Should the Athletics Check for Climbing take an action?

[Ogun]

We had a fun fight last night, took a pirate ship, my crocadilian lizardfolk character even got to bite someone.
But it took a lot of dedicated actions to climb up the side of the enemy craft.
We were told we couldn't use the movement part of our turn to climb, but had to make an Athletics Check and use our Action.
Two player characters wasted turns trying this.
We nearly lost a party member, only the bonus actions of bear spirit and healing word stopped that.
We then spent our next turns casting Shape Water, combined together to create a waterspout, which we could travel up via our Swim speeds.
That's when I got to bite a dude, using a bonus action, as thats all that was left on my turn.
That was rather cool, but requiring a full action to make a climb check seems like a heavy nerf.
I didn't make stink, I think its rude and not fun to second guess ones DM during play, and I knew I might be wrong.

What do y'all think?

[JNAProductions]

Generally not. It’s part of movement.

I can see using an action to grant advantage on the check or something, though.

[Unoriginal]

We had a fun fight last night, took a pirate ship, my crocadilian lizardfolk character even got to bite someone.
But it took a lot of dedicated actions to climb up the side of the enemy craft.
We were told we couldn't use the movement part of our turn to climb, but had to make an Athletics Check and use our Action.
Two player characters wasted turns trying this.
We nearly lost a party member, only the bonus actions of bear spirit and healing word stopped that.
We then spent our next turns casting Shape Water, combined together to create a waterspout, which we could travel up via our Swim speeds.
That's when I got to bite a dude, using a bonus action, as thats all that was left on my turn.
That was rather cool, but requiring a full action to make a climb check seems like a heavy nerf.
I didn't make stink, I think its rude and not fun to second guess ones DM during play, and I knew I might be wrong.

What do y'all think?

By-the-book, you don't need to use an action for that. You don't need a STR check to climb in most cases, even.

But if your DM has decided that it takes an action, then it takes an action. It's not a question of second-guessing or the like, the DM is the one who decides what the rules are, not the books.

That being said, as you noted, it *is* a nerf for characters who want to climb stuff mundanely (since apparently " swimming up a magically created water pillar" doesn't require an action). And I wouldn't rule that way personally.

Plus IMO it is poor form to not explain how you're ruling something differently than the baseline, it should be explained ASAP once you've made the decision so that the players know what to expect at your table and decide if they want to stay at said table.

[Ogun]

Well, the DM does make the rulings.
If he made the rules, we wouldn't need the books at all.
I'm going to ask if this will always be the ruling, given that we will certainly be making such checks again.
Either way, next time we will prepare.
There really is no excuse for conducting a hostile boarding action without ladders, grappling hooks and ropes at the ready.

[Composer99]

While climbing or swimming, each foot of movement costs 1 extra foot (2 extra feet in difficult terrain), unless a creature has a climbing or swimming speed. At the DM's option, climbing a slippery surface or one with few handholds requires a successful Strength (Athletics) check.

So, I could see making the hull difficult terrain and/or requiring a check in the conditions you describe, but having you players use up your actions is in poor form, at least in my opinion. It might be justifiable, but the DM in that case ought to provide some sort of justification.

[JonBeowulf]

For me, it's part of movement. You only need to make a check if there's a reason for it and failure costs you some/all of your movement but not your action.

There might be some edge case that would cause me to rule otherwise but I doubt I'll ever see it.

Climbing up the outside of a ship while in combat... that sounds rough. Props for the success.

[Tanarii]

No. It should only use your action if it involves 2 object interactions, or requires a Dash to make the distance.

[chainer1216]

But if your DM has decided that it takes an action, then it takes an action. It's not a question of second-guessing or the like, the DM is the one who decides what the rules are, not the book.


DnD is not Calvinball, the rules exist as a common baseline for everyone and DMs making special calls is for unique situations, not the fundamental basics of the game.

This isnt an example of a DM making some grandiose design decision, this is simply a guy who doesnt know a rule of the game and made a poor call.

DMs are not above criticism.

[Tanarii]

Otoh it's worth noting in combat that freeing up your hands to climb and then drawing out something to use when done could well be two object interactions.

And of course if you use a shield just taking it off is it's own action.

[da newt]

Just curious, but how did you and your party end up in the water with the goal of boarding an enemy ship during combat without any provisions for climbing (rope, hook, pitons, etc)?

[Ogun]

How did we end up so unprepared?
Well, I game with young people.
They play a lot less tactical game.
Our Open Seas Oath Paladin was sure he could talk his way on board.
That didn't work, so he made a frontal assault using his climb speed.
He got ambushed by a rogue,and put to zero hit point by a fighter.
Getting to him became a priority, thus the climb checks.

I tend towards a cautious playstyle.
I would have tried to entered the ship from below the water line and take the crew by stealth.
Letting a less careful character take the lead creates a positive effect on the narrative.
But I still don't want to look foolish the next time we board a ship, so precautions will be taken.

[Tanarii]

That didn't work, so he made a frontal assault using his climb speed.
Did he remember to say "alright chums, let's do this!"

[Ogun]

Did he remember to say "alright chums, let's do this!"

Dear God if only!

[Man_Over_Game]

It does make me wonder what the DM would have done had someone in the party had a Climbing Speed.

Throw the book, maybe?

[KorvinStarmast]

How did we end up so unprepared?
Well, I game with young people.
They play a lot less tactical game.
Our Open Seas Oath Paladin was sure he could talk his way on board.
That didn't work, so he made a frontal assault using his climb speed.
He got ambushed by a rogue,and put to zero hit point by a fighter.
Getting to him became a priority, thus the climb checks.

Salt Marsh (published adventure) has climb checks for getting onto the Sea Ghost. ( a ship) One of my players complained about it. I showed him. He then got the no hand holds bit when I explained to him how the shape of the outside of a hull is convex.

Looks to me like you got it right. :smallwink:

[KorvinStarmast]

Dear God if only! He should have said "do you want to live forever" but that might have been to over the top.

[Fynzmirs]

That's the way I would run it. If you can't walk up the given surface you can't move through it as part of your movement. Spending an Action to make an Athletics check would be a way to get on top of that obstacle. From the tactical point of view it gives some sort of meaning to that obstacle and rewards alternate methods of getting on top (climb speed, Spider Climb, Levitate, flying, teleportation or even swimming up the cojured pillar of water etc.).

[Dark.Revenant]

Does it take your Action to swim? To jump? To pick your nose? I don't see many casters inhibited by this rule, only physically-dependent characters.

[Fynzmirs]

Does it take your Action to swim? To jump? To pick your nose? I don't see many casters inhibited by this rule, only physically-dependent characters.

The spells I've mentioned have a cast time of an action so I consider it a challenge which requires an action to overcome. As usual martiałs require a check and casters use up some of their resources.

[Composer99]

That's the way I would run it. If you can't walk up the given surface you can't move through it as part of your movement. Spending an Action to make an Athletics check would be a way to get on top of that obstacle. From the tactical point of view it gives some sort of meaning to that obstacle and rewards alternate methods of getting on top (climb speed, Spider Climb, Levitate, flying, teleportation or even swimming up the cojured pillar of water etc.).


The spells I've mentioned have a cast time of an action so I consider it a challenge which requires an action to overcome. As usual martiałs require a check and casters use up some of their resources.

The actual text of the rules says otherwise: climbing does not require an action, and doesn't normally even require a check. It's your game, so rule how you want, but just keep that in mind.

[Dark.Revenant]

The spells I've mentioned have a cast time of an action so I consider it a challenge which requires an action to overcome. As usual martiałs require a check and casters use up some of their resources.

Climbing more than 15 feet (for most characters) may indeed require an Action—to Dash—because you have to spend two feet for every foot you climb. That's IF you pass your check at all. And plenty of spells and abilities allow for teleporting as a bonus action, so I'll call BS on the "requires an Action" position.

[Tanarii]

Many martials and some casters are paying an action cost to put stuff away to free up their hands anyway. TWF and any with a shield are for sure.

I'm curious if the Paladin had a shield in this case?

[Ogun]

No shield for the paladin, nor the druids,but my character does carry one , fwiw.
It didn't come up, but it certainly should considered.
I'm actually considering the Jump spell(!) for situations like this.

[Tanarii]

In that case the Paladin should have been able to use an object interaction to sheath their weapon, climb 15 ft, and then choose between action to draw their weapon again or make an unarmed attack. Probably a grapple or shove, since unarmed attacks are a little weak.

Or, yknow, just skip the weapon thing if they want it out and call it an action to climb with it in hand. :smallamused:

[Ogun]

Good points!
This is why I don't halt play to quibble.
Its not fun, and it generally things are close enough to right anyway.
None of us were penalized for having something in our hands, so the paladin came out ahead and it was pretty much a wash for me.

[Keravath]

"At the DM's option, climbing a slippery vertical surface or one with few hand holds requires a successful Strength (Athletics) check. "

"The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure."

"For every ability check, the DM decides which of the six abilities is relevant to the task at hand and the difficulty of the task, represented by a Difficulty Class."

Although most of the time, climbing would not require your action, it is well within the range of DM decisions to decide that a particular surface is so difficult to climb that it will require your action.

As cited above, the DM can call for an Athletics check when trying to climb a difficult surface. This would normally be part of movement. In addition, the DM can call for ability checks when the character attempts an action. It is quite possible for a DM to rule that climbing the slippery side of a wet boat in seas that may not be completely calm requires MORE than just a character's movement. The DM is not wrong to make such a ruling.

For example, a character trying to climb the side of a boat might need both hands to do so, if they let go with one hand then they fall back into the water. This would significantly limit the actions that they could perform. The DM could also decide that the side of the boat is difficult terrain which when combined with the 1/2 speed for climbing without a climb speed would reduce climbing to 1/4 movement. In addition, the DM can call for an Athletics check to succeed in climbing.

Could the DM run it without requiring the character's action? Sure. However, the DM decided that the focus, concentration and muscle power required to climb the side of a wet and slippery (possibly algae covered) convex ship's hull would be impossible without the character using their action to do so ... and there is nothing wrong with that decision.

[Ogun]

Keravath, excellent citations!
I'm convinced, my DM was actually quite generous in thier rulings.

[Tanarii]

"The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure."

Looks like common use version of taking action, not game terminology use an Action.

[MoiMagnus]

As a GM, I'd give a different DC for the Athletics check depending on whether you use your action or your movement. Like DC 15 with your movement but DC 10 with an action. (Or 10/5 if the climbing is easy)

[Ettina]

I'd say climbing is your movement, not your action, unless you're climbing far enough to require a Dash. Whether you need to make a skill check or not to succeed the climb wouldn't alter what actions it takes.

However, if you're holding two things in your hands, you'd have to make two object interactions, using your action. Or stow only one of them and climb at disadvantage because you only have one free hand.

[Unoriginal]

Keravath, excellent citations!
I'm convinced, my DM was actually quite generous in thier rulings.

They weren't. They didn't do anything contrary to the principles of the game, sure, but it wasn't generous.

[Ogun]

They weren't. They didn't do anything contrary to the principles of the game, sure, but it wasn't generous.
I didn't have to take off my shield and the paladin did not have to stow either of his hand crossbows.
That alone was generous.