D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[clearstream]

It’s pretty clear to me the kind of situation the books are talking about under Athletics. Climbing itself is just movement, which is free. It’s when you climb under external circumstances that make climbing difficult, like the climbing surface itself being sheer or slippery, or the presence of hazards or creatures that oppose your climb, that you might have to make a Strength {Athletics) check to resolve your attempt to climb.

Do you feel that calling for a Strength (Athletics) check to climb is justified under the RAW for any of the following circumstances:

• A character in the throes of a tropical disease - that causes them to have a weak and uncertain grip - wants to climb up a rope?
• A character wants to climb up a rope as quickly as possible - throwing caution to the winds - as they desperately flee some horror!?
• A character wants to grandstand in a life-imperiling fashion as they climb up a rope?

Aside from the circumstances described, it is an ordinary climb, so that we can get at whether those circumstances could make an ordinary climb risky. There is danger however: the climb will be high enough that the character could die if they fall. They are 2nd level, alone, and have no resources other than their ability scores of 12 and proficiency in Athletics that will bear on the climb.

 

[clearstream]

Agreed. Exactly as it says under Special Types of Movement. Although, I'd also love to see an example of when crawling might require a Strength (Athletics) check from our heroes. I'm pretty certain it wouldn't be an excessively long, low-ceilinged tunnel.

I believe some are mistaking what is at issue - or at least perhaps mistaking what motivates my arguments.

My argument is not about whether RAW justifies a Strength (Athletics) ability check to climb on account of height. My concern is whether Raw justifies doing so for any possible complicating or difficulty-adding circumstances at all, other than the four printed examples? So for those who are narrowing this to height, I think you have to ask yourself whether you can imagine the possibility that events could unfold in the shared narrative at your table that justified a check and yet didn't match one of the four listed examples?

If you can, then I imagine you can easily see the reasonable implication, and how that bears on the OP.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

I believe some are mistaking what is at issue - or at least perhaps mistaking what motivates my arguments.

My argument is not about whether RAW justifies a Strength (Athletics) ability check to climb on account of height. My concern is whether Raw justifies doing so for any possible complicating or difficulty-adding circumstances at all, other than the four printed examples? So for those who are narrowing this to height, I think you have to ask yourself whether you can imagine the possibility that events could unfold in the shared narrative at your table that justified a check and yet didn't match one of the four listed examples?

If you can, then I imagine you can easily see the reasonable implication, and how that bears on the OP.

I don't believe anyone is arguing the "four printed examples" of "complicating or difficulty-adding circumstances" are exhaustive. Not by a long shot. The difficulties are only limited by one's imagination. After all, calling for the check is "At the DM's option". So the answer to your concern is: Yes.

If a difficulty emerged in the narrative during the climb then it follows that your second question can also be answered: Yes.

I'm not sure why this causes "concern" since the game is centered around the DM, using their imagination, posing interesting challenges for the players and their PCs. Can you elaborate on your "concern" here?

I'll just note that "at the DM's option" does not always equal "call for a STR(Athletics) roll". It all comes down to the difficulty being introduced into the narrative. If the proposed approach of the PCs in trying to climb the rope with said added difficulty has some uncertainty behind its outcome and failure has a meaningful consequence, then at the DM's option a successful STR(Athletics) roll might be appropriate for the PC to continue making climbing progress.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Well, you are consistent. I'll give you that.

LOL, thanks... I think.

But did you read what the rules on jumping actually say?

Sure, here they are for future reference:

Long Jump. When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.

This rule assumes that the height of your jump doesn't matter, such as a jump across a stream or chasm. At your DM's option, you must succeed on a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check to clear a low obstacle (no taller than a quarter of the jump's distance), such as a hedge or low wall. Otherwise, you hit it.

When you land in difficult terrain, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to land on your feet. Otherwise, you land prone.

So, let me ask you this. You have a STR 12, but you need to jump a gap 15 feet. How would you rule it?

Because you are making up your own rules here.

Well, not quite, but in a way the designers of 5E have forced me to.

RAW, it is IMPOSSIBLE--IMPOSSIBLE mind you!--for a PC with a STR 12 to make a running jump of 15 feet. Because they have NO rules for it, no guideline on how to implement it.

The "rules" for jumping only allow you to call a check to (edited):
1. clear an obstacle or
2. attempt to not fall prone when you land in difficult terrain

That's it. Nothing else. So, we (myself and other DMs I know, anyway) are forced to ask for checks in situations not covered by the "rules".

A 10 ft jump is a 10 ft jump. It doesn't matter if it is across hot boiling lava, a pit of snakes, a spike pit, or a puddle. It is part of your movement, and requires no check according to 5e rules.

No, it isn't. A 10-foot jump over land is nothing (technically, you could stumble and turn your ankle or something, but that is not meaningful consequence to failure--at least not immediately). A 10-foot jump over a pit filled with spikes, acid, snakes, or whatever (maybe a 100-foot deep pit...?) is not the same thing.

Oh, there I go with that bloody distance/height thing again... Guess I am consistent (one of the hallmarks of a good DM, IMO ).

When it comes to these judgement calls it comes down to a matter of perspective about the nature of your game. A lot of players want "heroic" PCs which do not worry about such mundane challenges and only call for checks if the events are truly dramatic. Cool, great for them! For myself (and others like me) I prefer my PCs to be heroes because they DO heroic and dangerous things--not just because the plot says so. I like a more "mundane" game and atmosphere in that sense.

So, I call for checks when I feel there is significant danger or consequences to failing--like falling to your death or serious injury.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

LOL, thanks... I think.


Sure, here they are for future reference:


So, let me ask you this. You have a STR 12, but you need to jump a gap 15 feet. How would you rule it?

They fall in. But, knowing the rules in the PHB, I would hope the player would try to come up with another plan.

Well, not quite, but in a way the designers of 5E have forced me to.

RAW, it is IMPOSSIBLE--IMPOSSIBLE mind you!--for a PC with a STR 12 to make a running jump of 15 feet. Because they have NO rules for it, no guideline on how to implement it.

The "rules" for jumping only allow you to:
1. clear an obstacle or
2. attempt to not fall prone when you land in difficult terrain

That's it. Nothing else. So, we (myself and other DMs I know, anyway) are forced to ask for checks in situations not covered by the "rules".

You might want to read the "rules" again. I've posted them again for you below. They do more than those two things. I've bolded the important part you seem to be skipping over for some of your adjudications but not for others.

No, it isn't. A 10-foot jump over land is nothing (technically, you could stumble and turn your ankle or something, but that is not meaningful consequence to failure--at least not immediately). A 10-foot jump over a pit filled with spikes, acid, snakes, or whatever (maybe a 100-foot deep pit...?) is not the same thing.

Oh, there I go with that bloody distance/height thing again... Guess I am consistent (one of the hallmarks of a good DM, IMO ).

When it comes to these judgement calls it comes down to a matter of perspective about the nature of your game. A lot of players want "heroic" PCs which do not worry about such mundane challenges and only call for checks if the events are truly dramatic. Cool, great for them! For myself (and others like me) I prefer my PCs to be heroes because they DO heroic and dangerous things--not just because the plot says so. I like a more "mundane" game and atmosphere in that sense.

So, I call for checks when I feel there is significant danger or consequences to failing--like falling to your death or serious injury.

So, do you explain to your players ahead of time that you are ignoring the 5e jumping rules when you see fit? You really tell the 18 STR fighter, who has plenty of room to run (more than 10') before making the jump, that they need to make a STR(Athletics) check to clear a 10' wide pit because... something nasty is down in the pit? But, if the pit lacked something nasty, the fighter could easily make the jump?

Long Jump. (PHB p 182)
When you make a long jump, you cover a number of feet up to your Strength score if you move at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump. When you make a standing long jump, you can leap only half that distance. Either way, each foot you clear on the jump costs a foot of movement.

This rule assumes that the height of your jump doesn't matter, such as a jump across a stream or chasm. At your DM's option, you must succeed on a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check to clear a low obstacle (no taller than a quarter of the jump's distance), such as a hedge or low wall. Otherwise, you hit it.

When you land in difficult terrain, you must succeed on a DC 10 Dexterity (Acrobatics) check to land on your feet. Otherwise, you land prone.

 

[Hriston]

Well, "climbing" covers a lot of things. The point of debate has been if the height can be enough of a circumstance due to the danger involved to make the climb difficult.

If you don't think so (which it appears you don't), that's fine. But can you understand how other DMs (such as myself) think it can be, and thus are also covered by the same rules and examples given?

Yes, but I think you’re mistaken. Climbing a long distance or to a great height is still just climbing, which is a matter of freely moving your character where you want it to go within the game-world. Simply climbing is not meant to be difficult. It’s circumstances you encounter while climbing that can either make the act of climbing itself difficult (like a difficult climbing surface) or pose a threat or obstacle that can make it difficult to make forward progress or not fall.

 

[clearstream]

EDITED The first part of my reply was intended for a different poster.

I'm not sure why this causes "concern" since the game is centered around the DM, using their imagination, posing interesting challenges for the players and their PCs. Can you elaborate on your "concern" here?

You may have missed some of the discussion Say we agree that the examples are not limiting? Thus we believe there are circumstances possible that could justify a check other than the four examples. But at that point, from what privileged position can we then deny that each DM is equally justified by RAW in calling for a check whenever there are costs for failure and the circumstances seem sufficiently difficult to them?

Some posters read the examples in RAW as incomplete or permissive, while others read those same examples as complete or prescriptive. Because I can imagine cases that fall outside them, I am in the former group.

 

[clearstream]

Yes, but I think you’re mistaken. Climbing a long distance or to a great height is still just climbing, which is a matter of freely moving your character where you want it to go within the game-world. Simply climbing is not meant to be difficult. It’s circumstances you encounter while climbing that can either make the act of climbing itself difficult (like a difficult climbing surface) or pose a threat or obstacle that can make it difficult to make forward progress or not fall.

As a point of reference, here are climb DCs in WotC publications, I verified a couple in OOTA - the narrative for those cases says nothing about any factors in difficulty other than that it's an N foot high climb.

str athletics 10 climb on rope bridge after falling off and catching yourself
str athletics 15 climb 50 foot natural rock cliff
str athletics 15 climb 20 foot natural rock 10' x 10' pit
str athletics 10 climb 10 foot rock wall
str athletics 11 climb 10 foot carved stone pit
str athletics 12 climb 15 foot pit
str athletics 12 climb 10 foot cliff
str athletics 13 climb 10 foot wall with hand holds
str athletics 10 climb 50 foot cliff with hand holds
str athletics 10 climb 30 foot natural rock wall
str athletics 10 climb 100 foot shaft, one check for the whole thing, it's carved by magic
str athletics 11 climb 6 foot natural rock cliff
str athletics 15 climb 30 foot wall 'carved' by a purple worm
str athletics 15 climb 40 foot wall 'carved' by a purple worm
str athletics 15 climb 200 foot slope with 60% grade it is 155 feet high and 126.5 feet long
str athletics 12 climb 40 foot sheer sides of the crevasse
str athletics 10 climb outside of 20 foot diameter metal cage
str athletics 13 climb on metal cage after falling off and catching yourself
str athletics 10 climb 60 foot natural rock cliff
str athletics 10 climb 40 foot natural cliff with hand holds
str athletics 15 climb 2nd floor of lodge timber & plaster construction
str athletics 10 climb 75 feet ice wall with hand holds
str athletics 15 climb 8 foot ice ledge
str athletics 15 climb 9 feet or higher ice ledge with tools
str athletics 14 climb 15 feet around to a ledge

 

[SkidAce]

Why would another attempt to climb not be possible if time isn’t a factor?

Died from the fall?

 

[SkidAce]

I see that this point was already brought up, my bad.