D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[Hriston]

I'm going to reorganize your post a little, so I can respond to each of your bullet points separately.

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

• 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?

No, climbing a rope is just climbing a rope which doesn't warrant a check in my view. Your description of the disease is inadequate for me to conclude otherwise.

• A character wants to climb up a rope as quickly as possible - throwing caution to the winds - as they desperately flee some horror!?

I think moving at a fast pace covers this action, but in a case where the character is attempting something that would require a rate of movement that exceeds a fast pace, I might call for a Dexterity check.

• A character wants to grandstand in a life-imperiling fashion as they climb up a rope?

Assuming the character is trying to influence their audience's attitude in some way, I might call for a Charisma check, and I think proficiency in Athletics or Performance could apply.

 

[Hriston]

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

What conclusion do you draw from this evidence?

 

[Imaculata]

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?

Unless the players make an extra effort to help clear that distance, according to raw they can't make that jump.

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.

Just because there isn't an explicit rule to make that jump, does not exclude the possibility of the players coming up with a solution. So it is not impossible. Just not possible with a normal jump.

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

I think it is more accurate to say that 5e rules allow a pc to jump or climb as far as their movement allows, without a check. But the DM may ask for a check if there is an obstable they need to clear, or if the pc is landing in difficult terrain. They don't state that these are the only conditions that allow for a check, as the DM is always empowered to decide a check is needed. The rules are proscriptive in this way, showing that with most jumps, a check is not needed.

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.

A 10 ft. jump across an empty pit is just as difficult as a jump across a 10 ft. pit filled with sharks with laserbeams on their heads. It is a 10 ft jump, so if you have a STR 10 or more and a running start, you can make the jump. No check. How more clear can the rules be?

The rules make it very clear that it is your strength that determines how far a distance in feet you can jump. The pit doesn't become bigger because it is filled with deadly laserbeam sharks. Heck, one could even argue that most jumps in D&D are scary. But that doesn't justify a check.

When it comes to these judgement calls it comes down to a matter of perspective about the nature of your game.

I really don't think it does. There is what the rules say, and how you interpret the rules differently. As @iserith already pointed out, you are empowered by 5e rules to do whatever you want. But the rules say a check is not needed.

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

Which Is fine. But in respect to jumping and climbing, you are introducing a house rule into the game which is more in line with older editions.

 

[Charlaquin]

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?

I know I’m not the one you were asking, but... Without some other means of increasing your jump distance (maybe a springboard or a pole vault or something?), you can’t.

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 seems like an accurate summary of the jumping rules to me.

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".

“Forced” in the sense that doing so is your only option if you want to allow a character to jump further than the rules allow them to, yes. Or to rephrase, if you want to allow the players to do something outside the scope of the rules, you have to make a ruling that is outside the scope of the rules. That’s... practically tautological.

 

[Hriston]

You're free to think that of course, but I don't think I am since IMO height (and the danger associated with it) is a factor which would require a call for a check. At least you can appreciate that whichever way a DM leans, it is a judgement call... like most of 5E. shrug


Again, this is where I think "climbing" and the rules associated with it are meant to cover a wide range of challenges. A climb up a steep hill, a tree, etc. without much danger from falling (depending on the height of the tree) might not be hard and the risk is minor, if any. If the PCs climbed the tower with a climber's kit, a second rope used as a harness/safety line, etc. so the risk of falling and serious injury or death is mitigated, their additional planning would convince me (given time) they could do it safely.

The simplest way I can put it is this: if there is risk or danger in a situation which has consequences for failure, I call for a check.

I think this is what’s in contention, though. Since your ability to climb up to your movement under baseline circumstances is guaranteed, there is no risk of failure, so there’s no reason to call for a check.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Unless the players make an extra effort to help clear that distance, according to raw they can't make that jump.

Without a special feature (like Step of the Wind) or something, they can't according to your use of the rules. That is extremely unfortunate IMO and I'm very glad I don't play like that...

I know I’m not the one you were asking, but... Without some other means of increasing your jump distance (maybe a springboard or a pole vault or something?), you can’t.

Exactly, you can't. Sadly. The "rules" if you read them without bringing into them the ability to call for a check (something the DMG clearly outlines), you are only limiting your game.

But the DM may ask for a check if there is an obstable they need to clear, or if the pc is landing in difficult terrain.

So, you feel those are the only times the DM can ask for a check? Again, you (and others) seem to be say (even though I don't think you are) that only times the DM may ask for check is given the options presented in the specific rules related to movement (more or less...).

They don't state that these are the only conditions that allow for a check, as the DM is always empowered to decide a check is needed. The rules are proscriptive in this way, showing that with most jumps, a check is not needed.

Oh, so you do understand the DM can ask for checks at other times...

So, it comes down to this (for you): if you don't have a high enough STR, you can't make the jump.

That's pathetic for a game, especially if you view PCs as "heroic" types. And again, I am very glad I don't play like that...

A 10 ft. jump across an empty pit is just as difficult as a jump across a 10 ft. pit filled with sharks with laserbeams on their heads.

Precisely. But both would require a check due to the danger and fact failure has consequences (falling in the first cast, falling and being bitten by snake and/or shot by their lasers in the second case... ).

Now, those are not the same as just making a 10-foot jump on solid ground, with no obstacle in the way.

I really don't think it does.

Fine, and no surprise there. I think it does...

But in respect to jumping and climbing, you are introducing a house rule into the game which is more in line with older editions.

And I know I am completely within the bounds of the rules of the game (no houserule required) by playing the way we do.

I think this is what’s in contention, though. Since your ability to climb up to your movement under baseline circumstances is guaranteed, there is no risk of failure, so there’s no reason to call for a check.

It isn't guaranteed, though. The rules give two specific examples of when a check might be called for. But they are just that, examples, and IMO asking for a check due to "great" heights is a factor that falls within the DM's prerogative and in line with the rules as written. Certainly what constitutes a great height or even a complicating factor is subjective... and one DM could very well rule differently from another.

Again, this is what I mean by subjective, of course, to many DMs a high climb might not warrant a role, to others such as myself, it certainly does. Otherwise, you get into ridiculous assumptions...

And, although it is hardly exhaustive, the examples in the modules provided above show how even the writers and designers of the game feel IMO asking for a check given only distances is reasonable...

 

[Charlaquin]

Exactly, you can't. Sadly. The "rules" if you read them without bringing into them the ability to call for a check (something the DMG clearly outlines), you are only limiting your game.

I don’t know what’s sad about that. The rules make it clear how far a character can jump. If they wish to jump further than they can jump, they need to describe an approach to that goal, which the DM will then resolve according to the general action resolution rules. If the goal is “jump farther than I can jump” then the approach “try really hard” doesn’t seem to me to have a reasonable chance of success, and therefore doesn’t require a check to resolve. If you have some other means (again, maybe a springboard or something?), then yes, it’s up to the DM to determine if the action has a reasonable chance of success and failure and a meaningful cost or consequence for failure.

 

[Hriston]

It isn't guaranteed, though. The rules give two specific examples of when a check might be called for. But they are just that, examples, and IMO asking for a check due to "great" heights is a factor that falls within the DM's prerogative and in line with the rules as written. Certainly what constitutes a great height or even a complicating factor is subjective... and one DM could very well rule differently from another.

Again, this is what I mean by subjective, of course, to many DMs a high climb might not warrant a role, to others such as myself, it certainly does. Otherwise, you get into ridiculous assumptions...

As others have pointed out, this is like calling for a check for someone to walk across the floor. Or, to bring in a dangerous consequence of failure, it's like calling for a check to swim across an otherwise placid body of water because someone might sink to the bottom and drown if they failed the check.

And, although it is hardly exhaustive, the examples in the modules provided above show how even the writers and designers of the game feel IMO asking for a check given only distances is reasonable...

I’m not at all convinced that any of those DCs are meant to reflect the height of the climbs involved. I would think that many of them could reflect the difficulty of the climbing surface, however, and if I was running one of those adventures and decided to use the DCs as a suggestion, I would describe the surface of the pit or cliff wall as suitably difficult to climb.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I don’t know what’s sad about that.

It's sad because it makes challenges pointless. How many dungeons have a 10' wide pit? So, any PC with STR 10 or better can jump it without issue and never worry about falling in and taking damage despite it being 100' deep... Hardly any point in having it there, that being the case.

As others have pointed out, this is like calling for a check for someone to walk across the floor.

No, it isn't the same at all.

Or, to bring in a dangerous consequence of failure, it's like calling for a check to swim across an otherwise placid body of water because someone might sink to the bottom and drown if they failed the check.

Depends on how far the swim is... 20 feet? 20 miles? Just like climbing distance... As others have said, if you don't like making a STR (Athletics) doing CON (Athletics) works as well.

I would describe the surface of the pit or cliff wall as suitably difficult to climb.

Which is, of course, your prerogative. Without taking the time to reference the examples, I couldn't tell you if that is a factor or not.

At any rate, I see no point in continuing this discussion with any of you further. I really thought this had been resolved a few pages (or more) back and as far as I am concerned, it is. I am completely within the rules to play the game as we do, and we enjoy our games (as much as I can enjoy 5E, anyway...), and that is all that really matters.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

It's sad because it makes challenges pointless. How many dungeons have a 10' wide pit? So, any PC with STR 10 or better can jump it without issue and never worry about falling in and taking damage despite it being 100' deep... Hardly any point in having it there, that being the case.

Open pits that are 10’ wide are not a real challenge for interesting heroic adventurers. Rolling dice due to some home brew obfuscation of the rules to jump across them doesn’t change that fact for most of us here. Tip: camouflage your 10’ pit. Now you have a different challenge.

(as much as I can enjoy 5E, anyway...),

It’s too bad you aren’t more receptive to advice. You might enjoy the game more.