D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[iserith]

Constitution (Athletics) - a climb check using a different ability score.

If the group is using the variant method for ability checks. And it's not the same as a Strength (Athletics) check that resolves overcoming difficult situations while climbing mentioned in the specific rules for climbing. It's asking and answering a different question.

 

[clearstream]

If the group is using the variant method for ability checks. And it's not the same as a Strength (Athletics) check that resolves overcoming difficult situations while climbing mentioned in the specific rules for climbing. It's asking and answering a different question.

I felt your move to claim that climbing a great height would be Con constituted a rhetorical gambit. If a DM did want to do it that way, then they could as well use the suggestions for using alternative abilities.

 

[iserith]

I felt your move to claim that climbing a great height would be Con constituted a rhetorical gambit. If a DM did want to do it that way, then they could as well use the suggestions for using alternative abilities.

I don't know what you're implying with "rhetorical gambit." Very simply, a Strength (Athletics) check may be appropriate when the PCs are trying to overcome a difficult situation while climbing per the rules in Chapters 7 and 8. Examples show what the rules mean by "difficult situation." Length of climb is not among them. A Constitution check may be appropriate if the PCs are pushing past their normal limits which, like a forced march, seems a better way to resolve, say, whether or not a character is exhausted by the length of a climb. But these are resolving different things, even if the group is using the variant rules for ability checks. The ability is what matters in an ability check. That they may both add on the Athletics skill proficiency is irrelevant.

 

[clearstream]

I don't know what you're implying with "rhetorical gambit." Very simply, a Strength (Athletics) check may be appropriate when the PCs are trying to overcome a difficult situation while climbing per the rules in Chapters 7 and 8. Examples show what the rules mean by "difficult situation." Length of climb is not among them.

Length of climb is not among them for you. Unless you're prepared to say that the examples list the only things that can be considered, you cannot avoid admitting to ambiguity.

A Constitution check may be appropriate if the PCs are pushing past their normal limits which, like a forced march, seems a better way to resolve, say, whether or not a character is exhausted by the length of a climb. But these are resolving different things, even if the group is using the variant rules for ability checks. The ability is what matters in an ability check. That they may both add on the Athletics skill proficiency is irrelevant.

Whether or not a DM might decide to consider exhaustion - or would be justified in doing so - is not at issue.

 

[iserith]

Length of climb is not among them for you. Unless you're prepared to say that the examples list the only things that can be considered, you cannot avoid admitting to ambiguity.

Whether or not a DM might decide to consider exhaustion - or would be justified in doing so - is not at issue.

The category of examples in the specific rules for climbing is not ambiguous. Length of climb doesn't fit in that category.

As for the Constitution check, here I am offering a way to make the length of the climb a challenge that falls within the rules.

 

[Charlaquin]

Given we agree there is ambiguity, those arguments are logically false. I'll try and illustrate it below.

(C((ABC')A')B')X

That is not a perfect illustration. Because we said there is ambiguity, we cannot delimit the contents of the set. The fact that X is outside the set on all accounts doesn't prevent there being multiple equally valid lists of what is inside the set. Inside C's circle are CABC'. Inside A's circle are ABC'A. Inside B's are ABC'A'B. All exclude X.

I apologize, but I can’t make heads or tails of any of this.

That example worked better in my head but hopefully you can see that to say the circle is ambiguous, logically entails that there is not one authoritative list of contents. There are multiple, equally valid (unable to be chosen between) ways to draw the circle. And that doesn't change just because there are things that on all accounts are put outside. The language is deceptive. We casually spoke of a circle, but seeing that circle is ambiguous we must hold in mind that it comprises multiple overlapping circles, all equally valid - no definitive way to choose between them.

I disagree. There is one circle, which contains all the things the developers intended to constitute a Strength (Athletics) check. The bounds of that circle may not be clear, but they do exist. It is the DM’s role to determine what they think lies within the circle and what doesn’t, but they could come to incorrect assessments.

I hope that you can see that - even though we haven't stumbled across them yet - there might be circumstances that you would call difficult that @6ENow! would not.

Of course there might be. And one of us would be right and the other would be wrong. We might then discuss our reasons for thinking these things do or don’t call for a Strength (Athletics) check, and may or may not succeed in persuading the other.

The certainty of the arguments you put - and the reliance on there being a single definitive circle - are logically not supportable once you agree upon there being ambiguity.

I think you and I may be working from different definitions of the word “ambiguous.” To me it means unclear. You seem to be using it to mean undefined.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Right, I'm just paraphrasing the rules for adjudication there. We have to leave open the possibility that if a PC is presented with a mile-high climb with the risk of exhaustion that they pull out some kind of plan, feature, item, boon, etc. that will allow them to ignore the risk of exhaustion - removing the meaningful consequence for failure - and thus make the climb without a Constitution check.

I just don't get it. The beginning of the thread you said that climbing is just a type of movement regardless the length of the climb. Walking two miles doesn't require an athletics check or a constitution check. A one mile climb is the equivalent of a two mile hike in terms of movement. Wouldn't it be more consistent to say that they don't need a 'special boon' to to make such a climb? They can just climb it. Hand-waive. They get to the top and have an epic duel with the rapier wielding guy at the top of the cliff.

 

[iserith]

I just don't get it. The beginning of the thread you said that climbing is just a type of movement regardless the length of the climb. Walking two miles doesn't require an athletics check or a constitution check. A one mile climb is the equivalent of a two mile hike in terms of movement. Wouldn't it be more consistent to say that they don't need a 'special boon' to to make such a climb? They can just climb it. Hand-waive. They get to the top and have an epic duel with the rapier wielding guy at the top of the cliff.

As far as the specific rules governing climbing go, length of the climb is not a difficult situation the rules contemplate as evidenced by the given examples. So, no Strength (Athletics) check to resolve tasks related to overcoming the challenge of a lengthy climb. If the DM wanted to, however, the challenge can be framed on par with a forced march - a lengthy walk, if you will - and where climbing is concerned a lengthy climb. A Constitution check could be used if appropriate to test whether a character successfully climbs without suffering exhaustion by pushing past his or her normal limits, for example. But this shouldn't be conflated with the difficult situations during a climb for which the rules say a Strength (Athletics) check may be appropriate.

As for the special boon, my point there is that when a DM presents a challenge - for example, a climb the length of which is past the character's normal limits - the player describes how his or her character deals with that challenge. In the infinite possibilities inherent in a fantasy game based on imagination, we can imagine a player overcoming the challenge without needing to make a check, perhaps by having some kind of special boon or the like that removes the meaningful consequence for failure (e.g. exhaustion) and with it the need to make an ability check.

In no way am I saying that the DM needs to frame a challenge as I just described. Only that he or she could and how to resolve it within the scope of the rules.

 

[Charlaquin]

I just don't get it. The beginning of the thread you said that climbing is just a type of movement regardless the length of the climb. Walking two miles doesn't require an athletics check or a constitution check. A one mile climb is the equivalent of a two mile hike in terms of movement. Wouldn't it be more consistent to say that they don't need a 'special boon' to to make such a climb? They can just climb it. Hand-waive. They get to the top and have an epic duel with the rapier wielding guy at the top of the cliff.

By strict RAW, I would say this is correct. If we treat pushing past one’s limits to climb a greater distance as equivalent to a forced march, technically a Con save shouldn’t be required until the 9th hour of climbing in a day, which would be between 9 and 18 miles of climbing depending on “travel pace.” However, I think the better call here might be to disregard the specific rules for forced marches and call for a Con save based more on when it’s dramatically appropriate rather than when a certain distance has been exceeded.

Also, for the Princess Bride scene, I would say Fezik was encumbered by carrying three people, reducing his speed and allowing Westly to gain on them despite them having a head start. When they cut the rope, Westly had to make a Dex save to catch himself and avoid falling. And at that point he had to start making Strength (Athletics) checks to make progress due to the loose rocks creating unstable footing, and would have fallen on a fail by 5 or more. Meanwhile there was time pressure in the form of Visini making progress towards Gilder, where he would have killed Buttercup if he had gotten there before Westly caught up.

 

[iserith]

I just don't get it. The beginning of the thread you said that climbing is just a type of movement regardless the length of the climb. Walking two miles doesn't require an athletics check or a constitution check. A one mile climb is the equivalent of a two mile hike in terms of movement. Wouldn't it be more consistent to say that they don't need a 'special boon' to to make such a climb? They can just climb it. Hand-waive. They get to the top and have an epic duel with the rapier wielding guy at the top of the cliff.

I think also what may be going on here is getting hung up on the example of "mile-high climb." In context, I'm using that as a stand-in for "a climb past the character's normal limits." Not necessarily a climb that is exactly one mile long.