Gammut's page

Scenario #1: Rogue gets grappled by a lizardfolk. Fighter joins the grapple to help save him. A froghemoth pops out of a pond and grabs the rogue at the extent of his reach.

Is the rogue pulled free from the grapple? Does the entire grapple move adjacent to the froghemoth? What if there isn't room?

I'd like to go back to this example. I can see many instances where this would happen. The rogue is in reach of the froghmoth and the lizardman is out of reach. The froghmoth just wants to eat something. Because the rogue is already grappled by the lizardman, what happens? The froghemoth isn't allowed to grapple the rogue?

Because in a grapple with multiple opponents (i.e. the monk and fighter) only the initiator of the grapple is entitled to make an actual grapple check. The fighter would hvae to make an aid another roll to help the monk.

O.k...so I've been snooping around, checking out other grappling threads, lemme see if I have it straight.

What you're saying here is you can grapple the one who is in controle of the grapple, thus forcing them to use their free action to let go?

This would make sense to me. If suddenly the fighter got dominated, he could attempt to grapple the monk, since the monk now has the crab. If the fighter succeeded, the monk would be forced to release the crab from the grapple.

The crab could then attack the fighter, then use his grab to grapple, with one claw (-20 to grapple check), he can use his other attack to hit the monk and also grapple the monk (at -20 to the grapple check if he successfully grappled the fighter forcing the fighter to release the monk).

I was always under the impression you could just ignore the person grappling you. So if you're fighting opponent A in melee and opponent B grapples you, you could just keep fighting opponent A normally with all your attacks. The down side, of course, is you are at penalties to hit etc, because of the grappled condition.

Alternately, only being able to attack once/round when grappled seems like an appropriate penalty.

I can't help but think, though, that if you grapple a leopard, it's just gonna go balistic and use all its attacks on you...

You can fill out the party with items as well. Not too many, but maybe one or 2 key useful things. A rogue is versatile and has Use Magic Device as a class skill. Let them find a wand of Curing, maybe a couple combat oriented magic items. Potions can be a life saver and won't break the game. You could try a figurine of wonderous Power, perhaps; the Lion is a little portable "fighter" and would take some of the hits. Just make sure the item(s) isn't too much for their level.

Scenario #1: Rogue gets grappled by a lizardfolk. Fighter joins the grapple to help save him. A froghemoth pops out of a pond and grabs the rogue at the extent of his reach.

Is the rogue pulled free from the grapple? Does the entire grapple move adjacent to the froghemoth? What if there isn't room?

Scenario #2: Wyvern uses a full attack action, stings the fighter, then bites him, which triggers his grab ability. The wyvern beats the fighter's CMD, and is now grappling the fighter.

What happens to the wyvern's wing attacks? Does the wyvern lose them? Should the wyvern have made his wing attacks before he made his bite?

I'm having similar confusion with grapple, if you want to check it out Here. I got some useful advice.

I wish to point you to the other grapple thread you pointed out. The fighter, the crab and the monk. Just as the monk can intervene on the fighters behalf against the crab I also think it is possible to grapple an assister.

Being in a grapple does not prevent you from being grappled.

Right. In that thread you also said that in subsequent rounds the fighter could not initiate a grapple against the crab. Why could the monk initiate a grapple against the crab before, but now the fighter cannot?

However, maintaining a grapple is a standard action unless the creature has the greater grapple feat, which makes it difficult to effectively grapple two enemies at once without the constrict ability.

How does the constrict ability let you more effectively grapple 2 enemies?

"Constrict (Ex) A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, when it makes a successful grapple check (in addition to any other effects caused by a successful check, including additional damage)."

From this, it seems that you have to successfully grapple every round to do constrict damage. Or is that just for the initial grapple? Do they just take damage automatically every round while in the grappled condition?

Lastly(and I'm pretty sure this is my last question), can you grapple an opponent who is aiding in another grapple, for instance in an effort to prevent them from aiding. It seems it would be a "no" since they are already in a grapple...

I'm not sure if I sound like I'm trying to be difficult. I'm just trying to give people a sense of what I want to do and see if it's within the rules.

So, to refocus the thread, I'd like to go back to the grab ability and grappling. Grandfather, it seems that I've misunderstood what you've been saying.

Let me see if I have it straight now and correct anything I don't have right. One creature does the grapple check, the others aid (adding a +2 bonus as per the aid action). I was fine with that part.

Also, only the one who is in control of the grapple can do damage, and those who aid are not allowed to control the grapple. (this is why a creature with the constrict ability, who is aiding, cannot do its constrict damage.

Only the one in controle of the grapple can choose what grapple action to take.

That's how the rules work. You join the grapple, then aid, not otherwise.

So to clarify, all those who aid int he grapple, if they "join the grapple", do they gain the grappled condition?

Next, a single creature with the "constrict" ability can take a -20 to its CMB to hold an opponent with one appendage. It can then attempt to attack/grab/constrict another creature with its free appendage.

I'll stop there for now...

Well, aid is a standard action. It isn't done as part of an attack action. The choker(with 2 attacks), therfore couldn't use his first attack to hit, then use his other attack to "aid" his ally.

There's a fundamental difference between how Grandfather and I interperate the rules: Grandfather is saying only 2 people can ever be in a grapple at the same time. No-one else can join or affect the grapple in any way with the exception of using an "aid other" action, in which case, the person is aiding by changing the odds in favour of one of the grapplers. Once they've aided (as a standard action), they can use their move action to withdraw from the grapplers if they want. (although the dm would probably rule that the grappler wouldn't get the bonus to his CMD since his ally's, who aided, are not adjacent when the opponent tries to escape the grapple later in the round) - but the point is, they're not grappled.

I'm saying that multiple people should be able to join the grapple simultaneously. That the multiple grapplers who "aided" also have the grappled condition if they wish to continue to add their bonus to the check.

In my interpretation, all the chokers would be able to use their constrict if they would have successfully aided and entered a grapple with an opponent.

It still doesn't answer questions regarding multiple grapplers wanting to do different maneuvers. I'm not sure the rules are that advanced. It doesn't look like it's covered and, as Maezer put it, is in the realm of house-rules. That said, I still welcome any comments, suggestions, constructive feedback etc...

Yes, they CAN grapple, but they CAN'T use the grab ability.

I have not been able to find an example of a dispensation on the grab rule. But I expect one would leave no room for doubt. To me the description under the chocker does not seem to allow the use of the free grapple benefit against small and larger enemies.

I don't want to get into a debate about Chokers. A small creature with the grab ability that can't actually use its abilities against the PC's does not deserve a CR2 designation. They will be able to use their grab against the PC's in my game.

"Multiple creatures can attempt to grapple one target. The creature that first initiates the grapple is the only one that makes a check..., with a +2 bonus for each creature that assists in the grapple (using the Aid Another action)."

I think the rules are quite clear:
A - the active grappler/the initial grappler is the only one that makes a [grapple] check.
B - the remaining grapplers assist in the grapple (using the Aid Another action).

RAW - "multiple creatures can attempt to grapple one target" Only the first makes the check while the other use the Aid other action "TO ATTEMPT TO GRAPPLE" Not to aid the ONE who grapples. I think they are using the "aid other" as a mechanic to resolve multiple grapplers. I don't think it's as clear as you think.

I think there's a big difference between aiding a grapple and attempting to grapple. We won't agree on this one, Grandfather, but I'm inclined to say that everyone who aids in the grapple will gain the grappled condition if the check succeeds.

I think I'll have to house rule something. I can see these grapple rules don't have the flexibility I want.

Hey Maezer, thanks for the reply. And of course, it's always about dealing the maximum damage *evil DM cackle*. Also ,I like the house rule. I'd invite you to read a bit further to my second post and see my response to Granfather - especially regarding the "aid" action. I'm just clarifying some of my problems/arguments...

I'm having a "similar" issue, if you'd like to take a look. You'll notice a reply that implies that only TWO people can be in a grapple at once. So your monk would not be allowed to grapple the crab. I'm not saying I agree with this, but I'd invite you to have a look at the situation I'm faced with: http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboards/paizoPublishing/pathfinder/pathfinderR PG/rules/grabAndMultipleGrapplers&page=1#0

O.k, A few things:

1. Choker description: "A choker will attempt to grasp creatures of almost any size, but prefers lone prey of its size or smaller. "

so they CAN grapple medium creatures, but this is not relevant to my question, so we can just replace Choker with any other creature with Grab.

2. "Then don't." isn't a very constructive answer. I was giving an example: "Let's say someone who is grappling is trying to move their concious opponent into another room, but I felt it would be more helpful to the situation to just pin the foe instead, is it impossible to enter the grapple and attempt to pin?"

3. Is this how I should run a choker (or any creature with improved grab):

a. roll to hit, if successful role damage and role a grapple check, if successful do constrict damage. Do I get to role to hit with my second tentacle against the same opponent? ie: role to hit, if successful, role damage then grapple and if successful role constrict damage.

b. If the first choker hits, then succeeds in grappling and constricting, does this mean that none of the other chokers can use their grab or constrict abilities against that same foe? If so, it seems to limit their ability to help each other.

One thing that I don't agree with you on is the rules say:

"Multiple creatures can attempt to grapple one target. The creature that first initiates the grapple is the only one that makes a check..."
It doesn't say, "multiple creature can attempt to help another grappler..." Although that is the purpose of the "aid" action, I think that this is just another use for it. So it seems to me, by this sentence, even though the other creatures are making "aid" actions, they are using the "aid" action to actually grapple and therefore they would all get to use their constrict.

I don't really know how to deal with the "grab" ability and multiple grapplers or deal with grapple when the creature has multiple attacks. Here's the situation: I have 6 above-average intelligence Chokers move in and attempt to attack/grapple an opponent.

When I ran the combat, I had each choker attack individually and resolve their attack and grapple and constrict normally. After the first succeeded in the grapple, the rest had an easier time to hit because the PC had the "grappled" modifier.

The PC's argued this ruling saying that that there was only one role for a grapple. Does this mean you can't "join" a grapple once it starts? Can you only Aid one of the people in the grapple? What if I don't want to aid the person grappling the opponent? What if that person is trying to pin them, but I want to render them unconcious instead?

It almost makes sense for normal grapple attacks, but it doesn't make sense for a choker, with 2 tentacle attacks/round to give up both attacks to use their standard action to aid one ally.

Also, It seems to me that if a choker has 2 tentacle attack/round, he'd never attempt to grapple on the first attack because he wouldn't get to attack with the second tentacle.

How I interpereted the rules after I re-read them was all 5 of the chokers would have to ready a standar action to "aid" as the 6th choker attacks. If the 6th hits, he does his attack damage and his grab ablility to grapple, then the other chokers can aid the grapple (8 +2 for each successful aid). If the role succeeds, all 6 chokers can do their "constrict" damage.

Then on the PC's turn, he'd have to beat a CMD of the main choker +2 for each choker who aided.

Is this correct? I think it's a bit silly because each choker is giving up the potential for 4d4 +12 damage (2 tentacles at 1d4 +3 plus the constrict damage for each tentacle) for a 1d4+3 constrict which depends on one of two roles succeeding. 6 chokers attack 12 times vs one choker attacking twice....

I've been using 11 and with good results. I also changed the size mods to...

Fine –16, Diminutive –8, Tiny –4, Small –2
Medium +0
Large +2, Huge +4, Gargantuan +8, Colossal +16

And how does that work compared to the old 3.5 categories? It scales so that the top and bottom end are the same as 3.5. Just curious.

I think my main complaint is that "at will" powers can break an encounter. While it's unlikely in most situations, it can happen: Assassin vines have a movement of 5 feet and a reach of 20ft. If someone like the ranger or the rogue spots it, then the wizard can "ray of frost" until it's dead because it's so slow. No-one uses up any resourses.

At higher levels, a mage can cast "Force Cage" then do "ping" damage on the creature until it's dead while everyone sits back and takes a snooze.

This is how I'm doing it: Cast a # of times/day = to INT
If you meditate for 10 mins then it resets the limit back to Zero.

I'd considered this, but figured it wasn't fair for wizards and was opening a can of worms:

1. Cast limit = Stat, if you don't meditate then,
2. After every casting thereafter make a spellcraft dc=10+1/casting, if you fail, you take subdual damage. (kind of like the rules for forced march)

Generally I don't understand why the system hasn't gone more Warlock on things ...

I mentionned this in another thread, but I think this is the best place for it:

I feel that Warlocks were overpowered. Any class that lets you do damage at will from a range has the potential to be abused. For that reason I'm not too crazy about the "at will" attacks that the new spellcasting classes get.

Archers use up arrows, fighter-types risk themselves in melee and spellcasters use up spell-slots. There has to be some kind of use of resources and risk of death.

I've seen the "improved invisible" warlock/rogue obliterate encounters before.

Am I the only one who feels this way?

I'm not against "at will" powers, I just think they should be non-combat and/or buff spells. I also like giving spellcasters additional combat powers, but I think they should be a limited number of times per day even if that number is high (i.e: equal to their main STAT).

O.k, is it me or is giving wizards/sorcerers/clerics the ability to do a magical missle attack (at will!) a bit broken? Fighters have to go melee, archers use up arrows, and spellcasters used to have a finite amount of spells. It was for this reason my group disallowed the Warlock class.

Any situation where the party is at a height advantage against a foe or behind a barrier etc..., the spellcaster can do ping-damage until it's dead while everyone sits back and takes a snooze.

Combine that with Improved invisibility and levels of rogue (who can now sneak attack amost anything).

I feel that, in combat, there has to be some kind of risk, whether it's risking resourses or HP's.