D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[Shiroiken]

I wanted a CHANCE of falling, that's all. Not instant success but enough to make you think twice. They had no time constraints and no immediate guards.

This is really what it comes down to. If you wanted there to be a consequence, such as falling, you set the DC 10, and giving advantage for the rope works fine. The consequence only happens if they get a 5 or less (falling), and at 3 checks with advantage it's unlikely that anyone would have fallen, but still possible. This puts the players in the situation of deciding the acceptable level of risk. It's a moderate risk for the rogue with only a +1, but will probably not fall if he has advantage. With a +5 the fat dwarf would have been fine, with a failed roll only delaying the character. I'd only make the fat dwarf roll if he's ahead of the rogue, because it doesn't matter how many times the dwarf fails, he'll get there eventually. If he's climbing ahead of the rogue this would keep the rogue on the rope longer, potentially cause him to have to roll more checks and eventually fall, but smart players & characters shouldn't do this.

In theory you could also have set a fall DC of 5 without advantage, but you want to be wary of doing this. If you set a low DC due to the advantage of a knotted rope, then you are opening up the option of them gaining advantage another way. The reverse is also true with disadvantages, but obviously that's most likely on your end anyway.

 

[reelo]

They wanted to throw a grappling hook on a knotted rope 80 feet up and snag a small window they'd broken.

Throw? A rope (solid enough to carry PCs) with a grappling hook? 80ft up? Into a small window?!? I'd rule that to be an impossibly difficult feat.

 

[Flamestrike]

Throw? A rope (solid enough to carry PCs) with a grappling hook? 80ft up? Into a small window?!? I'd rule that to be an impossibly difficult feat.

Yeah, with 14' to a Storey, you're looking at lobbing a grappling hook through a 6th storey window.

While that would be all but impossible for a person of average Strength (Str: 10) I reckon a particularly strong person could manage it.

Id make it a Strength check with a DC of 24 (meaning a Str of 18 would be required to even be in with a shot). Guidance, a nearby Bard, or being a Champion or Jack of All Trades Bard would help.

You could always just send it up there with Mage Hand, or ask your familiar to fly up there and tie it off though.

 

[Flamestrike]

This is really what it comes down to. If you wanted there to be a consequence, such as falling, you set the DC 10, and giving advantage for the rope works fine. The consequence only happens if they get a 5 or less (falling), and at 3 checks with advantage it's unlikely that anyone would have fallen.

Its highly likely multiple people would have fallen.

DC 10 (at advantage) is a roughly 25 percent chance of failure for each attempt. With 3 attempts needed, odds are you fail one of those checks and fall.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Throw? A rope (solid enough to carry PCs) with a grappling hook? 80ft up? Into a small window?!? I'd rule that to be an impossibly difficult feat.

Not really IMO. Difficult? Absolutely! Impossible? No.

Even considering that a grappling hook in 5E is 4 lbs (a bit overweight IMO, but whatever), 80 feet of silk rope would be 8 lbs. Now, by spinning the hook on the rope, you gain speed and can launch the hook towards the window.

IMO the harder part than the weight and distance is the target. How do you determine the check needed? Is it a Strength (Athletics), or even Dexterity (Athletics) check? What is the DC? 20? 25? 30!?! Do you use an attack roll and set an AC for the window as a target?

Other options if you have them might be a "grappling arrow", or using a lighter cord and sinker weight attached to the grappling hook, which releases when the hook catches and allows the sinker weight to draw the cord through. When the cord reaches the ground, up pull the heavier rope up through the loop on the hook.

But, of course if you just want to say "no" as a matter of fact in your game, that is your prerogative.

 

[aco175]

3 quick things to add;

Climbing 80ft may require a Con check at the top rather than just Athletics checks. At some point your muscles become tired and you need to rest or stop. Maybe a mid-point landing where there was a chance for an encounter with something while on a ledge.

People mention that humans climb all the time since we developed from apes and such. In a fantasy game, not all species develop from apes and may not have the same genetics. A dragonborn or halfling may have a harder time climbing, but to make the rules more streamlined and to not offend fantasy races we have only a simplified set of rules.

Last point is that I tend to have PCs of a certain level auto succeed at some things. First tier PCs may need more skills and checks to do things like this, but at Tier 3 I may just allow them with 10 minutes of effort. I may make a roll to see if they are noticed or attacked if the players want to do something specific.

 

[Imaculata]

Because my brother kept bringing it and his insistence on 3.x rules, which was only complicating stuff in my brain. I wanted a CHANCE of falling, that's all. Not instant success but enough to make you think twice. They had no time constraints and no immediate guards.

Even in 3rd edition, climbing a knotted rope is only a DC 5 climb check. In 5th edition, I wouldn't even ask for a check, unless there are specific circumstances that complicate the climbing. Keep in mind that these are seasoned adventurers and heroes. If a common person such as you or I can climb a knotted rope with ease, then surely it would be easy as pie for a bunch of heroic characters?

The best way to think about it is this: "What could go wrong?"

The rope is knotted, so even if a person loses their grip and slips, there is nothing to slip to. They are literally resting their weight on the knots. If you want to add complications (and thus checks), you have to think of something that makes sense in the fiction. Keep in mind that checks are not the goal here. Checks are but a means of resolution when the outcome of an action is in doubt. Your goal here (as I understand it), is to make the climbing more challenging. Think of the challenge first, and then determine if the outcome is in doubt, and how to resolve the outcome. Depending on the actions of the players, a roll may still not be needed, despite it being a challenging task.


Stormy weather
Maybe they are climbing the rope during a storm? They might have to prevent themselves from being flung into the tower by the wind, taking damage, and possibly losing their grip.

(Possible solution: One or more players stay behind to keep the rope stable, no climb check needed but may require a strength check from those that hold the rope in place.)


Under attack
Maybe they are under attack while climbing the rope? I imagine it would not be easy to climb a rope when arrows are coming at you from multiple directions.

(Possible solution: One or more players provide a distraction, so the others can climb up safely. Might require a charisma check for the distraction, but no climb check.)


Freezing temperatures
Maybe the weather conditions are exceptionally harsh? If the players are climbing in very harsh cold weather, their fingers may be frozen, making it hard to maintain their grip.

(Possible solution: The players wear gloves, or use other (magical?) means to keep themselves warm. No check.)

 

[iserith]

Yeah, with 14' to a Storey, you're looking at lobbing a grappling hook through a 6th storey window.

While that would be all but impossible for a person of average Strength (Str: 10) I reckon a particularly strong person could manage it.

Id make it a Strength check with a DC of 24 (meaning a Str of 18 would be required to even be in with a shot). Guidance, a nearby Bard, or being a Champion or Jack of All Trades Bard would help.

You could always just send it up there with Mage Hand, or ask your familiar to fly up there and tie it off though.

As long as the DM rules it's not impossible, then there's no need for a roll here as the OP says there was no consequence for failure. Retries cost only time and there was no time pressure. Your ruling puts a prerequisite on it not being impossible (Str 18 and/or certain class features). If they have the prerequisite, there's no roll - they just succeed since they can keep retrying.

Mage hand would not work here because of its 30-foot range.

 

[jgsugden]

OK. Let me get this straight:

* We're going to take a 4 lb. grappling hook, attach a rope (weighing between 8 and 16 lbs - weight that drags behind the hook), throw it up 80 feet into a small window and manage to hook it. You'd need to add more weight to the hook to have any chance at all, and then you'd need incredible strength to make that happen. A trident weighs 4 lbs and the max range is 60 feet ... andthat is generally assuming a horizontal path.

* We're then, with full adventuring gear, going to climb 80 feet up the wall using the rope (which we'll assume is knotted)*. The percentage of people that could climb an 80 rope with 50 lbs of gear is .... well, small is an understatement. Most of us would die if our lives depended upon it. Still, these are heroes....

How I would handle it:

They'd need to come up with a plan to get the hook in the window. This would require an intelligence roll. If that failed, they'd soon realize that throwing the hook was futile, and that someone would have to climb the hard way and lower the rope.

If they figured out how to get the rope up there, I'd set a Strength DC on how hard it is to climb that rope. If anyone has proficiency in athletics or survivial, or has a background/class/race feature that applied, I'd allow them to give people advantage. The DC would be 10 if the person was minimally equipped, but would rise based upon how much equipment and weight they were bringing and their strength score / carrying capacity. The DC would climb to 30 if they had their full carrying capacity (which means they were trying to climb a role carrying as much as they could carry). If they were carrying half their capacity, it would be 20. So, a strength of 10 character has a carrying capacity of 150 lbs, and the DC would be 20 at 75 lbs of gear, or 15 at 40 lbs of gear. If they remove their gear, bundle it up and raise and lower it they can make life easier.

 

[Horwath]

as long as we have d20 instead of 3d6, these DCs for skills are meaningless.

d20 is just not a good die to represent something that is reliable, as skills.

it works in combat for attack/saves as it gets rolled 30 time or more so that evens out sometimes, but when you have exploration/social encounter that only requires one or maybe two rolls, d20 simply does not work.

skill proficiencies are not the problem, expertise is not the problem, DCs from 5 to 30 are not the problem. D20 is!