In a PbP game, we are having a discussion regarding whether someone being pinned can still attack the one doing the pinning.
"A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is flat-footed. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take. A pinned creature can always attempt to free itself, usually through a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check. A pinned creature can take verbal and mental actions, but cannot cast any spells that require a somatic or material component. A"pinned creature that attempts to cast a spell must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) or lose the spell. Pinned is a more severe version of grappled and their effects do not stack."
Some thoughts from various posts:
But if a pinned creature can't even cast a spell with a somatic component, which could really be just the slightest of gestures, can it really physically attack? Doesn't the above sentence essentially say verbal and mental actions, but not physical?
The problems with somatic spell gestures is that they're usually very specific and even the slightest grappling makes it tough to complete them correctly. But using one's natural claws or a small weapon like a dagger aren't anywhere near as complicated. That doesn't mean such attacks don't suffer a penalty. It just means they're not completely prevented.
I think the theory is that casting a spell requires complex movements that must be done exactly right. Twisting, clawing and biting can be a rather simple, primitive movements.
From NSpicer:
I would think that a pinned creature cannot attack its opponent. If it were grappling, I'm sure it could (in lieu of escaping the grapple). But, if it's pinned, that implies to me that it can't attack. It can still attempt to break the pin...but that just puts it back to grappling...and it would have to escape from that to be fully free.
While the Beta rules still remain silent on this subject, I decided to go back and reference the 3.5 SRD once more. Here's the part that I think is relevant to my interpretation:
Pin Your Opponent
You can hold your opponent immobile for 1 round by winning an opposed grapple check (made in place of an attack). Once you have an opponent pinned, you have a few options available to you....
If You’re Pinned by an Opponent
When an opponent has pinned you, you are held immobile (but not helpless) for 1 round. While you’re pinned, you take a -4 penalty to your AC against opponents other than the one pinning you. At your opponent’s option, you may also be unable to speak. On your turn, you can try to escape the pin by making an opposed grapple check in place of an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check if you want, but this requires a standard action. If you win, you escape the pin, but you’re still grappling.
The bolded and italicized text is mine, because at first I glossed over it, because I thought it meant you can choose to escape the pin or make an attack. But then I started wondering about that...so I went to a different source for rules clarification. The FAQ for D&D 3.5 and the various "Rules of the Game" articles in Wizards' 3.5 Archives. Here's a link to the relevant article by Skip Williams. And below is an excerpt that I think is most relevant to the situation:
As you might expect, you can't move out of the space you share with a foe that has pinned you. You cannot take any other actions except to make an opposed grapple check to escape the pin in place of an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check if you want, but this requires a standard action. If you win the opposed check, you escape the pin, but you're still grappling. If your base attack bonus allows you to make multiple attacks, you can attempt to escape the pin multiple times (at successively lower attack bonuses). If you escape the pin, you're still grappling with your foe, but if you still have attacks available, you can keep right on grappling....
So, given all that, I believe Kenzo should have successfully pinned the quasit such that it can't claw and scratch at him anymore. According to Skip's article, the only physical action available to it would be to try an opposed grapple check to break the pin. Otherwise, it can try casting a spell (as long as it has no somatic component to it)...or it could invoke a spell-like ability as long as it succeeds at a Concentration check.
After going through this analysis, I'm wondering why the Beta rules remain silent on the issue? Does the combat maneuver mechanics trump this interpretation in the interests of simplifying things? Or does a pin still prevent attack actions?EDIT: I did finally find something that supports the same interpretation in the Beta rules:
[Quote=]Beta Rules wrote:
Pinned: A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is flat-footed. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take. A pinned creature can always attempt to free itself, usually through a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check. A pinned creature can take verbal and mental actions, but cannot cast any spells that require a somatic or material component. A pinned creature that attempts to cast a spell must make a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + the spell’s level) or lose the spell. Pinned is a more severe version of grappled and their effects do not stack.
What I take from Jason's wording is that he completely omits any description of a pinned creature being able to use its attacks. After saying a pinned creature is limited in its actions, he outlines what it can do...i.e., break the pin, cast a spell (without a somatic component), or take other verbal and mental actions. But that seems to be it.
My own thoughts:
There's a legal maxim regarding interpreting such things - Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. My Black's Law Dictionary translates it as "the express mention of one thing excludes all others." Basically, it all hinges (as does so many things legal) on a very literal interpretation of the language. I was looking at the same thing you were, the 'pinned' definition on p. 401 of the Beta Rules.
A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take. A pinned creature can always attempt to free itself, usually through a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check. A pinned creature can take verbal and mental actions, but cannot cast any spells that require a somatic or material component.
[ooc]Because the above does not include words to the effect of 'such as' or 'including,' it should be interpreted as a complete list. It's sort of the difference between: They are limited in actions. They can do X. They can do Y. Not: They are limited in actions, such as X or Y.
Does that make any sense?
Dude, I didn't follow that at all. However, you can't attack someone if you are pinned. You can try to escape, or you can not try to escape. Anything else is at the GM's whim.
My take: You can try to escape, or you can make a purely mental/verbal action, but that's about it. But common sense applies, too (e.g. a pinned character could close his eyes, even though that's not a purely mental/verbal action, per se).
Maybe not verbal. I think the text says somewhere that whoever is pinning you gets to decide whether you can speak. Not sure where though...
pinned also means open to sneak attack from a third party
the status is nearly helpless, but not quite
be happy about that, helpless means wide open to coup de grace