Chokehold vs Breath Weapons


Rules Questions


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Question is: If a creature is in a chokehold, can it use a breathweapon? "In a chokehold" assumes the maneuver was a success: that is, the creature is not immune to suffocation, critical hits, and must breathe.

Chokehold:

Prerequisites: Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +6 or monk level 5th.

Benefit: While you have an opponent up to one size category larger than you grappled, you can attempt a grapple combat maneuver with a –5 penalty on the check. If you succeed, you have pinned your opponent and hold the opponent in a chokehold. When you maintain the grapple, you also maintain the chokehold. A creature in a chokehold cannot breathe or speak, and thus cannot cast spells that have a verbal component. An opponent you have in a chokehold has to hold his breath or begin suffocating. Any creature that does not breathe, is immune to bleed damage, or is immune to critical hits is immune to the effects of your chokehold. When the grapple is ended, so is the chokehold.


I would say no, it couldn't, if only because that's what makes the most sense given that breathing and speaking are already out, though that's just my gut response.


I think it's an oversight. Strictly RAW: No, chokehold does not prevent breath weapons. But I think the vast majority of GMs would rule that it does.


use a Garrote

A garrote is a length of wire or thin rope with wooden handles at both ends. The wire is placed across a victim's throat and crossed behind the neck; when the handles are pulled tight, the garrote strangles him.

Description: In order for you to use a garrote, your opponent must be helpless or unaware of you. You must make a grapple check (though you avoid the –4 penalty for not having two hands free) to successfully begin garroting your opponent. Sneak attack damage does not apply to a garrote. Your garroted opponent must make a concentration check (DC 20 + your CMB + level of the spell he’s casting) to cast a spell with a verbal component, use a command word item, or use any magic requiring speech. You gain the following additional option when grappling with a garrote.

Choke: You cut off your target’s air supply so he has to hold his breath (see Suffocation, and the Swim skill for additional information). Any round you do not maintain the choke, your opponent can take a breath and restart when he has to begin making Constitution checks.

Weapon Feature(s): choke

but i think it would have to be a big one extra long and you would have to be strong or the dragon or what ever would treat you like the female titan from attack on titan when she spins the guy about like a watch on a chain like a pimp.


Thank you for the replies so far. I've got some varied opinions at the table, so am trying to pin this down the best I can.

Zainale: Would a garotte cut off a breath weapon?

Dark Archive

My gut ruling would be "if you can't take a breath, you can't use a breath weapon".


Choke: You cut off your target’s air supply so he has to hold his breath (see Suffocation, and the Swim skill for additional information). Any round you do not maintain the choke, your opponent can take a breath and restart when he has to begin making Constitution checks.

if you let up at all the dragon, frost wolf or what ever can catch it's breath so i guess it would be able to catch its breath and exhale it quickly before you apply pressure again.


Does the breath weapon use all of the creature's lung capacity? Perhaps the choked creature can use the weapon once but in exchange has to start making Con checks per the Suffocation rules.


Aren't the breath weapons of dragons generally supernatural abilities, meaning they don't care about any conditions except those specifically listed in the ability as defining when they don't work and antimagic fields?


CalethosVB wrote:
Aren't the breath weapons of dragons generally supernatural abilities, meaning they don't care about any conditions except those specifically listed in the ability as defining when they don't work and antimagic fields?

That is an interesting point. Despite the name, I'm not at all sure that breath weapons actually require that you take in a breath. There are creatures with breath weapons that live in space. I presume that they can use their breath weapons in their native environment even though they aren't breathing anything in. Supernatural abilities don't have to make physical sense.

So, for me, the question would come to where to breath weapon's matter or energy originates. If you believe that the substance magically appears in your mouth and is then expelled, then restricting the throat wouldn't make any difference. If you think that the substance is created in the lungs and then expelled through the throat, then a choke hold would seem to be an effective countermeasure.


CalethosVB wrote:
Aren't the breath weapons of dragons generally supernatural abilities, meaning they don't care about any conditions except those specifically listed in the ability as defining when they don't work and antimagic fields?

Despite it being supernatural, it could very well be that it supernaturally bellows up inside them somewhere (stomach, throat, etc) and that they need to release it with a breath (which can be a normal exhale). This is as opposed to a theoretical monster that has an extraordinarily bad breath that sickens people when it exhales.

EDIT(S): Ninja and agree with Gisher in a sense, I would think it would be on a case by case basis unless otherwise specified in the monster's entry.

Don't need a theoretical monster (just for fun).

Catoblepas wrote:


Poison Breath (Ex) A catoblepas's horrid, stinking breath is 60-foot cone of poison gas. Breath—contact; save Fort DC 23; frequency 1/round for 6 rounds; effect 1d6 Con damage; cure 3 consecutive saves. The save DC is Constitution-based.

Something like this just needs to open its mouth and release the stench. It has no cooldown as opposed to a Dragon's breath and is EX instead of SU (as a point of reference that some breath weapons are built differently).

It even specifies that:

Catoblepas wrote:


Some have been known to use their breath underwater, creating a churning cloud of bubbles that kills fish in the area and starves out other creatures.


Hubaris wrote:


It even specifies that:

Catoblepas wrote:


Some have been known to use their breath underwater, creating a churning cloud of bubbles that kills fish in the area and starves out other creatures.

Bubbles signify air being released beneath the water.

Does emitting air count as exhaling?


No idea. The reason I posted that wasn't for actual response but to show that each breath weapon (while being classified as one) has its own rules and its not as one size fits all as it usually is depicted.

Basically I think that expect table variation is a thing here, the fluff (while fluff) does provide insight into how it (each weapon usually) works. Whether its RAW or not... *shrug*


Hubaris wrote:

No idea. The reason I posted that wasn't for actual response but to show that each breath weapon (while being classified as one) has its own rules and its not as one size fits all as it usually is depicted.

Basically I think that expect table variation is a thing here, the fluff (while fluff) does provide insight into how it (each weapon usually) works. Whether its RAW or not... *shrug*

I really don't want to do a FAQ request, but that may need to be a thing, given how finely RAW slices things.

That it doesn't stop it makes no thematic sense to me, personally, but thematics does not make it correct.


I agree with people who think that it could vary from creature to creature. First, Chokehold has the following note: "Any creature that does not breathe, is immune to bleed damage, or is immune to critical hits is immune to the effects of your chokehold."

Second, there is actually a feat that specifically calls out "you can shut down a breath weapon": Snoutgrip has the text "If you succeed, you have grappled your opponent and are holding its mouth shut, preventing it from using its bite attack, breath weapon, or spells with a verbal component". As a GM, you could use this to decide whether not being able to use spells with a verbal component implies that you can't also use a breath weapon.

I would probably rule that, at the very least, if the creature uses it's breath weapon, it does not count as "holding its breath", and it would start to suffocate.


Gwen Smith wrote:

I agree with people who think that it could vary from creature to creature. First, Chokehold has the following note: "Any creature that does not breathe, is immune to bleed damage, or is immune to critical hits is immune to the effects of your chokehold."

Second, there is actually a feat that specifically calls out "you can shut down a breath weapon": Snoutgrip has the text "If you succeed, you have grappled your opponent and are holding its mouth shut, preventing it from using its bite attack, breath weapon, or spells with a verbal component". As a GM, you could use this to decide whether not being able to use spells with a verbal component implies that you can't also use a breath weapon.

I would probably rule that, at the very least, if the creature uses it's breath weapon, it does not count as "holding its breath", and it would start to suffocate.

There looks like there's some discontinuity here. It may be due to different writers, or maybe breathweapons aren't quite as nailed down as we'd like to think they are. I'm recalling the monk flurry debate with one weapon vs two.

Chokehold:

Prerequisites: Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +6 or monk level 5th.

Benefit: While you have an opponent up to one size category larger than you grappled, you can attempt a grapple combat maneuver with a –5 penalty on the check. If you succeed, you have pinned your opponent and hold the opponent in a chokehold. When you maintain the grapple, you also maintain the chokehold. A creature in a chokehold cannot breathe or speak, and thus cannot cast spells that have a verbal component. An opponent you have in a chokehold has to hold his breath or begin suffocating. Any creature that does not breathe, is immune to bleed damage, or is immune to critical hits is immune to the effects of your chokehold. When the grapple is ended, so is the chokehold.

Snoutgrip:

Prerequisites: Combat Expertise, Combat Reflexes, Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +12 or 10th-level monk.

Benefit: As an immediate action, whenever an opponent up to one size category larger than you misses you with its bite attack, you can attempt a grapple with a –5 penalty on the check. If you succeed, you have grappled your opponent and are holding its mouth shut, preventing it from using its bite attack, breath weapon, or spells with a verbal component until it escapes your grapple. You may make this grapple attempt even if the target is out of your reach.

While snoutgrip has tougher pre-reqs, they otherwise cover similar ground. Not quite the same. Just enough to make me scratch my head.

We can ascertain that using a breathweapon requires an open mouth from the snoutgrip feat.

So in theory, anything that holds a mouth shut will prevent the use of a breathweapon.

?


SquirrelyOgre wrote:
Hubaris wrote:


It even specifies that:

Catoblepas wrote:


Some have been known to use their breath underwater, creating a churning cloud of bubbles that kills fish in the area and starves out other creatures.

Bubbles signify air being released beneath the water.

Does emitting air count as exhaling?

Well, it would seem that the breath weapon contains gaseous components, but air is not the only form of gas. We don't know for sure whether those gasses are coming from the lungs. They might have glands under their tongues which store and expel the poisonous gasses. In that case, squeezing their throats would be pretty useless. I'm not saying that is what happens, but I could see a GM deciding it was.

And then consider a Void Dragon. They live in space and have no need to breath, but they have a breath weapon. So do their lungs have anything to do with their breath weapon? In this case I would say that choking would be pointless.

I doubt that you would get a FAQ response to your question, both because of the variety of situations and since this is likely going to be a very, very, very rare situation.


Gwen Smith wrote:

I agree with people who think that it could vary from creature to creature. First, Chokehold has the following note: "Any creature that does not breathe, is immune to bleed damage, or is immune to critical hits is immune to the effects of your chokehold."

Second, there is actually a feat that specifically calls out "you can shut down a breath weapon": Snoutgrip has the text "If you succeed, you have grappled your opponent and are holding its mouth shut, preventing it from using its bite attack, breath weapon, or spells with a verbal component". As a GM, you could use this to decide whether not being able to use spells with a verbal component implies that you can't also use a breath weapon.

I would agree that sealing their mouths shut should stop a breath weapon.

Gwen Smith wrote:
I would probably rule that, at the very least, if the creature uses it's breath weapon, it does not count as "holding its breath", and it would start to suffocate.

Even if they have the "No Breath" ability like Outer Dragons? Or what if they also have gills and were under water? Or if it has other heads that it can breath through? As you said, this is probably going to have to be ruled on case-by-case.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Gisher wrote:
SquirrelyOgre wrote:
Hubaris wrote:


It even specifies that:

Catoblepas wrote:


Some have been known to use their breath underwater, creating a churning cloud of bubbles that kills fish in the area and starves out other creatures.

Bubbles signify air being released beneath the water.

Does emitting air count as exhaling?

Well, it would seem that the breath weapon contains gaseous components, but air is not the only form of gas. We don't know for sure whether those gasses are coming from the lungs. They might have glands under their tongues which store and expel the poisonous gasses. In that case, squeezing their throats would be pretty useless. I'm not saying that is what happens, but I could see a GM deciding it was.

And then consider a Void Dragon. They live in space and have no need to breath, but they have a breath weapon. So do their lungs have anything to do with their breath weapon? In this case I would say that choking would be pointless.

I doubt that you would get a FAQ response to your question, both because of the variety of situations and since this is likely going to be a very, very, very rare situation.

I know. It bothers me though, because looking at these feats suggests that the writers may have different understandings of how breathweapons work. That can only grow over time, and create more niche situations, and it will reflect how they continue to write feats and spells.

As an oldschool gamer, this really makes me want to hit my head against the desk, because it flies in the face of thematics, logic...at least to me. Except it's not my call.

If I did put up a FAQ request, what do you think of the following?

Question: Does a breathweapon require any of the following?

- The ability to inhale?
- The ability to exhale?
- An open mouth?

Snoutgrip suggests the last is true. The feats suggest the first two may or may not be true. The name of the ability suggests it is. However, it's also a supernatural ability.

It would affect status effects such as suffocate, spells such as suffocate, abilities such as a void dragon's breathweapon (making the void dragon uniquely dangerous to other dragons, which admittedly, I kind of love this idea), as well as feats such as these.

Dark Archive

My gut is saying "It's a breath weapon, meaning they have to be able to exhale to use it." Even if you're being choked you can probably exhale, just not inhale.

So then the question becomes "Does a breath weapon require you to breath in first?"

Traditionally, dragons have been shown to take a deep breath before exhaling fire, freezing cold, or whatever else their breath weapon is (usually fire). Meaning that whatever the actual mechanic, biologically or magically, they need plenty of air in their lungs to forcefully push their breath weapon forth. This accounts for how it's a Standard action. They have to breath in deeply, then force all that air out along with whatever the nature of the breath weapon is.

But here's the thing: if they don't need to take a deep breath first, then even if you are choking something with a breath weapon... It can still use that breath weapon. Of course in that case it's got no air in it's lungs anymore. If you're still choking them then let the con damage begin. Of course, you probably aren't choking them anymore after getting a breath weapon to the face.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Chokehold vs Breath Weapons All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.