|
I just want a confirmation that I've correctly interpreted how grapple works now. To help me communicate this better, I'm calling the creature initiating the grapple the Aggressor and the target of the grapple the Contender.
- I: On the Aggressor's turn
- The Aggressor, as a standard action, attempts to grapple the Contender. This normally provokes an AoO.
- Assuming the Aggressor is successful, both the Aggressor and the Contender are now grappled (-4 Dex, -2 Atk, etc.).
- At this point, the Aggressor is successfully grappling an opponent, but has not made a check to Continue the Grapple, and therefore cannot perform a Move, Damage,or Pin action.
- II: On the Contender's turn, the Contender has the option of 1 or 2.
- 1) Attempting to Break the Grapple. If successful he can act normally. Is attempting to break a grapple a standard or swift action?
- 2) Attempting to Continue the Grapple, a standard action. If successful the Contender can perform a Move, Damage,or Pin action.
- The Contender attempts to Break the Grapple and fails, thus his turn ends.
- III: On the Aggressor's turn
- The Aggressor attempts to Continue the Grapple, with a +5 to his CMB. If successful he can perform a Move, Damage,or Pin action.
II and III continue until the grapple is ended.
So if I'm reading the A3 grapple rules correctly, the only way to damage your opponent is by using a standard action. Isn't this a pretty big nerf for monks? They often use flurrying in conjunction with grappling in 3.5.
Am I missing something?
|
So if I'm reading the A3 grapple rules correctly, the only way to damage your opponent is by using a standard action. Isn't this a pretty big nerf for monks? They often use flurrying in conjunction with grappling in 3.5.
Am I missing something?
Flurry of blows is a full-round action in 3.5. You can only make one attack in a grapple, so a flurry of blows is not allowed.
Flurry of blows is a full-round action in 3.5. You can only make one attack in a grapple, so a flurry of blows is not allowed.
I used to think that too before a friend pointed out that I was wrong. Maybe there's errata out there on this that I'm not aware of, but 3.5 PH explicitly allows more than one attack in a grapple.
When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses.
(...)
Damage Your Opponent: While grappling, you can deal damage to your opponent equivalent to an unarmed strike. Make an opposed grapple check in place of an attack.
Full attack is definitely allowed. Now I suppose someone could argue whether or not flurry of blows qualifies for a low level monk, but I don't see why it wouldn't. That would merely be quibbling over Base Attack Bonus vs. Flurry of Blows Attack Bonus. It seems reasonable to just make the appropriate adjustment to the grapple checks.
Regardless, though, any character with a +6 BAB or higher is able to make more than one damage attempt per round. That's been changed for Pathfinder, and I'm not sure why.
|
|
I used to think that too before a friend pointed out that I was wrong. Maybe there's errata out there on this that I'm not aware of, but 3.5 PH explicitly allows more than one attack in a grapple.
Indeed. I was wrong. Thanks for the correction.
Full attack is definitely allowed. Now I suppose someone could argue whether or not flurry of blows qualifies for a low level monk, but I don't see why it wouldn't. That would merely be quibbling over Base Attack Bonus vs. Flurry of Blows Attack Bonus. It seems reasonable to just make the appropriate adjustment to the grapple checks.
I wouldn't quibble anymore and I'd let the monk use the flurry then.
Regardless, though, any character with a +6 BAB or higher is able to make more than one damage attempt per round. That's been changed for Pathfinder, and I'm not sure why.
Well spotted. The reason I see is that damaging someone in a grapple is automatic on a successful CM check. I'd still allow a flurry or multiple attacks if the BAB allows them.
Alpha 3, p. 78
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.
|
I think I have the grapple stuff down through the initial grab and the break attempt. In the Aggressor's second round if he now pins the Contender.
What good is that really? I mean, it seems there is not enough of a penalty imposed on the pinned individual to make subsequent grapple-break attempts that hard. I would assume that a pinned person would have a much more difficult time break a grapple...
Sorry, but as I understand the Grappling in A3 it plain sucks.
Why?
1. Attacker:
1.1 Move Action: Moves up to the enemy.
1.2 Standard Action: Initiates a Grapple and wins. Both are grappled now.
2. Defender:
2.1 Full Round Action: Makes his 3 Attacks with a -2 penalty (according to the grapple status) with his normal dmg.
3. Attacker:
3.1 Standard Action: Grapples the enemy again (with his +5 bonus) and deals 1d3+str dmg
And so on...
So the attacker has to spend his only action in the round allowed for him to maintain the grapple and PROBABLY dealing his unarmed dmg while the enemy can attack him as if he were ungrappled (unless he uses a 2 handed weapon that is) with the minor penalty of -2?
This gets even suckier when you consider some of the Monsters which rely on grappling:
The 16 tentacle having monster with the improved grab feat now hits the party fighter and can do his free grapple attemp. If he wins he has to use a standard action each round to maintain the grapple and thus cant use any of his 15 tentacles for anything, virtually defeating himself by grappling.
Sorry... but this cant be the purpose of grappling!
Some changes which came up to my mind:
1. The grapple status limits you to a single standard action per round. So the enemy you just grapple cant multiattack the hell out of you (how is this supposed to work anyway)
2. Monsters with the Improved Grab feat use a free action instead of a standard action to maintain the grapple, enabling them to act against other creatures while grappling one.
But still they would have the problem that they can attack with 1 tentacle afterwards only. Because of the standard action limitation.
3. Improved Grab makes sustaining a grapple a free action. By limiting him to a standard action he can make a single additional attack against someone.
Am I missing something or has grappling become that useless in A3?
So in my game this evening I had a tazilwyrm attempt to monkey-swing off a tree branch, and grapple a character who was halfway up a tree. The rules state that if the attacker does not have both hands free, he takes a penalty to his grapple check. However, it says nothing about a bonus if the defender's hands are full.
In this case, I gave him a +4 bonus because his opponent's hands were full of tree. Unfortunately, he still failed, missed his grapple, and hit the ground with a loud thump (to the great delight of all).
As I understand it, you first have to succeed on a grapple check as a defender to attack the attacker that grapples you.
But if that's true, what would the -2 on all attack rolls except for grappling mean. Also I miss using light weapons in grapple. I use the rule, that you can either deal unarmed damage or deal damage with a light weapon, though you get the -4 penalty for grappling with one hand.
Also, can you "perform one of the following actions" in the same round you initiated the grapple? That's not really clear and needs clearification.
Also, can you "perform one of the following actions" in the same round you initiated the grapple? That's not really clear and needs clearification.
I don't think so. The way I read the rules, it seems that the initial grapple check is an attempt to grab your opponent (by one arm, or leg, or whatever), and if you manage to keep the hold on him until your next action, you can pin him, move him or harm him with a +5 to the grapple check(like in the classical arm-twisting hold, this will hurt your enemy, but won't completely immobilize him). If your enemy, in his next action, is unable or not willing to free himself (deciding to attack you instead, or whatever) , he's not even struggling with you, merely bashing or slashing, probably trying to kill you before your next turn. Of course, since you're both grappling now, he can even try to pin you before you pin him! (risky, since you will gain a +5 if he fail to do so).
That's the way it works for me, and it feels pretty logical and balanced. In game, it feels much more similar to those scenes in movies or books with Tarzan struggling with the crocodile or Conan struggling with some beast with huge fangs that draw ever closer to his face.
|
|
Keldarth, I'd love to see your last post written out round by round. I'm nearly confident with these rules, but the previous posts have confused me a bit, or challenged my understanding of Alpha3 PRPG Grapple CMB rules. Would yourself, or another, please rephrase our full current understanding in a step-by-step manner for ultimate clarity. Thanks.
Of course, it will be a pleasure... Be aware that this is just my interpretation of the rules, and while I think this is the way it works, others may have a different opinion!
Well, let's say a monk is facing a fighter. Seeing that he won't be able to defeat the heavily armored fighter in straight combat, he decides to resort to grapple.
Monk's Round #1: Monk attempts to grapple the fighter. He rolls his CMB vs. 15 + fighter's CMB. If the Monk has Improved Grapple, he doesn't provoke an AoO. If he doesn't have that feat, he provokes, and if hit by it, he adds the damage suffered to the grapple DC. Since the monk is trying to grapple with both hands free, he doesn't suffer a -4 penalty. If the grapple attempt succeed, he grabs the fighter, and now both have the grappled condition. They cannot move, and take a -4 to their Dexterity, and have a -2 to attack rolls and CMB checks except those made to grapple.
Fighter's Round #1: Now it's the fighter's turn. Both enemies are struggling. The fighter may choose to try to free himself of the monk's hold (if he don't free one of his hands, dropping his weapon, etc... he has a -4 penalty to that check). He could also use his Escape Artist skill if it's worthwile for him to do so. If he's succesful at breaking free, the grappling attempt is over. But since both of them are grappling, he could also try to make a grapple check to pin the monk before he acts again (or move him, or damage him). And he could choose to not even try and just attack the monk or anyone else within reach with his weapon, suffering the -2 penalty for being grappled.
Monk's Round #2: If the fighter is not free by now (and has not pinned the monk!), the monk must make a CMB check (with a +5 bonus) to maintain the grapple. If he's succesful, in addition to maintaining the hold he can choose to move dragging the fighter behind, harm the figher applying his unarmed damage or pin the fighter so he's unable to attack again.
Fighter's Round #2: If the fighter is pinned, he cannot move and is flat-footed, and takes a further -4 to his AC. He can only try to escape the pin (by making a grapple check or with Escape Artist) and purely verbal and mental actions.
And this would go on until the end of the combat. If the monk had companions near, they could use rope to tie the immobilized fighter, or the monk could do it by himself, but doing so would require a CMB check with a -10 penalty.
Well, that's it. I think this is the way it works, hope it has been of some help.
So far, I like the grapple rules, with the exception of being able to attack with a weapon or such into the grapple.
So I added this modification, and its worked so far:
"While grappling, you can elect to act normally, within the limitations imposed by the grappled condition. As such, you can make a regular attack or full attack (at a -2 penalty, and with a light or one handed weapon) to deal damage with a weapon or natural attack. If you elect to do so, you do not gain a +5 bonus that turn if your opponent fails to escape your grapple."
I probably didn't phrase that well, but you should get the gist. It doesn't add any real complexity, and it makes most grapple-monsters just as scary still if they want to be.
So far, it allowed my wife's paladin to grab a goblin in one hand after missing with a thrown net, then in the next round pigstick him with a smiting trident. All the while preventing the little kneebiter from making attacks of opp at the wounded allies nearby.
Seems alright to me.
But it still doesn't adress the problem that the fighter might make a power attack with his battleaxe (Greatsword is out, because two-handed actions can't be done while grappling) at the monk, while the monk is strugling to get a hold to deal unarmed damage (which would work for a monk, but not other characters fighting unarmed. And the fighter could make a full attack, while the monk only gets one attempt to make a grapple check and deal unarmed damage.
Also, I'd like to see knife-fighting as part of grapling. Almost everyone experienced in hand to hand combat seems to say that knife-fighting is extremely dangerous and deadly, but as the rules are right now, it makes no sense at all to close in.
Does the penalty to Dexterity when grappling also apply if you have the agile maneuver feat, that allows you to use your dexterity modifier instead of the strength modifier?
Seems alright to me.
But it still doesn't adress the problem that the fighter might make a power attack with his battleaxe (Greatsword is out, because two-handed actions can't be done while grappling) at the monk, while the monk is strugling to get a hold to deal unarmed damage (which would work for a monk, but not other characters fighting unarmed. And the fighter could make a full attack, while the monk only gets one attempt to make a grapple check and deal unarmed damage.
Yes, but doing so he's risking a very probable pin in the next round (the monk would have a +5, so it's almost a "kill or be pinned" situation"). Perhaps it would make more sense to restrict it to a standard action, though, so full attacks could not be possible while grappled. Or even better, make it another option of what you can do with a succesfull grapple check (move, damage, pin or make a single attack with a light or one-handed weapon with the usual -2).
Does the penalty to Dexterity when grappling also apply if you have the agile maneuver feat, that allows you to use your dexterity modifier instead of the strength modifier?
The penalty to Dex while grappled does not have anything to do with you applying Dex instead of Str to your CMB, so it would apply equally.
Unless I had gloves of dexterity to raise my Dex from 18 to 20, the feat would be completely usless for grappling with Str14.
Because of the chat last night, I had some new thougths on this whole thing. There were some questions about how hard it was to break a monster grabble and how it plays out and Jason was kindly present to offer some answers.
Jason did point out that "aiding another" does work for grappling, so if you want to help your buddy, you can aid him. Knowing that aid another is suppose to work for CM though, it does bring up some other questions.
1. Does aiding another for defense allow your CMB defense to go up accordingly?
2. Does fighting defensively boost your CMB defense as well as AC?
Being able to aid another is something that I think does get overlooked when it comes to how difficult CM are to resist or pull off, however, and I do seem to recall very early on some people noting in their playtests that they weren't sure if they could aid another for grappling, for example.