RPG Superstar 2009 Top 4
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm having some trouble figuring out how these abilities are supposed to interact. Particularly as they relate to the stupefyingly awesome FROGHEMOTH.
Stepping through a 4-PC battle with a Froghemoth, I run into some weird mechanical issues. Each of its attacks has the GRAB ability. So this big, beautiful froggie starts out the battle by giving Seoni a good tongue-lashing. Before anyone can say "fire shield" she's in the froghemoth's mouth. As the DM, I am already enormously entertained.
Next it starts flailing about wildly with its tentacles, hitting Valeros with one of them. Since it's already grappling Seoni, Can it make a grab attempt against Valeros? What about its next two successful tentacle attacks against Kyra and Merisiel?
Stepping back a few ticks on the initiative counter, let's say the Froghemoth had to move to get to the PCs, and it lashed out with a tentacle against Valeros and Merisiel, adjacent and making doe-eyes at each other. It hits Valeros and can cleave into Merisiel. Does it get a grab attack against one of them? Both? Neither? How do GRAB and CLEAVE interact?
Anyway, if we allow Froghemoth to grapple multiple creatures (is that the intent of this monster?) how do we deal with the mechanics of this the following round? It's got CONSTRICT, so even if Froggie just holds its prey (at -20) it still deals damage... but it takes a standard action to maintain a grapple... does it release all but one foe? It also requires a standard action to SWALLOW WHOLE if Seoni's mighty 8 Strength and kickin' BAB is just not enough for her to escape its maw. So if it tries to gulp her down, does it have to release all other grabbed opponents?
Let's say it's Merisiel and not Seoni who gets SWALLOWED. Merisiel is considered grappled (-4 Dex, -2 to hit) and her actions are limited to things she can do with one hand. It seems that she can easily draw a dagger and stab away with no CMB check. correct? Is the Froghemoth specifically "denied" its DEX bonus and she can sneak attack it? Or is she simply attacking a target with no specific DEX and therefore not sneakable? Concealment would deny sneak attack I suppose, since it's dark in there.
Since GRAB automatically pulls a creature adjacent to the grabber, it seems that the PULL ability and the GRAB ability should not ever be on the same creature. On the froghemoth and Roper, these are correct. On the Giant Frog, both abilities are present. One of them is probably incorrect.
And three final Froghemoth-related questions:
1.) why does its CONSTRICT(tentacle) ability (1d6+ STR) not match its tentacle damage (1d8+ 1/2 STR)
2.) what type of damage is done by its SWALLOW WHOLE? all bludgeoning? all acid? half-and-half?
3.) how does it use both tongue and bite in the same full-attack sequence? That seems odd.
I know I read that you can take a -10 and just grab with one limb....and still be able to act normally
Ok,
So, assume the froghemoth has a full action to attack, it get's the following attacks as a full action, all at BAB (they are all natural attacks).
Bite (Grab)
Tongue (Grab)
Tentacles x4 (Grab)
Now, per grab...
...
The creature has the option to conduct the grab normally, or simply use the part of it's body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a -20 on it's CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself.
...
Ok, so that says, to me, that it can indeed make a grapple check every time it hits. If it uses it's full CMB, it is grappling, and considered grappled. The grappling rules state that you have to have two hands free or suffer a -4 penalty to your CMB. So, that seems to indicate you can grapple one person with every limb you have, but at a -4. So... yes, I would say that the Froghemoth could grapple with every attack it has successfully hit with. If it only uses the limb it attacked with, it can either use CMB-20 (and not be grappled itself) or it can use CMB-4 (for only using one limb) and be grappled, or use CMB and two limbs to fully grapple and be grappled. Obviously which to use depends on who it's grappling. Seoni it could probably grapple at CMB-20 considering it would have a +8 to do so vs her probably 18-19 CMD.
Now, as to the swallow whole...
The description of swallow whole says it takes a Maneuver check. A maneuver check takes the place of an attack. In this case, the attack with the mouth (or tongue I would rule, since both are in the mouth, it could theoretically tongue Seoni (down boys) and then bite someone else and have two people in it's mouth). That would mean it would make a maneuver check against both which would take the place of it's tongue and bite attacks. It wouldn't be able to attack with the bite or tongue, but could still use the tentacles. Theoretically, it could after swallowing the two unfortunates, use it's tentacle to move a grappled person into it's mouth (another maneuver check, and it wouldn't do grapple damage with that tentacle that round). The other three tentacles could squeeze their grappled victims. Lather rinse repeat.
It's a nasty monster for a CR 13.
Excellent questions! I was reading Crypt of the Everflame today and I came across the Giant Frogs. I was trying to figure out the interations between Pull and Grab, as they relates to the Frog's tongue attack. The tongue deals no damage on a hit, but can be used to grab with a successful combat maneuver check. It also says "The frog can make a free combat maneuver check with a successful tongue attack. If successful, the tongue pulls the frog's opponent 5 feet closer to the frog."
So when I hit with the tongue, is that one CM check for both the grab and the pull, or are there 2 distinct CM checks? One to see if the character is grabbed, then another to see if the character is pulled? If the check to grab fails, do you still check to see if the character is pulled (maybe the tongue is really sticky and still pulls the guy even though he's not grabbed)?
Maybe I just don't understand the grapple rules well enough....again.
The CM check is to move him closer. If he's 5 feet away, then you move him into the mouth. You can't pull the same turn you grab. You can only make one maneuver per attack, not two. So it would grab this round, make a roll to move/maintain next round, and keep that up until the person is drawn in.
Creative Director
|
1.) why does its CONSTRICT(tentacle) ability (1d6+ STR) not match its tentacle damage (1d8+ 1/2 STR)
Constrict damage doesn't always have to exactly match the damage of the attack used to initiate it. In this case, I believe we lowered the constrict damage a little bit because the froghemoth was already doing quite enough damage as it was.
2.) what type of damage is done by its SWALLOW WHOLE? all bludgeoning? all acid? half-and-half?
All bludgeoning—swallow whole damage is generally going to inflict bludgeoning damage, I think. Acid damage is something that as a general rule only really kicks in with particularly supernatural or magical monsters... in particular, monsters that are themselves immune to acid.
3.) how does it use both tongue and bite in the same full-attack sequence? That seems odd.
By biting before it uses its tongue (since the order in which a monster makes attacks doesn't matter in Pathfinder), or by biting the creature it pulls into its mouth with its tongue.
I don't understand how Pull works for monster which have Pull but not Grab, like the Roper.
Is a pulled creature also automatically grappled?
Does the monster have to hit each round anew to pull further?
What keeps the pulled creature from simply moving away again on its turn?
1.) why does its CONSTRICT(tentacle) ability (1d6+ STR) not match its tentacle damage (1d8+ 1/2 STR)Constrict damage doesn't always have to exactly match the damage of the attack used to initiate it. In this case, I believe we lowered the constrict damage a little bit because the froghemoth was already doing quite enough damage as it was.
Also, it should be noted that Constrict damage is extra damage on top of the damage done by a natural weapon with the Grab ability. So a froghemoth who has grabbed with a tentacle does 1d6+1d8+15 damage when constricting.
Ok,
So, assume the froghemoth has a full action to attack, it get's the following attacks as a full action, all at BAB (they are all natural attacks).Bite (Grab)
Tongue (Grab)
Tentacles x4 (Grab)Now, per grab...
Ok, so that says, to me, that it can indeed make a grapple check every time it hits. If it uses it's full CMB, it is grappling, and considered grappled. The grappling rules state that you have to have two hands free or suffer a -4 penalty to your CMB. So, that seems to indicate you can grapple one person with every limb you have, but at a -4. So... yes, I would say that the Froghemoth could grapple with every attack it has successfully hit with. If it only uses the limb it attacked with, it can either use CMB-20 (and not be grappled itself) or it can use CMB-4 (for only using one limb) and be grappled, or use CMB and two limbs to fully grapple and be grappled. Obviously which to use depends on who it's grappling. Seoni it could probably grapple at CMB-20 considering it would have a +8 to do so vs her probably 18-19 CMD.
...
The creature has the option to conduct the grab normally, or simply use the part of it's body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a -20 on it's CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself.
...
Small point, the text actually says that Humanoid creatures without 2 free hands takes -4. A Froghemoth wouldn't be affected by this rule.
Here's the way I picture a full attack action from the Froghemoth.
It uses it's tongue attack to nab Seoni from 30' away. Grab says that creatures not adjacent are pulled adajcent so she if she is grabbed she is brought next to the Froghemoth. It then bites her, and if it succeeds on another grab she is transferred to it's mouth. It then attacks the other 4 members of the party with it's tentacles securing a grab on each one (really great rolls). Each party member is now limited as to what it can do on their turn.
On the Froghemoths turn is where I have some questions, does taking the -20 mean you hold the creature (without any other effect) without having to make a check? Becuase otherwise it's a standard action to maintain whether you are grappled or not.
Anyway, the Froghemoth could let go of everyone as a free action (would Seroni take falling damage when she's spit out? Heh.), attack them all again and grapple them all again.
Or it could let everyone but Seoni go and spend a standard action to swallow her. Or it could hold someone with it's tentacle and deal regular damage 1d8+5 + constrict damage 1d6+10 as grab states:
If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals
constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature’s descriptive text).
Question I have is could it just try to hold the 4 with it's tentacles (essentially free actions) and swallow Seoni (the standard action and would the swallow have the -20)?
|
|
Also, it should be noted that Constrict damage is extra damage on top of the damage done by a natural weapon with the Grab ability. So a froghemoth who has grabbed with a tentacle does 1d6+1d8+15 damage when constricting.1.) why does its CONSTRICT(tentacle) ability (1d6+ STR) not match its tentacle damage (1d8+ 1/2 STR)Constrict damage doesn't always have to exactly match the damage of the attack used to initiate it. In this case, I believe we lowered the constrict damage a little bit because the froghemoth was already doing quite enough damage as it was.
You know, I never really thought about that. I thought that was wrong until I re-read it, but nope, and it does make a sort of sense. But wow. I had thought grab/constrict was powerful before, and I was doing it where the creature would attack, get attack damage, make a free check, do constrict damage, and that was a LOT on the 1st round. Then on subsequent rounds it just did constrict damage.
Holy ouch.
Also, it should be noted that Constrict damage is extra damage on top of the damage done by a natural weapon with the Grab ability. So a froghemoth who has grabbed with a tentacle does 1d6+1d8+15 damage when constricting.1.) why does its CONSTRICT(tentacle) ability (1d6+ STR) not match its tentacle damage (1d8+ 1/2 STR)Constrict damage doesn't always have to exactly match the damage of the attack used to initiate it. In this case, I believe we lowered the constrict damage a little bit because the froghemoth was already doing quite enough damage as it was.You know, I never really thought about that. I thought that was wrong until I re-read it, but nope, and it does make a sort of sense. But wow. I had thought grab/constrict was powerful before, and I was doing it where the creature would attack, get attack damage, make a free check, do constrict damage, and that was a LOT on the 1st round. Then on subsequent rounds it just did constrict damage.
Holy ouch.
Can a creature constrict on the rounds it initiates a grab?
You know, I never really thought about that. I thought that was wrong until I re-read it, but nope, and it does make a sort of sense. But wow. I had thought grab/constrict was powerful before, and I was doing it where the creature would attack, get attack damage, make a free check, do constrict damage, and that was a LOT on the 1st round. Then on subsequent rounds it just did constrict damage.
Holy ouch.
Yes, although it's somewhat balanced by the fact that you don't get multiple grapple checks per turn in PFRPG without taking Greater Grapple.
Yes, although it's somewhat balanced by the fact that you don't get multiple grapple checks per turn in PFRPG without taking Greater Grapple.You know, I never really thought about that. I thought that was wrong until I re-read it, but nope, and it does make a sort of sense. But wow. I had thought grab/constrict was powerful before, and I was doing it where the creature would attack, get attack damage, make a free check, do constrict damage, and that was a LOT on the 1st round. Then on subsequent rounds it just did constrict damage.
Holy ouch.
It's not so balanced i a creature can constrict on the round it grabs.
Froghemoth tentacle attack #1
Attack - deal damage
Make Grab check - Succeed
Constrict - deal damage
Let go as free action
Froghemoth tentacle attack #2
Attack - deal damage
Make Grab check - Succeed
Constrict - deal damage
Let go as free action
Rinse and repeat for attacks 3 and 4, + tongue and bite
|
|
No need to let go. The point is that the frog is already dealing 'double' damage even if he maintains a grapple.
The way it makes sense is because of how grapple works. A normal creature *without* constrict can grapple a target and take a standard action each turn to maintain the grapple. if they succeed, they can also do damage equal to their unarmed attack or natural weapon or whatnot, which in this case would be the froghemoth's tongue damage.
Because he has constrict though, he also deals constrict damage whenever he makes a successful grapple check.
So on round 1, he attacks, deals tongue damage, attempts to grab, does constrict damage.
On rounds 2+ it's the same damage each time he succeeds with a grapple check, and he has incentive to not let go because he gets the +5 bonus for having maintained the grapple AND he deprives his opponent of some actions. Heck, he could even sacrifice his non-constrict damage one round to just 'pin' the guy as well.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 4
|
When I ran this last week with my group, I ended up altering the way constrict worked. I changed it to be a type of ongoing damage that gets applied if you begin your turn grappled by a creature with the constrict special quality. That felt like it better represented what's going on during constriction (ongoing pressure) rather than big bursts of heavy damage.
I didn't bother to try figuring out whether cleave and grab could interact, and froghemoth was making full-attacks anyway so it probably wouldn't have come up.
I did rule though that a grapple check to just hold a victim could be substituted for a tentacle attack, and not made as a standard action. This allowed the froghemoth to grapple multiple foes simultaneously, just hold them, and deal constriction damage as above.
I got thrown several times trying to determine if the froghemoth could make attacks of opportunity. It's got two characters grappled from a previous round (just holding - not considered grappled) but has just used its tongue to grab another character this round (so it's grappled after all). So I don't think I got a single AoO off due to this confusion.
I can't wait to bust out the pathfinderized Ulgurstasta.
No need to let go. The point is that the frog is already dealing 'double' damage even if he maintains a grapple.
The point is that if the frog lets go, he can do the same full attack routine again next round. Whereas if he chooses to grapple, he only gets one grapple check next round.
|
|
No need to let go. The point is that the frog is already dealing 'double' damage even if he maintains a grapple.The point is that if the frog lets go, he can do the same full attack routine again next round. Whereas if he chooses to grapple, he only gets one grapple check next round.
Sure, but isn't it easier to just keep grappling?
Let's assume a basic level 13 fighter. We'll give him a good AC for a tank. +2 full plate, +2 heavy shield, +1 dex, +2 ring of prot.. we'll leave it at that. Give him a 20 STR too for the heck of it. These numbers really don't matter, but in the end his AC would be 29 and his CMD would be 29.
For the frog to attack him (with a tentacle) and then grapple him successfully, he would need to roll an 11+ (for the tentacle to hit) followed by a 2+ for the grapple check. If he's just grappling, all he needs is the 2+ on the CMB check to keep the grapple going and do the same damage. In truth, the more appropriate course of action would just be to have the frog try to swallow the dude on the first round, which it could easily do so long as it doesn't roll a 1. Then it can continue using its full attacks on people. :) Sure the fighter can try to escape with a light slashing or piercing weapon, but I've been surprised at how few fighters carry a backup tiny weapon for those purposes, so often it does keep them out of the fight.
|
No need to let go. The point is that the frog is already dealing 'double' damage even if he maintains a grapple.The point is that if the frog lets go, he can do the same full attack routine again next round. Whereas if he chooses to grapple, he only gets one grapple check next round.Sure, but isn't it easier to just keep grappling?
Let's assume a basic level 13 fighter. We'll give him a good AC for a tank. +2 full plate, +2 heavy shield, +1 dex, +2 ring of prot.. we'll leave it at that. Give him a 20 STR too for the heck of it. These numbers really don't matter, but in the end his AC would be 29 and his CMD would be 29.
For the frog to attack him (with a tentacle) and then grapple him successfully, he would need to roll an 11+ (for the tentacle to hit) followed by a 2+ for the grapple check. If he's just grappling, all he needs is the 2+ on the CMB check to keep the grapple going and do the same damage. In truth, the more appropriate course of action would just be to have the frog try to swallow the dude on the first round, which it could easily do so long as it doesn't roll a 1. Then it can continue using its full attacks on people. :) Sure the fighter can try to escape with a light slashing or piercing weapon, but I've been surprised at how few fighters carry a backup tiny weapon for those purposes, so often it does keep them out of the fight.
If it's one on one, absolutely, but as you can only grapple one target a round (grapple is a standard action), it's better to make full attacks, get the free grab against everyone, inconvenience them and get constrict damage, rather than just grapple one target. Unless there's one really annoying player/character who you want to get. In that case, concentrate fire on the unfortunate. You won't last as long, but at least you get to take him down with you.
EDIT: Actually, on rereading it, it says maintaining a grapple is a standard action. It doesn't say you can maintain only one. Hmmm. Depending on your GM, it might make more sense to keep maintaining it. Check beforehand.
EDIT: Actually, on rereading it, it says maintaining a grapple is a standard action. It doesn't say you can...
Well, to me "a grapple" means "one grapple". If a monster could grapple multiple foes with one standard action, that'd be pretty nasty all right!
|
|
I have to wonder if the Bestiary is missing some text for Grab, and that creatures with it should be able to maintain as a free action. Otherwise, what is the point of including "The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself."?
If it is a standard action to maintain, what's the point of this? I always assumed it was so the creature could continue to attack other people normally, but 'not being grappled' really doesn't do jack since most of the penalties don't apply against the person you're grappling with anyhow. :S
|
|
Also, creatures with lots of attacks and grab, like the Gibbering Mouther. How do they function properly? It's a standard action to maintain, yes, but can't it start grapples with as many people as it wants? On round 1, use 6 bites to attack 6 different targets (if they happen to all be nearby) and start a grapple with each? I guess they technically *would* be stuck in the grapple and suffer the appropriate penalties until the mouthers next turn, when he can only maintain the grapple with one and has to let the others go.
I consider myself well versed in all the rules, but Grab and Constrict have been the two things that always seem to change and twist and confuse the hell out of me.
Excellent questions. :-)
|
|
I think the *easiest* fix, and maybe what was intended, is that creatures with Grab can maintain a grapple as a free action. Or something like that. It'd fit the theme with all those crazy grabbing creatures too. Whenever I think of a creature with grab I think of something snatching up as many things as it can, not something that snatches up one thing in one of its 8 tentacles and gets distracted. :)
|
Monsters with the Grab ability pretty much have to be able to maintain a grapple as a free action. Otherwise, none of the general tactics of these monsters work. The Frogemoth was obviously designed to grapple an entire party of four simultaneously, eating them one by one each round. I don't suppose we could get an official ruling on this?
I do also think monsters with multiple grappling appendages should be able to make grapple checks to maintain a grapple as a free action.
To increase the confusion, I just discovered that the Kraken in the Bestiary has the following special quality:
Tenacious Grapple (Ex) A kraken does not gain the grappled condition if it grapples a foe with its arms or tentacles.
I do also think monsters with multiple grappling appendages should be able to make grapple checks to maintain a grapple as a free action.
To increase the confusion, I just discovered that the Kraken in the Bestiary has the following special quality:
Tenacious Grapple (Ex) A kraken does not gain the grappled condition if it grapples a foe with its arms or tentacles.
And here I was about to go with the multiple appendages = free grapple maintains rule
And then... The s+&@storm kraken hit the fan.
I think that we're gonna have to go with the -20 Rule ><
Which does suck, but oh well. It's written.
Then again, lol, ya don't HAVE to obey the rules, but I will.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
So this big, beautiful froggie starts out the battle by giving Seoni a good tongue-lashing.
I have to say it... [Quagmire]Giggity-giggity![/Quagmire]
I believe the grapple rules are written for humanoids. Normally, a human gets one (1) natural attack, and therefore it takes a standard action to maintain the grapple.
The Grab ability supercedes those rules.
... or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself
I'd interpret that to mean it substitutes that part of its Full-Attack routine to maintain the grapple and deal constrict damage, at a -20 penalty, or uses one Standard action to maintain ALL the grapples (still at a -20) so it can drag its prey into the darkness.
That allows the beastie to actually threaten a party of 4, rather than grabbing one and trying to swallow it while the other wail on it for 3 rounds unopposed; or grab a party member or two and forcing the rest of the party to follow to a more dangerou- ahem.. cinematic locale or abandon their friend.EDIT: Against a 13th level Seoni, with a base CMD of 16 (No Str or Dex mods, no Ring of Protections, etc.) would have a 40% chance of breaking free if Froghemoth did not devote its full attention. Against a Fighter or Barbarian, with base CMDs of 23 it has, at least, a 75% chance. That sounds reasonable to me.
Look to the Tenacious Grapple ability of the Kraken.
It solves the problem.
The Froghemoth takes the -20.
===================================
Oh wait, you're agreeing, nevermind. lol
What's that about a standard action though, I'm not certain I grasp what you're saying. -Wishes I did-
That allows the beastie to actually threaten a party of 4, rather than grabbing one and trying to swallow it while the other wail on it for 3 rounds unopposed; or grab a party member or two and forcing the rest of the party to follow to a more dangerou- ahem.. cinematic locale or abandon their friend.
I think I read in another thread that a character which is grappled, but not pinned, may do a full attack on the grappler, as long as he is using only one hand to do it.
If this is correct, grappling multiple opponents for multiple rounds without pinning them can also be quite dangerous for a beastie.
|
The true danger of a multiple attack creature with grab and constrict is this:
1) attack; succeed --> deal natural weapon dmg
2) grab as free action taking the -20; succeed --> deal constrict dmg
3) attack grabbed creature with all remaining natural attacks WITHOUT the -2 as the creature is NOT considered grappled
4) perform AoOs normally against other creatures
So, you grab someone with weak CMD, like a caster so his/her spells become hard to fire off, then you wail on it until it dies, then you move to the next PC. If you start splitting your attacks on different PCs, your monster becomes pretty easy to defeat.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
What's that about a standard action though, I'm not certain I grasp what you're saying. -Wishes I did-
Only that the grapple rules require a standard action to maintain the grapple.
If you do not release the grapple, you must continue to make a check each round, as a standard action, to maintain the hold. If your target does not break the grapple, you get a +5 circumstance bonus on grapple checks made against the same target in subsequent rounds. Once you are grappling an opponent, a successful check allows you to continue grappling the foe, and also allows you to perform one of the following actions (as part of the standard action spent to maintain the grapple).
Move:
Damage:
Pin:
Tie Up:
Given the Constrict damage is less than even a single tentacle attack, maintaining a grapple under the grapple RAW essentially requires a full round action, I can't imagine the Froghemoth EVER grappling/constricting/swallowing unless facing only one foe or raiding farms and towns for level 1 commoners, unless the Grab ability supercedes the grapple rules.
If you're going to be stuck in one place, you might as well get 6 attacks out of it!
Tenacious Grapple (Ex)
Given that this started with the Froghemoth, does that make the tongue attack a Lick of Destiny?
Couldn't resist. Seriously though, was the "Pull" Ability resolved in relation to the Attack/Grapple/Swallow?
@.@; I think I just confused myself. ~.~;
Now that this has been largely answered, would be be okay to point out that ...
... The title of this thread made me think of something vaguely pornographic. =8O
I think I read in another thread that a character which is grappled, but not pinned, may do a full attack on the grappler, as long as he is using only one hand to do it.
If this is correct, grappling multiple opponents for multiple rounds without pinning them can also be quite dangerous for a beastie.
Assuming that the beastie only has one attack (like a constrictor snake, for instance), how is that any more dangerous than meleeing multiple opponents for multiple rounds (which is presumably the alternative)?
Given the Constrict damage is less than even a single tentacle attack, maintaining a grapple under the grapple RAW essentially requires a full round action, I can't imagine the Froghemoth EVER grappling/constricting/swallowing unless facing only one foe or raiding farms and towns for level 1 commoners, unless the Grab ability supercedes the grapple rules.
I agree that most creatures with multiple attacks are better off not grappling, under the current rules. But note that Constrict damage is in addition to the damage from the natural weapon that started the grapple. So a froghemoth would do tentacle + constrict damage on a successful check, not just constrict damage.
Assuming that the beastie only has one attack (like a constrictor snake, for instance), how is that any more dangerous than meleeing multiple opponents for multiple rounds (which is presumably the alternative)?I think I read in another thread that a character which is grappled, but not pinned, may do a full attack on the grappler, as long as he is using only one hand to do it.
If this is correct, grappling multiple opponents for multiple rounds without pinning them can also be quite dangerous for a beastie.
I was thinking more about the Froghemoth, which could make use of its superior reach in a normal meelee.
You are right for monsters in general, it often makes no difference.
So just a quick confirmation once again, and I apologize for this.
If the original tentacle attack deals 7 damage., and then the grapple with the tentacle succeeds.
The constrict damage would come into play.
Then on the next round when the grapple would need to be maintained, if successfully maintained and then?
==========================
1)The creature grappled by the tentacle would take additional tentacle damage plus new constrict.
2)Would take 7 damage plus new constrict.
3)Would take constrict damage.