Normal climbing rules still apply to an extend. The spell and the Dhampir feature don't mention difficult surfaces, only the ability to walk on walls and ceilings. That means if it's a wall of loose earth, slippery ice or such they'd still need to make athletics checks to climb there like anyone else (keep in mind that for climbing under normal circumstances you don't need to make a check or have climbing speed, you just half your movement speed). Just that they probably have a lower DC (DM fiat obviously) and can do it without using their hands.
Normal climbing rules still apply to an extend. The spell and the Dhampir feature don't mention difficult surfaces, only the ability to walk on walls and ceilings. That means if it's a wall of loose earth, slippery ice or such they'd still need to make athletics checks to climb there like anyone else (keep in mind that for climbing under normal circumstances you don't need to make a check or have climbing speed, you just half your movement speed). Just that they probably have a lower DC (DM fiat obviously) and can do it without using their hands.
@ProfSiccus Is it RAI that creatures with a climb speed need to make Athletics checks to climb? RAW are silent on the issue, thus yes?
@JeremyECrawford A trait like Spider Climb, not a climbing speed, lets some creatures forgo ability checks when climbing. #DnD
Look at the date.
2016 Dhampir's didn't exist in 5e and casting the Spider Climb spellisn't the same as having the spider climb trait. Creatures with the spider climb trait, like the one Haravikk linked, have a version that explicitly lets them ignore difficult surfaces when climbing so of course they don't need to make ability checks. Dhampir's and the Spider Climb spelluse a different wording.
I didn't look at the date so it looks like there's two same named game elements Spider Climb with different wording.
That is interesting. Does everything fall out of their pockets?
First, it seems clear this is a DM ruling sort of thing. If it were me, I’d go with what the OP calls the labyrinth example, just for simplicity’s sake. Otherwise, you’re going item by item down the equipment list and deciding what falls, what stays where it is, what flips the other way and becomes annoying. In addition to all the other issues raised by the OP. No way am I going to spend time sorting that out.
Adventures will move roughly lots of times. 99% of their stuff is going to be strapped or tucked rather securely. The remaining 1% a character with spider climb (especially as a racial trait) can learn to subconsciously hold/adjust. It might be a bit awkward, but nothing should fall out.
That's my logic for it anyway. Like I said the only differences between the examples is how they are visually described and what happens when prone.
I agree. For someone who can and does walk upside down on the ceiling, anything they are carrying would be properly secured so having things fall just wouldn't be an issue I would address as DM - it isn't worth the time in game and the in world character would have already solved it except for occasional exceptional circumstances which might be narratively interesting.
@DnDSphinxDo creatures with a climb speed make Athletics checks? If so, Advantage would be nice-lets make that official.
@mikemearls no check needed to climb
That's quite a weird contribution for Mike Mearls to make though, as the rules say nothing like this; checks for climbing are specifically stated as at the DM's discretion and nothing about having a climbing speed means you can't still fall off while climbing, it literally only means you have a different speed you can climb at (as opposed to half walking speed).
Of course at said DM's discretion climbing can be made safer for a creature with a climbing speed, but that depends a lot on how you decide it is actually performing the climbing, e.g- a creature with hooked limbs probably doesn't need to take its time securing pitons and a rope to climb safely, but we don't really have any information about how a spider-climbing creature actually climbs, so that's being left to DM fiat as well.
The "I walk around like I'm in an M.C. Escher painting" option is simplest, which makes it a perfectly fine option. But the spell and feature is called "spider climb" so "you climb around like a spider" seems reasonable IMO, though how that actually applies to a humanoid is still kind of weird as a spider clambers around on all of its legs no matter which surface its on, but does that mean you need to use as many "legs" as possible too, or is two fine? That's why it's a bit annoying when a magic spell (and comparable feature) don't give just that little bit more detail!
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
1) I think the point is that in general when climbing under optimal conditions there is no need for a creature with a climb speed to make a check. Using a rope or climbing up a perfectly climbable surface? No worries, you have a climb speed. If there are things that make it more difficult, then you can call for checks. Slippery rock face due to it being under a waterfall, or there are rocks tumbling down the cliff face or the rope is attached to a zeppelin flying through a storm. But the same thing goes with a walking speed. There's no need to make ability checks when walking normally. However, when terrain gets tricky or there's an earthquake or the ground starts falling out from under your feet, then you start to make ability checks. Ability checks are to be made when there is a reasonable chance of failure. You might argue that there's always a chance of failure when climbing something, but creatures with a "climb" speed are adapted/trained in climbing. That's why they don't move at half speed, and why they don't need to make checks for "standard" climbing. There's a non-zero chance that when you walk or run somewhere that you will trip over your own feet and fall, but DM's don't call for rolls every time you dash.
2) We can't really take the name of the spell into the meaning of the mechanics of the spell, as there are numerous examples of spells that don't do what they say on the tin. For instance, Chill Touch is neither a "touch" spell, nor does it do "cold" damage. Instead it is ranged and does necrotic. Detect Evil and Good does not detect the alignment that someone has, but instead allows you to know if there are certain types of creatures nearby. Sneak Attack isn't actually really a Sneak attack in most circumstances, because you get to roll Sneak Attack dice whenever an ally is within 5 feet of your target, and thus could probably be more accurately called "Pinpoint Strike" or something like that. Daylight doesn't actually cause "sun-light", which you might expect it to do, and thus has no effect on vampires and Drow. So the fact that "Spider Climb" doesn't actually mean them crawling around with all limbs like a spider is fine for me.
I think the point is that in general when climbing under optimal conditions there is no need for a creature with a climb speed to make a check.
That's simply not how climb speeds work - swim speeds don't work that way either. Both of them change how far you go when you climb or swim. Neither of them have any interaction with checks you make to see if you go. This is both explicit - the PHB and MM both say the speeds let you go faster while not saying they obviate or help with checks - and implicit in that there are things that grant these speeds that also obviate checks (note that the implicit reading is fundamentally invalid; 5E has numerous examples of rules that provide extra, unnecessary text giving you a rule you already had). A ruling like this would mean that spiders and mountain goats have identical climbing competencies.
Swim speeds do explicitly interact with the rolls you make for a forced march, and a DM would be wholly justified porting the rules over to climb speeds if a party had to spend an entire day climbing.
2) We can't really take the name of the spell into the meaning of the mechanics of the spell
This is entirely accurate. Spell names are proper nouns - e.g. "Fireball" is the spell's name in the same way Vecna is the god's name. Like all proper nouns, reading them in a descriptive way violates the grammar rules of English.
Per RAW though, if knocking a Dhampir prone (or them choosing to go prone) would not force them to fall, why would being unconscious do so? Dhampir's spider climb is non concentration, and being unconscious would make you fall prone and lose concentration, both things we've determined don't make a Dhampir fall. So this feels like more of a personal thought people have that to them it makes sense they'd fall if unconscious but I don't see it in a specific rule that they would. At least that I saw there wasn't one.
If you are a dhampir climbing a wall and go prone, do ranged attackers have disadvantage attacking you?
The condition says so so by default yeah, but I think it's really just a simplification of "a prone creature is a smaller target at range", so your DM may still grant advantage to counteract it if they think it wouldn't be beneficial, e.g- if you fall flat onto a wall, you're probably no more difficult a target than someone standing upright on the ground.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Not according to the Dev https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/767935159739961344?s=20&t=_m6otzPGAZB4MMFQskQNyg
I didn't look at the date so it looks like there's two same named game elements Spider Climb with different wording.
Another Dev also chimed in on that as well https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/752981020803108864?s=20&t=NZ3YEPEF3_Utn_IV3pCgsw
I agree. For someone who can and does walk upside down on the ceiling, anything they are carrying would be properly secured so having things fall just wouldn't be an issue I would address as DM - it isn't worth the time in game and the in world character would have already solved it except for occasional exceptional circumstances which might be narratively interesting.
That's quite a weird contribution for Mike Mearls to make though, as the rules say nothing like this; checks for climbing are specifically stated as at the DM's discretion and nothing about having a climbing speed means you can't still fall off while climbing, it literally only means you have a different speed you can climb at (as opposed to half walking speed).
Of course at said DM's discretion climbing can be made safer for a creature with a climbing speed, but that depends a lot on how you decide it is actually performing the climbing, e.g- a creature with hooked limbs probably doesn't need to take its time securing pitons and a rope to climb safely, but we don't really have any information about how a spider-climbing creature actually climbs, so that's being left to DM fiat as well.
The "I walk around like I'm in an M.C. Escher painting" option is simplest, which makes it a perfectly fine option. But the spell and feature is called "spider climb" so "you climb around like a spider" seems reasonable IMO, though how that actually applies to a humanoid is still kind of weird as a spider clambers around on all of its legs no matter which surface its on, but does that mean you need to use as many "legs" as possible too, or is two fine? That's why it's a bit annoying when a magic spell (and comparable feature) don't give just that little bit more detail!
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
A few things:
1) I think the point is that in general when climbing under optimal conditions there is no need for a creature with a climb speed to make a check. Using a rope or climbing up a perfectly climbable surface? No worries, you have a climb speed. If there are things that make it more difficult, then you can call for checks. Slippery rock face due to it being under a waterfall, or there are rocks tumbling down the cliff face or the rope is attached to a zeppelin flying through a storm. But the same thing goes with a walking speed. There's no need to make ability checks when walking normally. However, when terrain gets tricky or there's an earthquake or the ground starts falling out from under your feet, then you start to make ability checks. Ability checks are to be made when there is a reasonable chance of failure. You might argue that there's always a chance of failure when climbing something, but creatures with a "climb" speed are adapted/trained in climbing. That's why they don't move at half speed, and why they don't need to make checks for "standard" climbing. There's a non-zero chance that when you walk or run somewhere that you will trip over your own feet and fall, but DM's don't call for rolls every time you dash.
2) We can't really take the name of the spell into the meaning of the mechanics of the spell, as there are numerous examples of spells that don't do what they say on the tin. For instance, Chill Touch is neither a "touch" spell, nor does it do "cold" damage. Instead it is ranged and does necrotic. Detect Evil and Good does not detect the alignment that someone has, but instead allows you to know if there are certain types of creatures nearby. Sneak Attack isn't actually really a Sneak attack in most circumstances, because you get to roll Sneak Attack dice whenever an ally is within 5 feet of your target, and thus could probably be more accurately called "Pinpoint Strike" or something like that. Daylight doesn't actually cause "sun-light", which you might expect it to do, and thus has no effect on vampires and Drow. So the fact that "Spider Climb" doesn't actually mean them crawling around with all limbs like a spider is fine for me.
That's simply not how climb speeds work - swim speeds don't work that way either. Both of them change how far you go when you climb or swim. Neither of them have any interaction with checks you make to see if you go. This is both explicit - the PHB and MM both say the speeds let you go faster while not saying they obviate or help with checks - and implicit in that there are things that grant these speeds that also obviate checks (note that the implicit reading is fundamentally invalid; 5E has numerous examples of rules that provide extra, unnecessary text giving you a rule you already had). A ruling like this would mean that spiders and mountain goats have identical climbing competencies.
Swim speeds do explicitly interact with the rolls you make for a forced march, and a DM would be wholly justified porting the rules over to climb speeds if a party had to spend an entire day climbing.
This is entirely accurate. Spell names are proper nouns - e.g. "Fireball" is the spell's name in the same way Vecna is the god's name. Like all proper nouns, reading them in a descriptive way violates the grammar rules of English.
Per RAW though, if knocking a Dhampir prone (or them choosing to go prone) would not force them to fall, why would being unconscious do so? Dhampir's spider climb is non concentration, and being unconscious would make you fall prone and lose concentration, both things we've determined don't make a Dhampir fall. So this feels like more of a personal thought people have that to them it makes sense they'd fall if unconscious but I don't see it in a specific rule that they would. At least that I saw there wasn't one.
If you are a dhampir climbing a wall and go prone, do ranged attackers have disadvantage attacking you?
Food, Scifi/fantasy, anime, DND 5E and OSR geek.
Yes, "The following definitions specify what happens to a creature while it is subjected to a condition." such as prone
The condition says so so by default yeah, but I think it's really just a simplification of "a prone creature is a smaller target at range", so your DM may still grant advantage to counteract it if they think it wouldn't be beneficial, e.g- if you fall flat onto a wall, you're probably no more difficult a target than someone standing upright on the ground.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Yeah, i was thinking that being prone on a wall doesn't make you a more difficult target.
Food, Scifi/fantasy, anime, DND 5E and OSR geek.