D&D 5E Climbing a tower rules 5e

[Maxperson]

It’s a save, not a check, the difference being that the action (swimming) succeeds, no check. Having to make a save is a consequence of the successful action, and failing the save doesn’t prevent continued successful action unless too many levels of exhaustion accrue.

Not necessarily. I found this in the DMG. It talks about distance alone, not any factors that would make it harder. That implies that if the DM thinks that there should be a check involved, there is, and the DMG thinks distance is a reason to add such an ability check.

"Under certain circumstances, you can decide a character's proficiency in a skill can be applied to a different ability check. For example, you might decide that a character forced to swim from an island to the mainland must succeed on a Constitution check (as opposed to a Strength check) because of the distance involved. The character is proficient in the Athletics skill, which covers swimming,..."

 

[Hriston]

Not necessarily. I found this in the DMG. It talks about distance alone, not any factors that would make it harder. That implies that if the DM thinks that there should be a check involved, there is, and the DMG thinks distance is a reason to add such an ability check.

"Under certain circumstances, you can decide a character's proficiency in a skill can be applied to a different ability check. For example, you might decide that a character forced to swim from an island to the mainland must succeed on a Constitution check (as opposed to a Strength check) because of the distance involved. The character is proficient in the Athletics skill, which covers swimming,..."

I was talking about the rule you brought up for swimming for an hour or more, as I believe was the person I was responding to. But to address the passage you’ve brought up here, it doesn’t talk about adding a check because of distance. It presupposes the existence of a Strength check (so we should assume that circumstances exist that make swimming difficult) and then talks about switching it to a Constitution check because of the distance involved.

 

[Maxperson]

I was talking about the rule you brought up for swimming for an hour or more, as I believe was the person I was responding to. But to address the passage you’ve brought up here, it doesn’t talk about adding a check because of distance. It presupposes the existence of a Strength check (so we should assume that circumstances exist that make swimming difficult) and then talks about switching it to a Constitution check because of the distance involved.

Sure, but it's only talking about distance and nothing more. That means that there are no harsh currents or anything else that would require that strength check that is being changed into con. For that matter, the rule is that distance is a con save, so it wouldn't even be an ability check(con or otherwise) at all. Unless ability checks can be called for when the DM feels like one should be had, regardless of the swim rules.

 

[Hriston]

Sure, but it's only talking about distance and nothing more. That means that there are no harsh currents or anything else that would require that strength check that is being changed into con. For that matter, the rule is that distance is a con save, so it wouldn't even be an ability check(con or otherwise) at all. Unless ability checks can be called for when the DM feels like one should be had, regardless of the swim rules.

The passage you posted only talks about distance as the reason for calling for a Constitution check as opposed to a Strength check. It doesn’t get into why the DM might have wanted to call for a Strength (Athletics) check in the first place. It’s illustrating the “Skills with Different Abilities” variant. The PHB uses a nearly identical example. That being said, a DM is well supported in calling for a Constitution check if it’s in doubt whether the character possesses the stamina to complete a swim of a given distance.

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Make-believe is a big component of this game. So, make believe. It's important to consider whether one is subordinating fantasy to reality and if this has a beneficial impact on a game driven by imagination. I'll never make arguments about reality when discussing the rules. It's not a solid place from which to argue in this context as I see it.

It is the DMs job to decide what is possible and what is not and whether a roll should be called for. We agree on this.

If a player said, "I want to climb this 3000 foot cliff in 15 minutes." I'd say, no roll required since that's impossible, regardless of what the rules say.

 

[iserith]

It is the DMs job to decide what is possible and what is not and whether a roll should be called for. We agree on this.

If a player said, "I want to climb this 3000 foot cliff in 15 minutes." I'd say, no roll required since that's impossible, regardless of what the rules say.

Great - rulings, not rules, right?

 

[Nebulous]

"Unless aided by magic, a character can't swim for a full 8 hours per day. After each hour of swimming, a character must succeed on a DC 10 Constitution saving throw or gain one level of exhaustion."

So, that's a core DMG rule not side referenced in the PHB at all? And it goes on to describe a few other optional swimming things. I haven't ever seen these rules either. It is on page 116 for anyone referencing in the 5e core book.

 

[Nebulous]

And a couple of you already houseruled it should have an increasing DC!

 

[Nebulous]

Why not each hour of CLIMBING a PC has to make a CON 10 check or gain a level of Exhaustion? The DMG says it as far as swimming, and that's the same movement penalty as climbing, so should the penalty of DC Con 10 per hour apply too?

 

[Charlaquin]

Why not each hour of CLIMBING a PC has to make a CON 10 check or gain a level of Exhaustion? The DMG says it as far as swimming, and that's the same movement penalty as climbing, so should the penalty of DC Con 10 per hour apply too?

That seems like a pretty solid house rule to me.