General Grappling and Grappling & Evard's Tentacles questions


3.5/d20/OGL


Two of us were experimenting w/ grappling rules today - mainly since we'd been to a high-school wrestling demo. ;) Go figure... Here's what we ran into.

- When attacking to grapple, the PC provokes an AoO. Can the "defender" use a grapple as his AoO? (this then devolves into the vicious "last in, first out AoO Resolution" cycle, because his AoO attack provokes an AoO, which then means the "attacker" can launch a grapple-check as *his* AoO and it gets resolved, then up one iteration to the original defender's AoO, and then up to the original attack...)

- In a "friendly match" where both PCs/NPCs *intend* to grapple, should the AoO be skipped or does this represent the grapple target deflecting the incoming grapple?

- Do you make a Grapple Check *every* round to maintain a grapple and *another* one to pin your opponent?

- Assume two PCs are "locked up" in a grapple. Can the "defender" (the sap who lost the opposed check when the other guy attacked) make an opposed grapple check to pin the "attacker"? Or should he instead make an escape and then launch his own attack next round to gain control and then make a pin?

(If the AoO stays in, that made for something like 20+ rounds of AoO's blocking incoming attacks, Grapple attempts being beaten, and then the Other Side doing same...)

With Evard's Black Tentacles, the object was one of the PCs (4th lvl) had to make it across the spell's spread, no other path available to bypass it, no spells available, etc. EBT's CL was set at 7, so Grapple Mod was a +15. Here's what it looked like.

First off, should the EBT spell get an initiave score?

Round One:
PC enters area of EBT
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

Round Two:
PC makes escape attempt (opposed grapple check) and failed.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

Round Three:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 5 bludgeoning.

Round Four:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT fails Grapple-check and does no dmg. (PC rolled a 20 - auto-success?)

Round Five:
PC makes escape attempt and fails.
EBT makes grapple-check and fail. (EBT rolled a 1 - auto-fail?)
(PC is still grappled)

Round Six:
PC makes escape attempt and fails.
EBT makes grapple check and succeeds.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 7 bludgeoning. (Rolled a 20 - critical hit?)

Did we do this right? I mean, I know many times and places have argues that EBT is an almost unholy spell for its ability to dominate the battlefield. We *assume* we did this right, but due to so many die-rolls being necessary every round, we thought we'd ask and see.

The poor PC *almost* made it thru - only one square of EBT stood between him and FREEDOM! Plus, had he been one level higher, he'd likely have had enough HP to have lasted that one last round of the spell.


Doc_Outlands wrote:

With Evard's Black Tentacles, the object was one of the PCs (4th lvl) had to make it across the spell's spread, no other path available to bypass it, no spells available, etc. EBT's CL was set at 7, so Grapple Mod was a +15. Here's what it looked like.

Evard's Black Tentacles really is one of the best 4th level spells around. Part of your problem is that the poor 4th level fighter is trying to survive a spell used by a mage at least 3 levels higher then him. Facing mages 3 levels higher then you is hazardous to your health. In other words I think the spell is great but I don't think its broken great.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


First off, should the EBT spell get an initiave score?

No. It first goes when the spell is cast. If that is part of a combat then it would go on the casting wizards initiative at first. If it was due to some trap then it kind of wins initiative by default. Characters are now "within the area of the spell" and therefore must make the initial grapple check. If, for some reason, it was 'just there' then it goes off immediately anytime someone enters the area of the spell. Its for this reason that it does not have an initiative. Its possible for it to be activating on all sorts of initiative counts since it goes off every time anyone gets into the area of the spell and that could potentially be on all sorts of different infinitive counts.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


Round One:
PC enters area of EBT
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

The EBT does not get to make a damage dealing grapple check in the same round it grapples. That said the effect is almost like that.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


Round Two:
PC makes escape attempt (opposed grapple check) and failed.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

This is not exactly correct. What should happen is, on the players initiative, but before the player does anything, the EBT makes its damage dealing grapple check. In this case the player would now be taking the 10 points of bludgeoning damage that you have listed in the round before this one.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


Round Three:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 5 bludgeoning.

Here last rounds damage dealing grapple check should have gone off. Our poor PC takes yet another 10 points - but know he has escaped! so he does not take the 5 points of damage you have listed. When he moved did you count the 1/2 movement? He'd have to be pretty fast as he had to use a standard action to escape the grapple and he only had one move action left? But 30' movement is certainly possible for a PC so you probably did.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


Round Four:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT fails Grapple-check and does no dmg. (PC rolled a 20 - auto-success?)

I'm totally confused. Our PC was free! - he does not have to make an escape attempt until he is actually grappled. So, if our hero beat the EBT in that first roll, there would not have been a second roll. Furthermore should he not take a double move? I mean I doubt he likes this spot very much - he should move 1/2 speed twice for a total of 30' and escape the vile clutches of the EBT. Yay!

OK you note some other rounds as well but as far as I am concerned our hero is away and free (and the crowd goes wild - go grapple that wizard that did this to you!).

Still you raise some other interesting questions along the way and I'll try and address them.

If the attack roll for a grapple is 20 does it automatically hit? How about if its a 1?
The initial attempt to grapple is a modified attack roll. That says to me that it follows the rules for automatic hits and misses. But it does not, here, get to do extra damage as this is not a damage dealing attack.

What about 1s and 20s with grapple checks?
Once the hold is established and your making grapple checks to do damage you are no longer are doing 'attack rolls'. The rules don't indicate anywhere (that I am aware of) anything about natural ones or twenties in this case so I would presume that there is nothing particularly special about a 1 (except that its a pretty lousy roll) or a 20 (except that its a really good roll).


Been a while since I looked at Evard's, but I have become quite the expert on grappling, thanks to a poison dusk lizardfolk monk I had the priviledge of DMing for.

1. Assuming you have no ability that allows you to start a grapple without provoking an attack of opportunity, then you provoke. Simple enough. So now it becomes, for the moment, about Attacks of Opp, not grappling.

An attack of Opp can be anything you can do at that time with a normal melee attack (not attack/standard action; no manyshot or bullrush on an attack of opp). The short and easy list is this: attack, grapple, trip, disarm, sunder. Anything you do that would provoke its own AoOp does so, see the irritating resolution cycle.

Consider this thematically for what you proposed. I reach out to grab your shirt collar, intending to pull you in close and put you in a headlock. You take advantage of my overall lack of skill in "true" grappling and grab my hand, twist, sidestep, and now you have me on the floor with my nearly out of it's socket. That would be countering a grapple AoOp with a grapple, if it was successful.

2. You can always ignore an attack of opportunity and choose to not take it. In a freindly match, that would probably be the case, or see above for using it to start your own grapple.

3. You do nothing to maintain a grapple. A grapple is maintained exactly as long as A. you want it and B. your opponent has not escaped. The rolls you initiate are to do "something": damage, disarm, pin, move, etc. The rolls he initiates are the same, but here's the catch: escape from grapple is one of the options, but maintain grapple isn't. You don't have to roll for it. You can choose to let go although, if your not "on top" at the moment, that might not do much.

4. Yes, Mr. Sap can attempt to pin when his turn comes around, as long as he's not A. dead, or B. pinned himself. Consider pinning to be the "basement" of grappling. Once the grapple moves there, regardless of who moves it, the options of the grapple change until it is moved to "ground floor" again, by an escape from pin or a release of pin.

As I said, I don't remember EvBT that well, no books in front of me. But any spell effect you generate that can influence the world should do so on your own initiative, as it is your spell.

Overall, what you typed looks right, assuming you mean the tentacles attack in melee, then due to improved grab, initiate grapple checks. If so, it all looks about right.

One big thing, often houserules (I sure do). The rules are fuzzy on whether a grapple check is an attack roll or more of a modified ability check. The literally interpreted answer is no, but this brings up the oddity of no combat bonuses on a grapple check. The bard singing his lungs out for you to win from the sidelines doesn't help your greco-roman wrassling? I find that odd.

If we assume a grapple check is an attack roll, consider all effects that can boost attack rolls. Also consider that a Nat 1 would be auto-miss, meaning the person auto-looses that particular check (reprecussions could be anywhere from no damage dealt to no longer being in a grapple). It also means a Nat 20 is auto-success. Consider looking over improved disarm (another opposed roll combat manuver) for how to deal with the effects of double 20's.

There you go, hope that helps.


Doc_Outlands wrote:

Two of us were experimenting w/ grappling rules today - mainly since we'd been to a high-school wrestling demo. ;) Go figure... Here's what we ran into.

- When attacking to grapple, the PC provokes an AoO. Can the "defender" use a grapple as his AoO? (this then devolves into the vicious "last in, first out AoO Resolution" cycle, because his AoO attack provokes an AoO, which then means the "attacker" can launch a grapple-check as *his* AoO and it gets resolved, then up one iteration to the original defender's AoO, and then up to the original attack...)

Welcome to AoO hell...

Your right about the first in last out sequence but you have an infinite loop here. Umm - so now you just crashed the game...
In this particular case the DM is going to have to make a decision. I figure at some point the grapple presumably does go off and I'd rule that the first guy trying to do it gets to go first.
Doc_Outlands wrote:


- In a "friendly match" where both PCs/NPCs *intend* to grapple, should the AoO be skipped or does this represent the grapple target deflecting the incoming grapple?

I figure eventually some body is going to actually get to roll to grapple somebody else. I'd probably let the initial grapple go first but you could reasonably argue that they make initiative rolls or something for it.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


- Do you make a Grapple Check *every* round to maintain a grapple and *another* one to pin your opponent?

Once your in a grapple you don't have to roll to maintain it - its self sustaining until somebody succeeds on a roll to escape (or dimension doors out or dies or what not). I suppose that if both parties ellect to 'let go' then the grapple would end and in some cases only one side is doing the grabbing and therefore could 'let go' at anytime but these are unusual circumstances. Generally once one side is in a grapple both party's are considered to be grabbing onto each other. Some area of confusion here crops up because the grapple rules are often used in odd situations. So if a Tyrannosaurus bites you it gets a free grapple check to see if it picks you up in its teeth and starts chowing down on you. This circumstance somewhat modifies the grapple rules.

Doc_Outlands wrote:


- Assume two PCs are "locked up" in a grapple. Can the "defender" (the sap who lost the opposed check when the other guy attacked) make an opposed grapple check to pin the "attacker"? Or should he instead make an escape and then launch his own attack next round to gain control and then make a pin?

Sure.


The Black Bard wrote:
Overall, what you typed looks right, assuming you mean the tentacles attack in melee, then due to improved grab, initiate grapple checks. If so, it all looks about right.

Evard's Black Tentacles Does not have improved grab.

Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

My house rule to protect against the 'endless AoO loop' is simple: If you do not have Improved Grapple, you cannot use a grapple attempt as an AoO. If you do have Imp. Grapple, you don't provoke and thus break the cycle. This house rule stems from the following rule (which I'm 99% sure is actually mentioned in the RAW): You cannot make AoOs with weapons you are not proficient with.

Without Imp. Grapple, you aren't "proficient" with grappling and thus cannot use it in such a fashion. I also apply this rule to sunders, disarms, etc. I allow trips if the character is wielding a weapon that allows him to make trip attacks OR if he has Imp. Trip.


Fatespinner wrote:

My house rule to protect against the 'endless AoO loop' is simple: If you do not have Improved Grapple, you cannot use a grapple attempt as an AoO. If you do have Imp. Grapple, you don't provoke and thus break the cycle. This house rule stems from the following rule (which I'm 99% sure is actually mentioned in the RAW): You cannot make AoOs with weapons you are not proficient with.

Without Imp. Grapple, you aren't "proficient" with grappling and thus cannot use it in such a fashion. I also apply this rule to sunders, disarms, etc. I allow trips if the character is wielding a weapon that allows him to make trip attacks OR if he has Imp. Trip.

Hmm...I like it though I can't really say I have yet had the infinite loop problem actually occur in the game.


First off - THANK YOU!! I've already figured out a couple of MAJOR errors we were making! (my son does wrestle greco-roman and freestyle, so I may be slaughtering catgirls as I try to get a handle on the grappling rules. ;) )

On the AoO infinite loop, I assumed each "side" would only get ONE AoO, as the rules say you only get one AoO per opponent per round. So, to me, Attacker attempts a grapple and provokes an AoO - Defender opts for a grapple as his AoO and provokes in return - Attacker then goes for a grapple as his AoO - and the cycle STOPS, because the Defender cannot make another AoO against the Attacker this round. Opposed checks are then resolved in reverse order, which does open up an odd quirk, since grappling is about control over time rather than immediate damage.

So there's no real benefit to being the winner of the grapple-check if the intent of both parties is to grapple, right? If Red initiates a grapple and Blue doesn't deal damage and thus break the grapple, then *either* side during a round can attempt to pin? Interesting... Speaking of - if Red moves in to grapple, Blue can use an Unarmed Attack to deal nonlethal damage and break the attack, right?

I'm going to back up and re-read the responses and craft further replies.


Did I say "thank you" yet? I mean it from the bottom of my dark lil DM heart! On rereading the replies, I think I see what we did wrong - in *several* cases!

With that in mind, let me go back through round by round...


Round One:
PC enters area of EBT
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

Should not have taken damage.


Round Two:
PC makes escape attempt (opposed grapple check) and failed.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

First EBT roll was unnecessary.


Round Three:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 5 bludgeoning.

PC is free and could make a double-move at half speed, for TWO 15' moves. We goofed because we didn't understand half-moves.

Can EBT roll to hit this round?

Damage should not have been rolled.


Round Four:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT fails Grapple-check and does no dmg. (PC rolled a 20 - auto-success?)

Depending on if EBT rolls to hit last turn, PC might still be free. If so, PC's roll to escape is unnecessary, he makes a double move, and escapes the EBT. If EBT *was* able to roll last round after PC made his double move, then PC rolled well enough to escape and makes another double move and is out of spell's area of effect.

Second roll, for damage, isn't allowed.


Round Five:
PC makes escape attempt and fails.
EBT makes grapple-check and fail. (EBT rolled a 1 - auto-fail?)
(PC is still grappled)

Round Six:
PC makes escape attempt and fails.
EBT makes grapple check and succeeds.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 7 bludgeoning. (Rolled a 20 - critical hit?)

These rounds shouldn't have happened. The PC did well enough to have moved through the area of effect in four rounds, taking only 10 points of bludgeoning damage.

Oh, and this "re-walk-thru" doesn't even take into account the 20's and 1's issue.

Son's chest is definitely swelling now that he knows his PC *should have* made it out, losing only 1/3 of his HP and "busting the ambush"!
:D


Doc_Outlands wrote:

Did I say "thank you" yet? I mean it from the bottom of my dark lil DM heart! On rereading the replies, I think I see what we did wrong - in *several* cases!

With that in mind, let me go back through round by round...

Round One:
PC enters area of EBT
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

Should not have taken damage.

Correct.

Doc_Outlands wrote:

Round Two:
PC makes escape attempt (opposed grapple check) and failed.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes crapple-check and does 10 bludgeoning.

First EBT roll was unnecessary.

Correct.

Doc_Outlands wrote:

Round Three:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 5 bludgeoning.

PC is free and could make a double-move at half speed, for TWO 15' moves. We goofed because we didn't understand half-moves.

Can EBT roll to hit this round?

Damage should not have been rolled.

The PC should actually not make his escape attempt until after the EBT goes. So in this case the EBT should crush for 5 points of bludgeoning damage and then the PC gets to try and escape.

The PC is free but can't make a double move this round because some time was lost to escaping from the grapple. Now we enter into an area of the grapple rules which are kind of fuzzy. Its not clear how much time is spent doing a grapple. Said another way, its not clear what kind of an action a grapple check is except that apparently you get as many grapple checks as you have attacks - but a grapple check is not an attack. So now it has some kind of duel nature - both an attack and not an attack at the same time. I feel it is reasonable to presume that a grapple check is a standard action if you only make one grapple check in the round but a full round action if you make more then one grapple check in the round. Basically it takes the same amount of time as attacks take - if you make only one grapple check that takes up a standard action just like making only one attack - if you make more then one grapple check then it is the same as making more then one attack and is therefore a full round action.

That said it may be that any use of a grapple check uses up all your actions for the rest of the turn. Probably the second option is more accurate by pure raw. If you ever grapple in a turn then you may do nothing else even if you happen to escape - but I bet a lot of DMs use something closer to my interpretation and you seem to have naturally gravitated to that view in your break down.

However I do feel that some time was used in that grapple roll to escape hence the character only has a single move action left and could only move once - at half speed (because EBT makes things move at half speed) on this round.

The EBT does not get to make a to hit roll later in the round - it already got its attack at the start of the round.

Doc_Outlands wrote:

Round Four:
PC makes escape attempt and SUCCEEDS! Moves 15' further into area of EBT.
EBT makes grapple-check and hits.
EBT fails Grapple-check and does no dmg. (PC rolled a 20 - auto-success?)

Depending on if EBT rolls to hit last turn, PC might still be free. If so, PC's roll to escape is unnecessary, he makes a double move, and escapes the EBT. If EBT *was* able to roll last round after PC made his double move, then PC rolled well enough to escape and makes another double move and is out of spell's area of effect.

Second roll, for damage, isn't allowed.

Here the EBT should, again, go first. If it hits then it will grab the PC but will not do damage this round. The PC will still have his turn so he could try and escape even after being grabbed.

Notice that the sequence is different from the first time he was grabbed. The first time he was grabbed he had moved into the EBT and caused it to activate - hence he had used up, presumably all, his actions before the spell interrupted his movement by grabbing him. In this case he was already in the EBT from the start of the round so the EBT goes first but he will still get to go even if grabbed.

If the EBT fails to grab him he will be able to make a double move (use both a move action and a standard action as a move action). If he is grabbed then he will have to spend at least a standard action to escape.

Doc_Outlands wrote:

Round Five:
PC makes escape attempt and fails.
EBT makes grapple-check and fail. (EBT rolled a 1 - auto-fail?)
(PC is still grappled)

Correct.

Doc_Outlands wrote:

Round Six:
PC makes escape attempt and fails.
EBT makes grapple check and succeeds.
EBT makes grapple-check and does 7 bludgeoning. (Rolled a 20 - critical hit?)

These rounds shouldn't have happened. The PC did well enough to have moved through the area of effect in four rounds, taking only 10 points of bludgeoning damage.

Oh, and this "re-walk-thru" doesn't even take into account the 20's and 1's issue.

Son's chest is definitely swelling now that he knows his PC *should have* made it out, losing only 1/3 of his HP and "busting the ambush"!
:D

I'll note that a big part of the problem with understanding what is going on is due to the fact that we are not just using the famously cumbersome grapple rules but are using some kind of version of those rules based around how a spell effect applies to them. Part of the problem with grapple is that it gets used in all sorts of unorthodox situations and the rules attempt to make it function in all of them. I think we need that - or something like that for the game - because being attacked by tentacles, snatched by Dragons, making flying leaps onto passing Elephants and being gobbled down by horrid Tyrannosaurs is great gaming - but its often also cumbersome gaming.


Doc_Outlands wrote:


On the AoO infinite loop, I assumed each "side" would only get ONE AoO, as the rules say you only get one AoO per opponent per round. So, to me, Attacker attempts a grapple and provokes an AoO - Defender opts for a grapple as his AoO and provokes in return - Attacker then goes for a grapple as his AoO - and the cycle STOPS, because the Defender cannot make another AoO against the Attacker this round. Opposed checks are then resolved in reverse order, which does open up an odd quirk, since grappling is about control over time rather than immediate damage.

Your correct here. There is no infinite loop. Its possible, even common for one of the parties to have Combat Reflexes but even here the loop would eventually end.


Why assume EBT goes first? We were discussing it (handy, living with three of your players) and felt EBT would be reacting to the PC's actions and thus move *after* the PC. Of course, ruling EBT "moves" *after* the PC is a distinct edge for the PC.

Grapple seems to be caught somewhere between a Move and an Attack, doesn't it? You can Move and Attack or Move up to 4x your base speed. But an Attack doesn't count for 3 Moves! etc. (I think my brain is bleeding)

I really think Grapple rules could do with some in-depth examples of play - including EBT - to show how they are *intended* to work. I'm sure my group will end up working out its own preferred method of handling grappling, following the rules as closely as we can interpret them.


Regarding move, standard, and full actions, its a little more complicated, which makes its simpler. Wait, that didn't come out right.

A full-round action is the most "valuable". You can do the most with it, which is why the slow spell is so annoying, because it deprives you of it. With a full round action, you can run up to 4x speed in a straight line, evasively scamper up to 2x speed without provoking for your first 5' of movement, or even make every attack you are capable of launching in one round.

After full round comes standard + move. This is nice, the ability to do something (draw item, stand up, scamper around at 1x speed, open a door) and still be contributing to the fight actively (with a spell or one attack at highest.)

Then comes move + move. Unless you're actually doing something besides moving, its better to take the full round action to withdraw, as you can go where you please (the name is not a limitation!) and avoid any potential attacks on the first 5'. But if you want to draw a potion and move to an ally, move + move is what you need.

Then comes partial actions.

Standard. This occurs when slowed, or if you are a zombie. You can drop it for a move, otherwise you can make one single attack or cast a spell. Obviously, this irritates fighters more than spellcasters. But if you are limited to one standard action each round, keep in mind you can still charge! Only up to 1x your speed for distance, but you can do it!

And then finally move. The nauseated condition can bring this into play, where all you have is one move action. Get out of that ugly area you're in with it, unless you think you can do something better by drawing an item and dropping it as a free action. (Seen that done with alchemist fire, not pretty, but effective.)


Doc_Outlands wrote:
Why assume EBT goes first? We were discussing it (handy, living with three of your players) and felt EBT would be reacting to the PC's actions and thus move *after* the PC. Of course, ruling EBT "moves" *after* the PC is a distinct edge for the PC.

Because the spell says that it acts on your inititive. Spells that start, end or take effect on your inititive do so at the begining of your turn. So if you cast one of the many spells that last for one round it keeps going until the begining of your next turn as an example.


Doc_Outlands wrote:


- When attacking to grapple, the PC provokes an AoO. Can the "defender" use a grapple as his AoO? (this then devolves into the vicious "last in, first out AoO Resolution" cycle, because his AoO attack provokes an AoO, which then means the "attacker" can launch a grapple-check as *his* AoO and it gets resolved, then up one iteration to the original defender's AoO, and then up to the original attack...)

According to the rules you can only make an AOO if you threathen a square with a meele weapon. Grappling is an unarmed attack and so does not threaten anyone. (That's why there's an AOO in the first place)


Unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike, but not Improved Grapple; in which case your unarmed attack is considered a 'weapon'.

The Exchange Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6

Note that per the D&D FAQ, once you escape from the tentacles, they will not grapple you again unless you exit and re-enter their area. Likewise, if they fail to grapple you initially, you are ok.


Russ Taylor wrote:

Note that per the D&D FAQ, once you escape from the tentacles, they will not grapple you again unless you exit and re-enter their area. Likewise, if they fail to grapple you initially, you are ok.

That's kinda ... odd. GREAT for PC's tho! I assume this FAQ is on the WotC site and is considered "official rulings"?


Doc_Outlands wrote:
Russ Taylor wrote:

Note that per the D&D FAQ, once you escape from the tentacles, they will not grapple you again unless you exit and re-enter their area. Likewise, if they fail to grapple you initially, you are ok.

That's kinda ... odd. GREAT for PC's tho! I assume this FAQ is on the WotC site and is considered "official rulings"?

Their not exactly official - official is in the errata. Their pretty close to official however. Note sure how The Sage got this from reading the spell. That's not what it sounds like to me but I guess its a valid interpretation and 'more' official then anything I might happen to believe.


Ah, ok - essentially an "Ask The Sage" question. I do, from time to time, have issues w/ the answers from The Sage, but in general, I look at them as "answers from someone who has played this game faaaaaar longer than me" and tend to use The Sage's interpretations/applications. I figure the session would have gone much easier on the PC than my flawed application anyway, without using the "uber-easy FAQ" approach...
;)

Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 3.5/d20/OGL / General Grappling and Grappling & Evard's Tentacles questions All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in 3.5/d20/OGL