D&D 5E Use Rope

[Kobold Stew]

Its the same reason why things like the Climber's Kit, Crowbar, Fishing Tackle, Healer's Kit, and the like are listed under Equipment and not Tools-- anyone can use those things whether or not they are trained.

Honestly, if the idea has legs, then I think adding crowbar as a tool proficiency makes sense too. One of the play test drafts had a "Break stuff" skill, and (on exactly this analogy) a crowbar proficiency could be used to adjust the DC.

There's no rolls associated with Climber's kits or fishing tackle, and even the healer's kit, and so they're not really analogous -- there's no unproblematic way to map improving the use of such items with the proficiency boys. But certainly if someone were proficient in fishing tackle, I'd let them catch a bigger fish, or whatever -- but that's not what the heart of this proposal.

Crowbar is analogous, though. The question becomes whether sliding the DC is more valuable thatn other tool proficiencies.

I agree with pretty much all of this except one thing: making the strength DC higher. Being able to tie cool knots in the rope isn't making the rope itself any stronger, and a DC17 is actually pretty high for 5E, falling between medium and hard. An average human would have a 3/20 chance of being able to break out, not exactly an easy thing to do.

On the contrary, it's way too high for my taste. How often would a tied up character get to roll? Once a minute? Even if it's just a single roll (and other threads recently have shown that's not the way a vast majority of groups play it), that's still a very high escape rate, and why I think introducing a tool proficiency makes sense.

The question becomes, can one become better at tying someone up? I'm suggesting yes, and that the tool proficiency operates at a suitable granularity for those who would want this.

(As for the use of Str rather than Dex -- I'm accepting the rope rules as is; just trying to tweak the tool rules to replicate something from a previous edition. And because I wouldn't trust rope in this game for anything, with the DC set where it's at.).

 

[GameDoc]

Hrm... I believe you both are correct. Dunno how I came up with the other way of thinking... maybe an old playtest packet ruling got me twisted.

Thanks to you both!

Are you saying you're understanding was all tied up in past rule sets?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Are you saying you're understanding was all tied up in past rule sets?

I'll admit I suffered a bit of a hitch.

 

[Sir Brennen]

Honestly, if the idea has legs, then I think adding crowbar as a tool proficiency makes sense too. One of the play test drafts had a "Break stuff" skill, and (on exactly this analogy) a crowbar proficiency could be used to adjust the DC.

No, I don't think "proficient" with a crowbar should be a thing. It already gives you advantage on applicable rolls. Anybody can use it, and it's not a sophisticated enough piece of equipment that extra training can make you significantly more skilled than an average "untrained" person to merit being called "proficient".

There's no rolls associated with Climber's kits or fishing tackle, and even the healer's kit, and so they're not really analogous -- there's no unproblematic way to map improving the use of such items with the proficiency boys. But certainly if someone were proficient in fishing tackle, I'd let them catch a bigger fish, or whatever -- but that's not what the heart of this proposal.

I'd argue that Climber's Kits and Fishing Tackle you do apply a roll to: Athletics and Survival, respectively. So they are rather relevant. However, you can climb or fish without the equipment in question, so not Tools by the game definition (though I might give disadvantage to fish without equipment, and to climbing sheer surfaces without a kit). You can also break stuff without a toolbar.

But again, rope IS more like lockpicks... you have to have that tool to do the job, and you can be trained to be better at it than someone untrained. It may be a hairpin or some jungle vine, but you need the tool in some form.

The question becomes, can one become better at tying someone up? I'm suggesting yes, and that the tool proficiency operates at a suitable granularity for those who would want this.

(As for the use of Str rather than Dex -- I'm accepting the rope rules as is; just trying to tweak the tool rules to replicate something from a previous edition. And because I wouldn't trust rope in this game for anything, with the DC set where it's at.)

Maybe rather than go more granular to get to back to something similar to an older edition's rule, go broader utilizing new rules in this edition: backgrounds. You're a Sailor or Bounty Hunter? Sure, add your proficiency bonus to tying that guy up to the DC. This approach then could be applied to many situations on the fly, without having to create a bunch of new Tool proficiencies that players have to split their limited proficiencies between. Also remember, most checks of this nature would have a relevant attribute to the proficiency as well. One could argue Dex or Int for tying someone up. But then you'd need to be pretty judicious with the base DC.

 

[Wormwood]

You're a Sailor or Bounty Hunter? Sure, add your proficiency bonus to tying that guy up to the DC. This approach then could be applied to many situations on the fly, without having to create a bunch of new Tool proficiencies that players have to split their limited proficiencies between.

It's probably 13th Age's influence on me, but that's how I'd run it as well. Backgrounds are a wonderful mechanic for that sort of thing.

 

[Kobold Stew]

It's probably 13th Age's influence on me, but that's how I'd run it as well. Backgrounds are a wonderful mechanic for that sort of thing.

It's also the way it's done in Barbarians of Lemuria and some FATE games (such as Diaspora). But it's a new mechanic for 5e, and I was trying to stick as close as I could to rules that already exist.

 

[Henry]

It's probably 13th Age's influence on me, but that's how I'd run it as well. Backgrounds are a wonderful mechanic for that sort of thing.

Amazing how 35 years later we came back around to basically the same idea Gary had back in 1979. (See "secondary skills" in the AD&D DMG.)

 

[Andor]

I actually had the same thought as the original poster.

Proficiency with rope use would imply a sailor-like ability with rope. You can make it, take it apart and remake it. You can splice two pieces of rope together, Splice an eye loop end into one, Tie slip knots, adjustable knots, use frapping to protect rope in hazardous uses, etc. Google saliors splices to see the kind of stuff you can do when you know what you're doing.

 

[machineelf]

The only potential downside to this is whether your not you follow the strict ruling of Tools on page 154 of the Player's Handbook. The first line under the heading is:

"A tool helps you to do something you couldn't otherwise do, such as craft or repair an item, forge a document, or pick a lock."

So by that reading... if you don't have a proficiency in a particular tool you aren't allowed to even attempt to do the activity at all ...

I think you're misunderstanding that, or reading too much into it. All it's saying is that a tool allows you to do something you couldn't do without the tool. It's not saying you also have to be proficient to be able to use the tool at all.

EDIT: Oh nevermind, sorry. I see you already addressed this issue. I spoke too soon. My apologies.