Am I missing something? Are there no penalties/potential hazards to swinging into a grapple between 2 other people? And does the grappler lose Dex bonus to AC on top of that?
Case study: monk grapples wizard on round 1. During same round, ogre bodyguard swings and hits monk, taking him down, ending grapple with wizard.
What are potential penalties/hazards for ogre's attack? Does the monk lose his Dex bonus to AC vs the ogre?
Thanks for the help.
|
Am I missing something? Are there no penalties/potential hazards to swinging into a grapple between 2 other people? And does the grappler lose Dex bonus to AC on top of that?
Case study: monk grapples wizard on round 1. During same round, ogre bodyguard swings and hits monk, taking him down, ending grapple with wizard.
What are potential penalties/hazards for ogre's attack? Does the monk lose his Dex bonus to AC vs the ogre?
Thanks for the help.
penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty
on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except
those made to grapple or escape a grapple. In addition,
grappled creatures
can take no action that requires two
hands to perform.
It does not say anything about losing your DEX bonus it just says -4 to DEX.
It doesn't appear to me to make a difference if someone is grappled or not except for the penalties imposed on the grappler and the grappled person.
Although I am sure there are those who will differ, and my interpretation or opinion does not mean anything.
It does not say anything about losing your DEX bonus it just says -4 to DEX.It doesn't appear to me to make a difference if someone is grappled or not except for the penalties imposed on the grappler and the grappled person.
Although I am sure there are those who will differ, and my interpretation or opinion does not mean anything.
The page number escapes me (dont have a book handy) but in the AC modifiers table there is a note about the defender losing his Dex bonus.
|
|
The page number escapes me (dont have a book handy) but in the AC modifiers table there is a note about the defender losing his Dex bonus.
It does not say anything about losing your DEX bonus it just says -4 to DEX.It doesn't appear to me to make a difference if someone is grappled or not except for the penalties imposed on the grappler and the grappled person.
Although I am sure there are those who will differ, and my interpretation or opinion does not mean anything.
Oh. Well if that is the case, I wonder why it would take away DEX bonus and a -4 to DEX, that seems a little steep (and redundant) to me. Especially since if the grappled pc does not break it the grappler gets a +5 in subsequent rounds.
That may be the case, but I bet its another one of those incidents where its a typo or they just are not clarifying what is what...if you catch my drift.
The page number escapes me (dont have a book handy) but in the AC modifiers table there is a note about the defender losing his Dex bonus.
It does not say anything about losing your DEX bonus it just says -4 to DEX.It doesn't appear to me to make a difference if someone is grappled or not except for the penalties imposed on the grappler and the grappled person.
Although I am sure there are those who will differ, and my interpretation or opinion does not mean anything.
The grappled condition says a -4 penalty to DEX, and under combat maneuvers, it specifically says that when you pin an opponent, you then lose your dex bonus to AC, though you are just grappled. The pinned critter is 'pinned' (flat footed and bunch of other issues).
Looks like the table you're quoting is a holdover from 3.5, though they did remove the ranged 'randomly strike one of the attackers' note for grapple maneuvers.
Probably another "Text trumps table" issue.
|
|
The page number escapes me (dont have a book handy) but in the AC modifiers table there is a note about the defender losing his Dex bonus.
It does not say anything about losing your DEX bonus it just says -4 to DEX.It doesn't appear to me to make a difference if someone is grappled or not except for the penalties imposed on the grappler and the grappled person.
Although I am sure there are those who will differ, and my interpretation or opinion does not mean anything.
The grappled condition says a -4 penalty to DEX, and under combat maneuvers, it specifically says that when you pin an opponent, you then lose your dex bonus to AC, though you are just grappled. The pinned critter is 'pinned' (flat footed and bunch of other issues).
Looks like the table you're quoting is a holdover from 3.5, though they did remove the ranged 'randomly strike one of the attackers' note for grapple maneuvers.
still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your
Dexterity bonus to AC.
This rule and the one I posted above are direct cut and pastes from the Core Rule Book PDF.
Looks to me like if you are pinning makes you lose your DEX bonus (the grappler) but the grappled pc gets a more sever condition as stated here an addition -4 penalty. Although it says in the pinned condition that they do not stack...I am so confused?
few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is f latfooted.
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 character who attempts to cast a spell must make
a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler’s CMB + spell
level) or lose the spell. Pinned is a more severe version of
grappled, and their effects
do not stack
Looks to me like if you are pinning makes you lose your DEX bonus (the grappler) but the grappled pc gets a more sever condition as stated here an addition -4 penalty. Although it says in the pinned condition that they do not stack...I am so confused?
Now you see my point. I liked it better when no one swung into a grapple for fear of the 50/50 chance to hit the monk. Quite a few systems used that.
I may house rule that.
|
|
So after reading all this very carefully if you pinned the guy you would be at a -4 to DEX and be flatfooted (no DEX) and so would your opponent. The only difference is that all the pinned pc can do is attempt to free him/herself or take mental verbal actions. Where as you the grappler can still try other actions at any time.
|
|
Now you see my point. I liked it better when no one swung into a grapple for fear of the 50/50 chance to hit the monk. Quite a few systems used that.
I may house rule that.
I think that is a great idea. It makes sense to me. I would rule that the defender gets a 50% concealment miss chance, with a missed hit smacking the other grappler.
Sorry did not mean to quote myself there.
Now you see my point. I liked it better when no one swung into a grapple for fear of the 50/50 chance to hit the monk. Quite a few systems used that.
I may house rule that.
Just to clarify though, in 3.5 only firing a missile weapon into a grapple had the 50% chance to hit the wrong grapple. A melee weapon would always hit the right grappler (although I think each grappler benefited from soft cover).
One thing I saw in the rules is that, except for the fact the grappler can make grapple checks to do things with the grappled, BOTH have the same condition applied to them. As a player, it is something I'm wary of making my monk do, just because of the scenario you highlighted (which is valid for both sides).
As a DM, I'd houserule the soft cover option. As said in the Combat section, in a round, a character occupying a square is not necessarily immobile. The creatures grappling each other might turn a few times around each other (have you seen a Judo competition?)
"Case study: monk grapples wizard on round 1. During same round, ogre bodyguard swings and hits monk, taking him down, ending grapple with wizard."
The reasoning behind grappling seems to get lost by some people. There are a lot of preconceptions of what being "grappled" and "pinned" are. Also I don't see why you would expect there to be 50/50 chance to hit the other person instead of the one you are targeting.
To be grappled just means you have enganged in grabbing someone to either prevent them from moving or impairing their movements. So to grapple a wizard or anyone the benefit is you have limited their movement and limited what they can do in a combat situation.
An example:
Two people are being being attacked by a wizard, so you decide to grapple the wizard. The wizard is now limited to spell selection and cannot run away. Your buddy can pull out a knife and stab the wizard who you are forceably holding in place, and controlled movement. Now sure the wizard can squirm around a bit and try to avoid the hit (thus the dex penalty, but not helpless), but it sure makes it a lot easier to hit someone if your buddy is holding them in place.
The next round the wizard doesn't get free, and you initiate a pin. This doesn't mean you have to pin them to the ground, this isn't WWF or WWE or whatever they call it now. You can pin someone against a wall, against a table, the floor, the ceiling if you can fly I guess, or any object that makes sense. If you are in a bar and initiate a grapple and then a pin, perhaps you pin your opponent over backwards against the top of a table standing over him. You don't have to be on the floor rolling around to grapple or pin. Also simple arm bars and locks are effectively pins without actually pinning an opponent to anything. You can put a guy in a very painful standing arm bar or wrist lock and I guarantee you he isn't going anywhere.
I think the PF group got it right. Now the 50/50 for ranged, well you could question it, but again, hitting a target being held in place is always easier than hitting a free moving target.
Now do you want to initiate a grapple if you are outnumbered as in the Case Study example with the monk against the wizard and an ogre body guard, probably not. That just doesn't sound like a good tactical plan in any situation where you are outnumbered 2 to 1. Now if you have a friend and its say 3 on 2, it could present itself in a favorable situation, but only if the tactics are correct.