The full notes from my playtest can be found in this thread, but I'm posting a more organized summary here.
Playtest Summary
The biggest improvement made by the Alpha rules was the fact that grapplers no longer need to move into their target's spaces. The Alpha rules also delivered on their promise to give spellcasters slightly better odds in grapple situations without over-correcting.
On the other hand, when comparing Alpha to 3.5, I found that I needed to stop play to reference the grapple rules just as frequently in either system. In particular, I found some of the finer differences between held, grabbed, grappled, and pinned a bit hard to remember.
Creatures with improved grab seemed to play about the same in both the Alpha and the 3.5 rules, despite slight tweaks to the numbers. However, creatures attempting to rely on Improved Grapple did poorly under the Alpha rules. For these creatures, attacking with a weapon was almost always a faster and more effective way to subdue an opponent.
One particular annoyance was the cumulative bonus to grapple checks. It was extra bookeeping to track for each creature, and bonuses gained by one creature did nothing to help other creatures attempting to grapple the same target. This became implausible in some circumstances (such as a team of four ogres failing to grab a frail gnome wizard).
After the fact, I also realized a problem with the mechanic of not moving into a grappled creature's space: grapplers with superior reach can repeatedly grab or grapple an opponent without ever being counterattacked, even if the target has armor spikes or natural weapons. The grappler is technically outside the immobilized target's reach, and always will be as long as the grappler keeps succeeding on combat maneuver rolls.
Other posters have also commented that grapple should deal damage. (fliprushman was the one who made the comment in the thread containing my rough playtest notes.) Since grapple could deal damage in the 3.5 rules, I tend to agree with this opinion.
Building on the suggestions of fliprushman and others, I propose a modified version of the Alpha grapple rules that looks something like the following:
Suggested Fix
As a standard action, you can attempt to grapple a foe, hindering its actions. If you do not have Improved Grapple, improved grab, or a similar ability, attempting to grapple a foe provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. You gain a +5 bonus on your combat maneuver roll if your target is already grabbed. You take a -4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll if you are holding an object in one or more hands.
If your attack is successful, you can take no further actions this turn and your opponent is grabbed (see sidebar below) until the end of your next turn. The grapple maneuver doesn't cause you to enter the target's space; however, your target may make melee attacks against you on its next turn by attacking your appendages, even if you are outside the target's normal reach.
When attempting to grapple as a standard action, for every 5 by which your attack exceeds the DC, you may deal damage as though you had hit the target with an unarmed strike attack (that didn't score a critical hit). You may choose for this damage to be lethal, even if your unarmed strikes normally deal non-lethal damage.
Pinning a Creature: Whenever damage you deal during a grapple maneuver would reduce your target to 0 hit points or render your target unconscious, you may choose to prevent that damage before it is dealt. If you do, the target is pinned until the end of your next turn. A pinned creature counts as paralyzed, even if it is normally immune to paralysis.
[sidebar] Grabbed Condition
A grabbed creature cannot move and cannot perform actions that require more than one hand. For example, the creature could attack with a single one-handed weapon or cast spell, but could not attack with a two-handed weapon. A grabbed creature cannot cast spells or use spell-like abilities without succeeding on a Spellcraft check.
As a standard action, a grabbed creature may attempt to break free by making a combat maneuver roll or Escape Artist check (DC 10 + the highest CMB of any opponent or spell effect that grabbed the creature this round). If the creature succeeds on this check, it is no longer grabbed.
[/sidebar]
So what does the above system offer? Well...
Spoiler:
The above system simplifies the Alpha system by combining the rules for "held," "grabbed," "grappled," and "breaking a grapple" into the a single grabbed condition. A successful grapple check always results in a grab. Grabbing becomes easier in this system, but grappled creatures are less restricted, so everyone on both sides gets to take more interesting actions.
The system allows grapplers to deal unarmed strike damage, and ties the pinned condition to accumulated damage instead of high rolls. This allows multiple grapplers (and even non-grapplers) to assist one another in subduing an opponent. This also makes pinning an opponent a satisfying "finishing move" instead of an annoying on-again/off-again hindrance.
The system also closes a few loopholes. (For example, creatures that don't have hands are no longer penalized for not having two free hands.)
Additional Playtesting
I ran my proposed fix for the grapple system through a thirty-encounter playtest and liked it, but my opinion on the matter is admittedly biased. Would anyone else be interested in testing it out and comparing it to the Alpha system?
I'm thinking about incorporating it. I'm not sure I like your fix on the pinned creature thing and your damage thing seems a little wonky. Do you get do deal damage for every 5 successes over the DC or just once? I'll be playing on Friday so I'll be able to tell you more before then.
I'm not sure I like your fix on the pinned creature thing and your damage thing seems a little wonky. Do you get do deal damage for every 5 successes over the DC or just once?
The damage is dealt for every 5, not just once. If you beat the DC by 5, it's unarmed damage once; if you beat the DC by 10, it's unarmed damage twice; and so on.
In my quick playtest, ogres regularly dealt 2d4+4 (unarmed x2) or 3d4+6 (unarmed x3) damage when grappling an 8th-level gnome wizard. With four ogres, that added up to pinned and effectively removed from the fight in about two rounds. It would have been a grapple or pin that did nothing to end the fight using the Alpha rules.
But let me know if you think the damage should be tweaked, because I'm thinking of using some version of this in the next game I run.
Why do unarmed strikes become lethal just because of grappling? They should be non-lethal unless it is from a creature using natural weapons or has the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.
That should read: "...ogres regularly dealt 2d4+10 (unarmed x2) or 3d4+15 (unarmed x3) damage..."
Gansk wrote:
Why do unarmed strikes become lethal just because of grappling? They should be non-lethal unless it is from a creature using natural weapons or has the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.
I needed grapple damage to work against undead, since you have to deal grapple damage to pin a creature. (Undead are not subject to nonlethal damage.) Also, an unarmed strike that automatically hits can freely deal lethal damage, since you can normally take a -4 to hit to make the damage lethal.
But you're right. That isn't the most elegant solution. If I'm going to use my system in my game, it will definitely need some improvement.
Very nice play test, I think these kinds of simulations and reports are very useful to the community as a whole, as it provides a much needed framework for discussing the mechanic.
I find it interesting that your results confirm one of Jason's/Paizo's comments in the Design Notes sidebar about grappling, specifically, that the designers set out to reduce the power/effectiveness of grapple.
I disagree with the idea that grapple needs to cause damage. I'm well aware that grappling can cause serious, perhaps lethal damage to a grapple-ee. Like many posters in threads on grappling, as I have some wrestling related experience (primarily Aikido), but I do not think it fits with stated goals for this revised mechanic.
Instead, I think grapple should set up provide enhancements to other combat maneuvers. IMO, if you first successfully grapple a foe, it should be easier to perform a Bull Rush, Disarm or Trip on that foe. Perhaps something where the grappling player gets a competency bonus equal to the positive modifier attached to the previous rounds grapple check.
Example: If on round 1, Player A grapples an orc, and achieves a result of Grappled, Player A gets a +10 competency bonus to a Bull Rush, Disarm or Trip against the orc on the following round. Making a Bull Rush, Disarm or Trip ends the grapple.
A combat feat could be introduced which would allow the grappler to make a Bull Rush, Disarm or Trip attempt as a free action after successfully initiating a grapple.
I think grapple should set up provide enhancements to other combat maneuvers. IMO, if you first successfully grapple a foe, it should be easier to perform a Bull Rush, Disarm or Trip on that foe...
A combat feat could be introduced which would allow the grappler to make a Bull Rush, Disarm or Trip attempt as a free action after successfully initiating a grapple.
Interesting ideas, F33b.
Combining elements of your approach with my previous suggestion:
Grapple (fix #2)
As a standard action, you can attempt to grapple a foe, hindering its actions. If you do not have Improved Grapple, improved grab, or a similar ability, attempting to grapple a foe provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. You take a -4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll if you are holding something that occupies one or more hands.
If your attack is successful, you can't move for one round and your target is grabbed (see below) until the end of your next turn. You do not move into your target's space; however, for one round, whenever you threaten the target, the target also threatens you, regardless of the target's normal reach.
If your attack exceeds the DC by 10 or more, you may immediately perform one additional combat maneuver (other than a grapple) against the same target as a free action. This additional combat maneuver doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity.
[Insert rules for grabbed. Add: "Any combat maneuver roll against a grabbed creature gains a +5 circumstance bonus."]
[Add the following new maneuver so you can use the additional maneuver granted by a sufficiently high grapple check to damage or subdue your target.]
Pummel
As a standard action, you can attempt to pummel a foe, dealing damage. If you do not have Improved Unarmed Strike, or a similar ability, attempting to pummel a foe provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
If your attack is successful, you deal 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage to the target, plus an additional 1d6 damage for every 5 points by which your attack exceeds the DC. This damage is non-lethal if your unarmed strike attacks normally deal non-lethal damage; otherwise, you may choose for this damage to be either lethal or non-lethal.
Take Down: If damage you deal while pummeling would reduce your target to 0 hit points or render your target unconscious, you may choose to prevent that damage before it is dealt. If you do, your target is taken down. The target falls prone and counts as paralyzed until the end of your next turn, even if it is normally immune to paralysis.
We ran into the grapple situation in our game last night and it ground combat to a halt. After talking with my gaming group, I have decided to keep the 3.5 grapple rules as being more realistic as opposed to having a grapple DC.
We ran into the grapple situation in our game last night and it ground combat to a halt. After talking with my gaming group, I have decided to keep the 3.5 grapple rules as being more realistic as opposed to having a grapple DC.
I'm with you. What is it that is so bad about the old grapple system? I would think that is the first thing that should be identified before trying to "fix it".
Grapple was never really an issue in any game I played in or DM'd.
Meepo I did enjoy your playtest summarry, between this and skills you do great work in the playtesting arena.
I'm glad to see these issues being discussed in detail. The inability to do any damage whatsoever while grappling without Improved Grab is one my major objections to the existing Alpha rules. I'm not sure that the fixes here are quite what I'm looking for though.
Your pinned condition makes me wonder why I can't pin somebody without hurting him. I don't like it. It seems to fit from a pro wrestling perspective where you beat the opponent nearly senseless so you can hold him down, but often the point of grappling in D&D or real life is to hold an opponent down without harming him.
Actually, that reminds me of a complaint I have in both Alpha and 3.5, going by the rules in the books grappling never makes the opponent prone. Meanwhile, most though not all grappling consists of rolling around on the ground. I'd think that one of the grappled conditions should give you the option of going to the floor with the opponent or at least a bonus on attempts to trip him if you're willing to go to the ground too.
All of that could get really complex though. I guess deep down grapple should be about keeping your opponent in place. I'd prefer to be able to do something to him while I keep him there though. If that means taking a "ground and pound" or "submission hold" type feat I guess that's probably ok. I just don't like the idea that I'd be entirely unable to hurt somebody I'm grappling. In fact, I think that "setting up" with grapple should probably give you some nice bonuses to do something painful afterwards.
EL, I can think of a few significant problems with the 3.5 grapple rules. First, the rules seem to lack clarity. Second, it is difficult for players to remember what actions are and are not allowed while grappled or pinned. Third, grapple victims have too few options.
On the other hand, I've asked the various folks I've played 3.5 with about which PCs of mine were the most powerful, and the grapple based PCs didn't stand out. I was only dealing with about a dozen people here, but I'm talking about PCs who had grapple bonuses in the 30s by 10th level. My druid can pin a T-Rex, but his DM's primary complaint seems to be that it takes too long to figure out how various effects like Reduce Animal and Inspire Courage affect my animal companion's combat stats. He also mentioned that Evard's Menacing Tentacles give us too many melee attacks. Ironically, EMT is what I do when I can't grapple for some reason.
If PRPG adds a feat to allow damage while grappling or perhaps maintain a grapple as a move action that might cover low level grapple damage. Honestly I can't see the problem with allowing damage even without a feat though. In any event, since PRPG is keeping full attacks I think there would need to be something more at higher levels. Else you're likely to end up sitting around trying to do damage to the bad guy once while everybody else attacks multiple times. I kind of like the idea of bonus damage when you exceed the grapple check by 5 or more. It seems a little clunky, but if you're already going to calculate how much you beat the DC by each round I guess it might not be so bad.
As a sidenote, while I think the cumulative +5 bonuses are kind of neat I wonder if they might not be a pain to track from round to round. I'm also wary of anything which develops over several rounds since so many 3.5 combats are only a round or two long.
Would it be incompatible with the set goals of Paizo to simplify grapple and unarmed combat rules using something like "Grappling for Beginners: How to Strike, Hold & Throw" ?
It's an alternative which has had some tests, so maybe it would reduce development "costs" (plus it's OGL)
(though the product is only available on a concurrent store ;)
The premise is: "why a whole subsystem, and especially a whole damage class for unarmed combat?"
(I'm guessing that unarmed damage exist in the game to simulate non-lethal bar fight, while it might have been the recovery/healing system which needed to be patched... maybe).
