D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[Charlaquin]

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?

I’d give them disadvantage if they had to make a Strength (Athletics) check to climb, but I wouldn’t call for such a check in the absence of external complicating factors.

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

They’re still limited by their speed. I wouldn’t allow a Strength (Athletics) check to run faster than their speed allows, why would I allow it with other forms of movement?

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

Sounds like a Charisma (Performance or maybe Acrobatics) check.

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.

Danger isn’t the key factor here. It establishes a consequence for failure, which is an important factor when determining if a check should be called for, but it doesn’t establish a possibility of failure. Since the specific rules for climbing allow a character to climb by spending 2 feet per foot climbed without a check, some factor external to the climb itself is needed to establish a possibility of failure.

 

[Charlaquin]

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

Modules are generally not good examples of applying the rules as the rule books suggest. See also, the currently ongoing discussion about skill challenges in 4e. Lots of people remember skill challenges being awful in ways that the rules really didn’t suggest, but that were present in published modules at the time.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

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

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.

I'm with you... the climbing difficulty examples in RAW are incomplete and permissive. I don't think anyone here is arguing those examples are complete.

I do think some posters are saying that list is exemplary of difficulties that are external to just climbing a rope (that's where I stand). Others want the rope climb coupled with height to be a difficulty in and of itself. As a player, I'd be kind of scratching my head at that latter ruling as it doesn't jive with heroes doing exciting adventurous things - eesh, let's get to the good stuff, player me would think, bring on the swarm of ravens or baddies dropping rocks or a strong gust of wind to make this climb exciting. Don't make me roll STR(Athletics) for a mundane rope climb, no matter how high.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I had replies to your prior post, but your most recent post allowed me to edit and condense things:

As a player, I'd be kind of scratching my head at that latter ruling as it doesn't jive with heroes doing exciting adventurous things - eesh, let's get to the good stuff, player me would think, bring on the swarm of ravens or baddies dropping rocks or a strong gust of wind to make this climb exciting. Don't make me roll STR(Athletics) for a mundane rope climb, no matter how high.

That's fine. To my group, the height and potential risk is exciting enough to represent the challenge involved. Our games are more mundane as I've said in prior posts. The tower, for us, isn't the exciting scene you would want it to be, it is what comes next after we make our quick little rolls. If someone fails the roll, they would try again; fail it by enough, and they fall. Now, the scene could become exciting! Will another PC manage to catch them? Does a caster have Feather Fall prepared? Will the damage, all else failing, be low enough to not seriously injure or kill the PC who falls?

Without the check, no excitement unless you want to ramp up every single instance of such a thing. I don't want to do that and I feel the danger involved is sufficient. If you don't agree, that's fine, but when people tell me I am not following the rules--that is annoying. I am following the rules, since it is a judgement call of that necessitates the need for a check.

Yes, but I think you’re mistaken.

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

Simply climbing is not meant to be difficult.

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.

 

[DND_Reborn]

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

I'm glad you did this. I was considering it myself...

I find it interesting that the DCs are all from 10-15 and called for even on distances as low as 10 feet (or a bit less).

 

[iserith]

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

These aren't rules. We're lacking the surrounding context of the challenge. And a module is at best a reflection of how the DM or DMs who wrote it runs a game and communicates it to other people planning to run the same game. In a discussion of what the rules say, this information no more relevant than any DM saying how they do things that aren't in the rules.

 

[clearstream]

I'm with you... the climbing difficulty examples in RAW are incomplete and permissive. I don't think anyone here is arguing those examples are complete.

@Charlaquin is arguing that only circumstances that match the examples can count: that there are no possible examples that don't fit those categories. It seems a bold claim.

 

[clearstream]

These aren't rules. We're lacking the surrounding context of the challenge. And a module is at best a reflection of how the DM or DMs who wrote it runs a game and communicates it to other people planning to run the same game. In a discussion of what the rules say, this information no more relevant than any DM saying how they do things that aren't in the rules.

I don't present them as rules, but @Charlaquin did make a claim about the designers' intent. One might anticipate seeing the designers' intent represented in officially published material.

(BTW @Charlaquin, I don't at all mean to specifically pick on you! It just happens you clearly stated arguments I am aiming to refute.)

 

[Charlaquin]

@Charlaquin is arguing that only circumstances that match the examples can count: that there are no possible examples that don't fit those categories. It seems a bold claim.

No, I’m not. Im arguing that a category can be inferred from the (incomplete) list of examples, and that it is not appropriate to call for a Strength (Athletics) check due to factors that don’t fit into that implied category.

 

[clearstream]

I do think some posters are saying that list is exemplary of difficulties that are external to just climbing a rope (that's where I stand). Others want the rope climb coupled with height to be a difficulty in and of itself. As a player, I'd be kind of scratching my head at that latter ruling as it doesn't jive with heroes doing exciting adventurous things - eesh, let's get to the good stuff, player me would think, bring on the swarm of ravens or baddies dropping rocks or a strong gust of wind to make this climb exciting. Don't make me roll STR(Athletics) for a mundane rope climb, no matter how high.

I kind of agree inasmuch as I might not call for checks in circumstances such as heights that others might. The point I am making though, is that once I agree that there could be other possible cases, it really seems to me that I should say the RAW supports each DM in calling for a check if they feel that the circumstances and costs of failure justify it. I also believe that is what the designers would endorse.