D&D 5E Player angry about enemies climbing rope with Rope Trick

[Oofta]

I don’t think simply having the monsters follow the ranger up the rope is the part most people are taking issue with. On its own I think that’s perfectly reasonable. But if it was done to “teach the player a lesson,” rather than because the DM thought that was genuinely how the orcs would react, that’s a problem. Regardless, it seems like the DM and the player had misaligned expectations, and that should be addressed, independently of whether or not either party’s tactics were sound.

Which is why I acknowledged that there may be other issues at the table. Such things should be discussed out of game time. The fact that it possibly worked before could be part of the issue.

I'm just saying that it doesn't really have anything to do with the enemy having detailed knowledge of how the spell works. Assuming they know magic exists, they have a pretty good guess what happened and proceeded to take a logical response. I've had players who got upset because of things sort-of-similar to this, some people seem to expect the enemies will have the same level of intelligence (or lack therein) as they have in video games. I think it's a good idea to remind people that NPCs and monsters can be reasonably competent now and then. If they get upset when the enemy counters this kind of thing it's not my problem.

 

[Irlo]

Can you dispel a rope trick? You can't see it to target it once the rope is no longer there and there is no "dispel magic in an area". I guess I'd allow it, but there's no guarantee anyone had the spell available.

You can target a magical effect in range, without a requirement that you can see the effect (as far as I know).

 

[TaranTheWanderer]

Can you dispel a rope trick? You can't see it to target it once the rope is no longer there and there is no "dispel magic in an area". I guess I'd allow it, but there's no guarantee anyone had the spell available.

You’d have to be able to see it. See invisibility would allow you to see it and target it. I assume. Dispel magic says choose a magical effect within range. You know where the magical effect it so I guess a very lenient dm might let you hit the area without needing to see it.

 

[Oofta]

You can target a magical effect in range, without a requirement that you can see the effect (as far as I know).

It's a tangent, and not one I really care much about. It's a question of how you target something you can't perceive. It's a separate topic.

 

[CleverNickName]

Me: You know, not every spell is going to be useful in combat.
My players: Wanna bet?
Me: Please don't do this.

(later)

My players: I cast Tiny Hut to avoid the dragon's breath!
Me: The spell has a casting time of 1 minute.
My players: ...oh. Then, um, I cast Rope Trick to dodge the dragon's breath!
Me: Do you have rope?
My players: Yep! I got 50 feet of silk rope, right here! Ha!
Me: You cast the spell, and the opening appears 50 feet above you.
My players:
Me: Would you like to use your movement to start climbing, or end your turn?
My players: WhY aRe YoU aLwAyS rUiNiNg OuR fUn?! mY sPeLLs ArE sO uSeLeSs!!!

 

[jgsugden]

I despise the way Tiny Hut is written. I had players using it as a temporary redoubt in battle, and sneer at me when I couldn't do anything about it. Then the one time I thought an encountered enemy could do something about it, they cried to the event organizer and came back to me with a Crawford tweet. I stopped running AL games after that.

When players use this technique, I allow it to be successful a lot. However, there are savvy enemies out there that understand it and will have countersteps. Dispel Magic is a simple one, but I've also had bad guys redifect an underground waterway to flood the section of the dungeon in which the PCs were resting. That was a crazy fun adventure for the players as they battled their way through a flooding chamber.

In a sense, I think about this stuff the same way I think about Spider-man and his webshooters. He uses them to solve almost all of his problems. Few enemies have an easy way to bypass those webs, and get stuck by them easily. Instead of being a problem, it is considered an iconic part of his repetoire. It is celebrated, rather than cursed as boring and repetitive. Adopting a similar mindset towards these often repeated strategies can make games more rewarding and less confrontational or frustrating.

And if you find that an inability to directly attack PCs easily because they are hiding in the hut is a problem, I suggest introducing goals to combats outside of PC survival. When the PCs need to engage with the encounter away from the location of the sphere, they can't hide in it for an encounter and lean out to shoot off a bow or spell.

 

[Charlaquin]

Which is why I acknowledged that there may be other issues at the table. Such things should be discussed out of game time. The fact that it possibly worked before could be part of the issue.

I'm just saying that it doesn't really have anything to do with the enemy having detailed knowledge of how the spell works. Assuming they know magic exists, they have a pretty good guess what happened and proceeded to take a logical response. I've had players who got upset because of things sort-of-similar to this, some people seem to expect the enemies will have the same level of intelligence (or lack therein) as they have in video games. I think it's a good idea to remind people that NPCs and monsters can be reasonably competent now and then. If they get upset when the enemy counters this kind of thing it's not my problem.

Yeah, I agree.

 

[James Gasik]

When players use this technique, I allow it to be successful a lot. However, there are savvy enemies out there that understand it and will have countersteps. Dispel Magic is a simple one, but I've also had bad guys redifect an underground waterway to flood the section of the dungeon in which the PCs were resting. That was a crazy fun adventure for the players as they battled their way through a flooding chamber.

In a sense, I think about this stuff the same way I think about Spider-man and his webshooters. He uses them to solve almost all of his problems. Few enemies have an easy way to bypass those webs, and get stuck by them easily. Instead of being a problem, it is considered an iconic part of his repetoire. It is celebrated, rather than cursed as boring and repetitive. Adopting a similar mindset towards these often repeated strategies can make games more rewarding and less confrontational or frustrating.

And if you find that an inability to directly attack PCs easily because they are hiding in the hut is a problem, I suggest introducing goals to combats outside of PC survival. When the PCs need to engage with the encounter away from the location of the sphere, they can't hide in it for an encounter and lean out to shoot off a bow or spell.

In a home game, I probably would consider steps like those, but this was, sadly, during my stint as an Adventure League DM. I was running adventures out of Tales From The Yawning Portal, and my ability to alter the dungeons was limited. It didn't help that TFTYP is older adventures updated to 5e, and The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan wasn't built to handle the 5e version of Leomund's Tiny Hut.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Knowing that there is magic and knowing the details of how a specific spell works are not the same thing. Do better.

It's a low level spell that any schlub orc mage can cast. Probably a DC 5 Int (Arcana) check. They probably have a couple casters in their village/clan. Would you demand a Computer Use skill roll to require people know about the existence of VPN's and the basics of what they do? Orcs live in a highly magical world and likely interact with spellcasters on a daily basis at home.

 

[James Gasik]

I hear what you're saying, Ehren, but I've also witnessed some very wildly different interpretations on what characters in 5e know about things. What you describe as DC 5 would be DC 15 at other tables, and characters non-proficient with Arcana might even be disallowed from rolling!