|
So, for the past few weeks I've been running a Burnt Offerings adventure with three players (and a GMNPC when they're almost dead). One of the characters, a hobgoblin wizard, had a tarsier (a kind of primate) familiar that had a really great Jump skill. This tarsier would jump onto an opponent, and if he exceeded the DC by 10 or more I'd give him a +1 bonus on his attack. Of course, if the opponent made their attack of opportunity, he would be disrupted, but no one ever seemed able to hit him. Anyways, if he's on someone's shoulder, biting them, does it count as grappling? It doesn't really make any sense to let the tarsier land on the opponent and hit in one round, but in the next just be by the opponent's feet.
After the fight in the Catacombs of Wrath (the same hobgoblin decided to try to break a piece off Lamashtu's altar by dropping it on the floor, bringing pretty much every monster in the dungeon in around their ears), I decided to switch to PFRPG. Unfortunately, the tarsier was killed in the battle by a lucky AoO critical of Koruvus. The exact same situation probably won't happen again, but something similar may.
My question is, if a creature is much smaller than the opponent, can it climb atop it without counting as "grappling?"
I could see something similar happening when Valeros takes on the rune giants in Xin-Shalast.
I would definitely not let any creature do a "virtual grapple" by letting it automatically hold onto another creature without a grapple.
If it wants to jump on someone, fine - but I think the rest of it is too much for the simple Jump skill.
Jump is just that ... jumping. It makes the check and jumps.
However, landing on someone and staying there is different, especially if you want to do so without grappling. I'd probably give it a base DC of 15 (I'd say 2" - 6" is reasonable for an average person's head or shoulders), and throw in the +10 for earthquake (you KNOW that person is trying to shake the damn thing off) and the +2 for a sloped surface, giving it a DC 27 Acrobatics check to stand on an unwilling opponent.
Now, if it wants to hold on? Easy. Now we're in grapple territory :) It lands where it wants and makes a grapple check.
My question is, if a creature is much smaller than the opponent, can it climb atop it without counting as "grappling?"
Jumping on a creature isn't really grappling it. Grappling implies restraining a creature such that it "cannot move". If the tarsier isn't grappling the creature, it shouldn't gain or give the grappled condition. I'd just treat it like being in the creature's square.
I'd just treat it like being in the creature's square
Am I wrong in also recalling a rule that states a creature can occupy the same space as another as long as the first creature in question is (I think) 2 size categories smaller or larger than the other?
I'd look it up myself, but sadly the office firewall won't let me =\
|
|
I'd just treat it like being in the creature's squareAm I wrong in also recalling a rule that states a creature can occupy the same space as another as long as the first creature in question is (I think) 2 size categories smaller or larger than the other?
I'd look it up myself, but sadly the office firewall won't let me =\
Yeah, that's right. I'm sort of talking about flavour here, since it doesn't seem very realistic for a creature to be dealing damage to something's feet when it could just climb up. Anyway, I think it's probably best to keep the normal rules for occupying a creature's space, just not making the smaller creature have to be either on the ground or being woefully outclassed in a grapple.
Yes, you recall correctly - you can share a space with a creature larger than you:
Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.
A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is. Creatures moving through squares occupied by other creatures provoke attacks of opportunity from those creatures.
But that's not what the OP was talking about - he was talking about a creature using Jump to land on another creature, staying there, and furthermore getting a +1 if its Jump check was high enough.
|
|
I would definitely not let any creature do a "virtual grapple" by letting it automatically hold onto another creature without a grapple.
If it wants to jump on someone, fine - but I think the rest of it is too much for the simple Jump skill.
Jump is just that ... jumping. It makes the check and jumps.
However, landing on someone and staying there is different, especially if you want to do so without grappling. I'd probably give it a base DC of 15 (I'd say 2" - 6" is reasonable for an average person's head or shoulders), and throw in the +10 for earthquake (you KNOW that person is trying to shake the damn thing off) and the +2 for a sloped surface, giving it a DC 27 Acrobatics check to stand on an unwilling opponent.
Now, if it wants to hold on? Easy. Now we're in grapple territory :) It lands where it wants and makes a grapple check.
Problem is, a creature two size categories larger than you has an insanely better grapple bonus. There is no "virtual grapple" anyways - the tarsier would just continue making attacks as normal. If anything, your version penalises the tarsier for attacking its opponent.
In my view, if a creature could scamper around on another creature, then it doesn't have to "grapple" it. Grappling is only useful if you're trying to subdue something, whether by pinning, distracting, or tying up with rope. At the most, I'd make the smaller creature make a Climb check. The thing was, most of the opponents didn't bother trying to remove the tarsier - if the tarsier started a grapple, the opponent would be "forced" to enter the grapple, too - and automatically overpower the tarsier, but be distracted and unable to attack the more important foes. The tarsier recognises that there's no way that he could be effective in a grapple, and if the opponent doesn't want a grapple, then neither should have to. The grapple rules aren't great for combat with one much smaller creature on a much larger creature. I think maybe it might be a combat manoeuvre with your Climb bonus added on, but the grapple rules don't cut my bar of realism. This question is not in the rulebooks; it's already ad hoc.|
|
Yes, you recall correctly - you can share a space with a creature larger than you:
But that's not what the OP was talking about - he was talking about a creature using Jump to land on another creature, staying there, and furthermore getting a +1 if its Jump check was high enough.Square Occupied by Creature Three Sizes Larger or Smaller: Any creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories larger than itself.
A big creature can move through a square occupied by a creature three size categories smaller than it is. Creatures moving through squares occupied by other creatures provoke attacks of opportunity from those creatures.
You get a bonus to your attack when you make a charge, correct? Well, vertical movement is like a charge - just it is harder to get enough distance to make such a "charge." The tarsier still provokes an AoO when it enters the opponent's square, and it still takes a -2 to AC until its next turn, but it only gets a +1 to its attack. It should be noted that this tarsier was asleep most of the time, and only came out of its master's backpack when it sensed that its master was wounded. If it got a 20 or higher with its +10 bonus, it got the +1 bonus to attack.
Problem is, a creature two size categories larger than you has an insanely better grapple bonus. There is no "virtual grapple" anyways - the tarsier would just continue making attacks as normal. If anything, your version penalises the tarsier for attacking its opponent.
I'm just pointing out that there's no free lunch.
A) The tarsier uses balance rules to scamper about on its opponent.
B) The tarsier uses grapple rules to grab onto its opponent.
In the case of (A), the opponent would be trying to shake it off (and very will might try to grapple the tarsier). (A) is the one the tarsier would probably prefer, since it's likely to fail the grapple.
In the case of (B) it makes perfect sense that the tarsier would fail. Consider a monkey trying to grab onto a tiger. Not going to work out so well for the monkey.
If you were a player character, and a DM told you that a creature was climbing around on you, I'm pretty sure you'd want some sort of ruling on how to pull or shake the beastie off, and I'm big on giving monsters a fair shake.
|
|
Problem is, a creature two size categories larger than you has an insanely better grapple bonus. There is no "virtual grapple" anyways - the tarsier would just continue making attacks as normal. If anything, your version penalises the tarsier for attacking its opponent.I'm just pointing out that there's no free lunch.
A) The tarsier uses balance rules to scamper about on its opponent.
B) The tarsier uses grapple rules to grab onto its opponent.
In the case of (A), the opponent would be trying to shake it off (and very will might try to grapple the tarsier). (A) is the one the tarsier would probably prefer, since it's likely to fail the grapple.
In the case of (B) it makes perfect sense that the tarsier would fail. Consider a monkey trying to grab onto a tiger. Not going to work out so well for the monkey.
If you were a player character, and a DM told you that a creature was climbing around on you, I'm pretty sure you'd want some sort of ruling on how to pull or shake the beastie off, and I'm big on giving monsters a fair shake.
Yeah, but if I was also trying to kill the creature's allies that were much larger (and dealt much more damage; the tarsier's max was 1) and my other allies were busy, I would go after the larger allies and then deal with the smaller creature. What I'm saying is that I shouldn't be forced to spend my turn grappling the creature if it doesn't want to grapple either. I'd agree that it should have to make a Climb or Acrobatics check at least every round, and if I wanted to I could attack it with one of my weapons.
If that came up in one of my games, I would rule that the tarsier (or any other creature significantly smaller than its target - I could see PCs doing this against a dragon) could cling on to something using a climb check at DC 20 or the target's CMD (if it is aware of you), whichever is higher. If you attack a creature you are climbing on, it doesn't get it's Dex bonus to AC. If the target wants to dislodge the climber, it makes a combat maneuver check that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. If successful, it can use the results of that check for either a bull rush (that it doesn't need to follow) or a grapple.
|
|
If you'd like a rule from 3.5, there was a feat for 'climbing' onto bigger opponents... 'Giantbane' from complete warrior (p111):
GIANTBANE [TACTICAL]
You are trained in fi ghting foes larger than you are.
Prerequisites: Medium or smaller size, Tumble 5 ranks, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: The Giantbane feat enables the use of three tactical maneuvers.
Duck Underneath: To use this maneuver, you must have taken a total defense action, then have been attacked by a foe at least two size categories larger than you. You gain a +4 dodge bonus to your Armor Class, which stacks with the bonus for total defense. If that foe misses you, on your next turn, as a free action, you may make a DC 15 Tumble check. If the check succeeds, you move immediately to any unoccupied square on the opposite side of the foe (having successsuccessfully ducked underneath your foe). If there is no unoccupied square on the opposite side of the foe or you fail the Tumble check, you remain in the square you are in and have failed to duck underneath your foe.
Death from Below: To use this maneuver, you must have successfully used the duck underneath maneuver. You may make an immediate single attack against the foe you ducked underneath. That foe is treated as fl at-footed, and you gain a +4 bonus on your attack roll.
Climb Aboard: To use this maneuver, you must move adjacent to a foe at least two size categories larger than you. In the following round, you may make a DC 10 Climb check as a free action to clamber onto the creature’s back or limbs (you move into one of the squares the creature occupies). The creature you’re standing on takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls against you, because it can strike at you only awkwardly. If the creature moves during its action, you move along with it. The creature can try to shake you off by making a grapple check opposed by your Climb check. If the creature succeeds, you wind up in a random adjacent square.
Special: A fighter may select Giantbane as one of his fighter bonus feats.
Sounds good to me
DC 10 climb check, possibly including acrobatics depending on the situation.
Grapple checks can be made without AoO being granted against a climbing creature.
I'd say that you get tossed to an adjacent square, unless their grapple exceeds by 5 or more, in which case they grapple your ass.
it sounds fair, a DC 10 climb check sounds a bit tame though, maybe make the DC equal to it's touch AC, possibly allowing an attack of oppurtunity on a failure.
the tarsier wouldn't provoke an attack of oppurtunity for making a '5 foot step' to enter another's creature square, alternatively it can use acrobatics to avoid attacks of oppurtunity if not directly adjacent.
***Fondly remembers Shadows of the Collossus***
All you are going to get are various house rules.
Climb or acrobatics checks I would say, = to CMD but creature is penalized for size instead. A check on your turn to stay on.
As for the jump check to get +1, I don't see how its different than a higher ground bonus.
|
|
it sounds fair, a DC 10 climb check sounds a bit tame though, maybe make the DC equal to it's touch AC, possibly allowing an attack of oppurtunity on a failure.
the tarsier wouldn't provoke an attack of oppurtunity for making a '5 foot step' to enter another's creature square, alternatively it can use acrobatics to avoid attacks of oppurtunity if not directly adjacent.
Yeah, I think I'll use the opponent's CMD with a +4 bonus since it's somewhat difficult.
Ouch. I forgot that five-foot-steps don't provoke AoOs... woulda made the tarsier a lot more effective, since he only ever attacked from an adjacent square.|
|
***Fondly remembers Shadows of the Collossus***
All you are going to get are various house rules.
Yeah, just wanted to fish for opinions/ideas.
Climb or acrobatics checks I would say, = to CMD but creature is penalized for size instead. A check on your turn to stay on.
I guess the size penalty works, but maybe it can make a free grapple check (DC same as normal CMD) to give its CMD +4.
Actually, that doesn't really work. I dunno.As for the jump check to get +1, I don't see how its different than a higher ground bonus.
Yeah, that's what I was thinking.