I'm wondering how other DM's handle this. The rogue in my campaign has second story work, meaning climbing no longer costs extra movement, so he zips all over the place.
Occasionally, enemies will fire arrows at him, but there doesn't appear to be any rules on a concentration type save to stop him from falling (like when taking damage and concentrating on a spell).
Do you guys run that or just let a climber take damage and climb as normal?
Whilst there may be no extra movement cost, there is nothing in Second Story Work that precludes Dexterity checks to actually climb or a Strength check if the take damage to see if they can hold onto whatever they are climbing
And you could set the Athletics DC as 10 or the amount of damage taken to hold onto the surface you're climbing.
@Stormlight, how do you include those green tooltips in the editor?
You could say something like that. Either a flat DC based on the amount of trouble he is in (basically a "you're under fire" check). You could also say that the DC is 5 + half of damage taken or something like that. I'll often look at this table to see what is adequate:
I'm not sure there is a 5E rule covering this but, I am curious to see what others are doing about how often a climbing check is required for long climbs? On one hand, it makes sense to me that where a check *is required, the character should check after every move to continue a climb. The problem is, for truly long climbs there is a near certainty of eventual failure. Generally, I break a climb up into a max of four rolls regardless of the distance to balance this out. One might think of this as "phases" of the climb or, points during a climb where there are not easy handholds or where fancy maneuvers are needed to continue. What are others doing?
I have long used climbing checks as "see if you can climb further" check rather than a "see if you fall" check, especially for extended climbs. I started doing this back in the 1e days. A second, see if you fall, check might be required after the character can climb no further depending on circumstances.
I think it would be absolutely fair to require an Athletics check to hold on/continue climbing after taking damage, in addition to any checks for the climb itself.
I have long used climbing checks as "see if you can climb further" check rather than a "see if you fall" check, especially for extended climbs. I started doing this back in the 1e days. A second, see if you fall, check might be required after the character can climb no further depending on circumstances.
I think it would be absolutely fair to require an Athletics check to hold on/continue climbing after taking damage, in addition to any checks for the climb itself.
Even though critical hits/misses are an attack thing, you could say that a natural 1 could still be the fall threshold. Additionally, you could come up with a climbing table: 1- falls, 2 to 5- maintains position, 6 to 10 travel half their climbing speed (which would have to be calculated first if they don't have one), and 11 to 20- travel their normal climbing speed.
This could be two different speeds depending on what speeds they have available. For instance, a Tabaxi has a climbing speed of 20. However, they still have their normal speed as well. This could plausibly mean that a non thief tabaxi could climb 20 feet with their climbing speed and then an additional 5-15 feet depending on DM ruling (is the climbing speed on top of the 30 ft normal speed or part of it.) In this instance, the first 20 feet are 1:1 whereas the next 5-15 are 2:1 (movement used:feet climbed) and doesn't factor in the possibility of dash or feline agility.
As for the OP, I like the idea of 5 + half the damage for arrows and perhaps 5 or 10 + half the damage for spells (force, thunder, fire perhaps with the 10 and ice/cold with the 5, others would depend, perhaps acid is a 15 + half, but poison is just half damage). A concentration check could be a great option to, particularly if the PC is free climbing, since you have to be paying attention to what you're doing (even on ladders).
I would actually rule it like a concentration check but with athletics. For example, I would say roll an athletics check to make sure you can hold on after being speared in the leg with an arrow. The DC would be 10 or half of the damage taken rounded down. Whichever is higher.
If you wanted it to be more in your rogues favor you could say Athletics or Acrobatics because either could be justified for keeping ahold of there climbing surface.
tl;dr versionin italics. 11 HP 1st level Dragonborn takes 7 surprise bite damage to the head at the very top of a 20 foot "chimney" climb, no safety gear. (5e DMs you know the one). Due to the surprise nature, I didn't give him a saving throw, and he tumbled. Falling damage roll took him down to 0. Luckily, nat20 med check stabilized him, and since this was session 1, I wasn't planning on killing him off, just making the escape as hairy as it could be. Was I too tough on him? Would you have fudged the damage roll to 3 to scare without truly punishing? Thought about fudging and the save rolls after it was too late. I, for one, will fudge rolls at times to ensure continuity or introduce a perfectly-placed wandering monster for the benefit of story, but damage rolls are usually more sacred.
PS: In the end, the water genasi made an ice raft and water-gurneyed him through the cave. WAY cool. I suggested a d100 roll to see how good their luck would be upon exit, as it was a tight squeeze. I said "you want a high roll," thinking something like "percentage of success." He rolled a 0-00 and thought he was dead, stuck, drowned, and either blocking the exit, or the rest of the party would leave him behind. At this point, I was relieved again, and knew things would be all right .... "Nope, you waterslide that bad boy like a champ, and your limbs stay crossed like they're supposed to. Easy squeeze!"
tl;dr versionin italics. 11 HP 1st level Dragonborn takes 7 surprise bite damage to the head at the very top of a 20 foot "chimney" climb, no safety gear. (5e DMs you know the one). Due to the surprise nature, I didn't give him a saving throw, and he tumbled. Falling damage roll took him down to 0. Luckily, nat20 med check stabilized him, and since this was session 1, I wasn't planning on killing him off, just making the escape as hairy as it could be. Was I too tough on him? Would you have fudged the damage roll to 3 to scare without truly punishing? Thought about fudging and the save rolls after it was too late. I, for one, will fudge rolls at times to ensure continuity or introduce a perfectly-placed wandering monster for the benefit of story, but damage rolls are usually more sacred.
PS: In the end, the water genasi made an ice raft and water-gurneyed him through the cave. WAY cool. I suggested a d100 roll to see how good their luck would be upon exit, as it was a tight squeeze. I said "you want a high roll," thinking something like "percentage of success." He rolled a 0-00 and thought he was dead, stuck, drowned, and either blocking the exit, or the rest of the party would leave him behind. At this point, I was relieved again, and knew things would be all right .... "Nope, you waterslide that bad boy like a champ, and your limbs stay crossed like they're supposed to. Easy squeeze!"
Yeah...I probably would have given the player a climbing check to catch another hand hold after slipping just out of reach of the adversary. Alternatively, if theatrics were in order, the biting creature could have lifted him out of the chimney by the head, causing a dilemma for the characters following behind. "Holy! Did you see that? Something just grabbed Dragbok!" Heh heh.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm wondering how other DM's handle this. The rogue in my campaign has second story work, meaning climbing no longer costs extra movement, so he zips all over the place.
Occasionally, enemies will fire arrows at him, but there doesn't appear to be any rules on a concentration type save to stop him from falling (like when taking damage and concentrating on a spell).
Do you guys run that or just let a climber take damage and climb as normal?
Whilst there may be no extra movement cost, there is nothing in Second Story Work that precludes Dexterity checks to actually climb or a Strength check if the take damage to see if they can hold onto whatever they are climbing
How to add Tooltips
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersAthletics checks are generally used for climbing, where you need to test the character for operating outside of their normal safety margins.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
And you could set the Athletics DC as 10 or the amount of damage taken to hold onto the surface you're climbing.
@Stormlight, how do you include those green tooltips in the editor?
How to add Tooltips
Typical DCs
Subclass: Dwarven Defender - Dragonborn Paragon
Feats: Artificer Apprentice
Monsters: Sheep - Spellbreaker Warforged Titan
Magic Items: Whipier - Ring of Secret Storage - Collar of the Guardian
Monster template: Skeletal Creature
I'm not sure there is a 5E rule covering this but, I am curious to see what others are doing about how often a climbing check is required for long climbs? On one hand, it makes sense to me that where a check *is required, the character should check after every move to continue a climb. The problem is, for truly long climbs there is a near certainty of eventual failure. Generally, I break a climb up into a max of four rolls regardless of the distance to balance this out. One might think of this as "phases" of the climb or, points during a climb where there are not easy handholds or where fancy maneuvers are needed to continue. What are others doing?
I have long used climbing checks as "see if you can climb further" check rather than a "see if you fall" check, especially for extended climbs. I started doing this back in the 1e days. A second, see if you fall, check might be required after the character can climb no further depending on circumstances.
I think it would be absolutely fair to require an Athletics check to hold on/continue climbing after taking damage, in addition to any checks for the climb itself.
Even though critical hits/misses are an attack thing, you could say that a natural 1 could still be the fall threshold. Additionally, you could come up with a climbing table: 1- falls, 2 to 5- maintains position, 6 to 10 travel half their climbing speed (which would have to be calculated first if they don't have one), and 11 to 20- travel their normal climbing speed.
This could be two different speeds depending on what speeds they have available. For instance, a Tabaxi has a climbing speed of 20. However, they still have their normal speed as well. This could plausibly mean that a non thief tabaxi could climb 20 feet with their climbing speed and then an additional 5-15 feet depending on DM ruling (is the climbing speed on top of the 30 ft normal speed or part of it.) In this instance, the first 20 feet are 1:1 whereas the next 5-15 are 2:1 (movement used:feet climbed) and doesn't factor in the possibility of dash or feline agility.
As for the OP, I like the idea of 5 + half the damage for arrows and perhaps 5 or 10 + half the damage for spells (force, thunder, fire perhaps with the 10 and ice/cold with the 5, others would depend, perhaps acid is a 15 + half, but poison is just half damage). A concentration check could be a great option to, particularly if the PC is free climbing, since you have to be paying attention to what you're doing (even on ladders).
I would actually rule it like a concentration check but with athletics. For example, I would say roll an athletics check to make sure you can hold on after being speared in the leg with an arrow. The DC would be 10 or half of the damage taken rounded down. Whichever is higher.
If you wanted it to be more in your rogues favor you could say Athletics or Acrobatics because either could be justified for keeping ahold of there climbing surface.
tl;dr version in italics. 11 HP 1st level Dragonborn takes 7 surprise bite damage to the head at the very top of a 20 foot "chimney" climb, no safety gear. (5e DMs you know the one). Due to the surprise nature, I didn't give him a saving throw, and he tumbled. Falling damage roll took him down to 0. Luckily, nat20 med check stabilized him, and since this was session 1, I wasn't planning on killing him off, just making the escape as hairy as it could be. Was I too tough on him? Would you have fudged the damage roll to 3 to scare without truly punishing? Thought about fudging and the save rolls after it was too late. I, for one, will fudge rolls at times to ensure continuity or introduce a perfectly-placed wandering monster for the benefit of story, but damage rolls are usually more sacred.
PS: In the end, the water genasi made an ice raft and water-gurneyed him through the cave. WAY cool. I suggested a d100 roll to see how good their luck would be upon exit, as it was a tight squeeze. I said "you want a high roll," thinking something like "percentage of success." He rolled a 0-00 and thought he was dead, stuck, drowned, and either blocking the exit, or the rest of the party would leave him behind. At this point, I was relieved again, and knew things would be all right .... "Nope, you waterslide that bad boy like a champ, and your limbs stay crossed like they're supposed to. Easy squeeze!"
Yeah...I probably would have given the player a climbing check to catch another hand hold after slipping just out of reach of the adversary. Alternatively, if theatrics were in order, the biting creature could have lifted him out of the chimney by the head, causing a dilemma for the characters following behind. "Holy! Did you see that? Something just grabbed Dragbok!" Heh heh.