if a PC is only +2 or something, a low enough roll can fail.

I usually don’t bother with DCs lower than 10. But, the cases where I feel that a very low DC is appropriate, it’s because the stakes are sufficiently high that even that small chance of failure is worth rolling to try and avoid. When there is significant, meaningful, and dramatic risk.

 

[DND_Reborn]

the thing I’m guaranteed to eventually succeed at.

That's the point where it is up to the DM. If you feel the PCs will scale the tower and get in given they have the equipment to do it, then you narrate it and move on.

For me, it doesn't take THAT much time for a group of 4-6 PCs to make checks to move on. In the odd case someone fails the roll, and possibly could fall, then suddenly the challenge takes a dramatic turn. Maybe a feather fall has to be cast? Maybe another PC tries to catch the falling one?

If your estimation is just that they might take a point of burn damage, etc. that is your choice. And it's fine for you. That isn't how it plays in my game. shrug

But do you make your players roll for those things? I'm assuming you don't.

It depends. If the stairs are a flight 80 feet high and they risk falling if they slip or trip or tumble? Yeah, I probably would. The DC would be very low, and most PCs would only fall if they failed multiple attempts.

Just like I wouldn't ask for a check to climb 10 feet, especially when they can help (boosting a PC up, pulling them up, etc.) and they have a rope or ladder.

There has to be some element of risk (such as reasonable damage from a fall) for me to warrant asking for a check.