Cartigan wrote:
Unlikely. There is no reason to say "grapple and pin don't stack" doesn't change the penalty to Dex because the only part that could stack is the penalty to Dex. Pinned replaces Grappled.
I disagree with your probability of truth because it is opinion. You believe the designers screwed up one way and I believe they screwed up another.
Of course it is my opinion. I never said that I know the truth, otherwise I wouldn't have filled the forums with questions about grapple but instead make a statement that I know the truth and then share it with you. But for each rule that we debate for there is a number of interpretations that are likely true.
For each one of there is a probability about each one of them to be true. This probability derives from reading the rules, comparing them with all the texts of the books that affect them and by listening different of opinions and evaluating them. So here I just shared my highest probability opinion and the reason why I converge to that. The facts as I see them are:
1) Pinned is globally accepted as problematic and need fixing. I do not say that it is problematic in the minds of the designers. But it is problematic in the way it is written. So IMO it is more probable that here we are not facing a mechanic problem but a description problem. The problem is not what they had in mind but how they wrote it, which leads the players from interpreting the rule differently than the intended one.
2) The main problem of the pinned condition is that flat-footed compared to the -4 Dex penalty of the grappled condition. -4 Dex affects skills and attacks and also affects AC and CMD even if you do not have a bonus to your DEX, it equally affects a 12 DEX PC and a 8 DEX PC. On the other hand we have a more sever condition (pinned) which affects only bonuses to AC (flat footed is the same for AC whether you have 10 DEX or 8 DEX) and doesn't affect skills or attacks or grapple checks of an agile maneuver PC. THIS IS AN ERROR with 99% precent probability IMO and rings a bell inside for the first time I read. I guess the same happened to most of us writing in this forum so lets try to see what was behind the designers mind but was written so purely.
3) To main possibilities IMO:
a) The -4DEX for grappled is an error. It was never intended to affect skills and the CMB of agile maneuver grapplers. It was only aiming to affect Defenses -> -2AC and CMD
b) The pinned condition was purely written and they wanted to keep the -4 to DEX and also apply a -4 to AC and the flat-footed condition.
From those the b is more probable IMO with my mind, WHY?
a) Pinned is generally purely written so the error is more probable there than to the grappled condition which is also newly designed so probably the designers took greater care of it.
I will no argue for example if a pinned character is helpless or not. I know that is not. I will not even ask the designers of their opinion about that because even if the say to me that he is helpless IMO they would be wrong. As a 10 year DM I have a complete awareness where something like that would lead and the results clearly show me that this should never be the inattention of pinned condition in a D20 game. T
b)
I recently read the pinned description of the DM screen. It states that pinned character is as a grappled one with some deferences. So it still has a -4 Dex penalty. THIS IS VERY important IMO. WHY?
i) In DM screen most of conditions are rewritten in order to take lesser space. So this was an opportunity for the designers to rephrase what was on their mind for pinned with lesser words. It is a second chance and it is better written IMO.
ii) The screen came after the core book. So it like a late print for me. This increases a bit the probability for me to be right.
iii) The way is in now described leaves only one inconsistency. That agile maneuvers are penalized compered to the strength ones. This is could be intentional. I am not saying that I agree with it. Only that it is debatable and that it is possible. So this is not a problem of system flaw but a perspective argument which I personally do not care to argue for. If this is what they wanted I am happy with it.
So from all the above IMO again the most probable truth is that the -4 penalty to DEX also affects pinned characters. I am not saying all these to persuade anyone. I am just trying to help everyone take in to account all these facts before shaping his opinion. What I cheerfully expect in return? Similar arguments that I am not aware of and that I didn't notice to shape my opinion. My opinion was not this when I first wrote about this subject, it was shaped by the DM screen and your (plural) opinions. I am not trying to so or convince that I am right. I only search for truth, a balanced and logical way of playing grapple.
Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: From those the b is more probable IMO with my mind, WHY?
a) Pinned is generally purely written so the error is more probable there than to the grappled condition which is also newly designed so probably the designers took greater care of it.
If that is your argument, then you can't discount that Pinned explicitly says it doesn't stack with Grappled.
Quote: b)
I recently read the pinned description of the DM screen. It states that pinned character is as a grappled one with some deferences. So it still has a -4 Dex penalty. THIS IS VERY important IMO. WHY?
That's inconsistent design. Again. That probably won't be fixed. Again.
Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: I am not trying to so or convince that I am right. I only search for truth, a balanced and logical way of playing grapple. The same.
I have given up "PINNED as a helpless condition" because it is too dangerous for game balance.
I tested it and saw Grapple will become too much powerful.
For me, Combat maneuvers are already powerful and perhaps too much.
Pinned is between state of grapple and helpless.
Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: The way is in now described leaves only one inconsistency. That agile maneuvers are penalized compered to the strength ones. This is could be intentional. Remember that it is easier to have a "good" Escape Artist than a good CMB
Pinned creature has -4 AC and is also flat-footed. That's sure. ;)
But, what becomes Dexterity?
I think a pinned character is treated as having a Dexterity of 0, giving him a –5 penalty to AC against both melee and ranged attacks (for a total of –9 against melee and –5 against ranged): for me, it is the more logical for the "pinned character is tightly bound." and the "pinned character is immobilized".
Loengrin wrote: Bound being helpless is nagging at me... While bounded you can pretty much do the same thing than whern you are pinned : cast only verbal/mental spell or try an escape artist to get rid of the rope...
I won't put bound as helpless neither pinned... ;)
well, i see bound as different, bear with me:
Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy
Paralyze: You can't move.
Hold Person(Held): You can't move.
Bound: You can't move.
Sleeping: You can't act.
Unconscious: Neither move nor act.
Not being able to act basically includes not being able to move.
Now, if you can't move, say, your hands, then it is quite reasonably possible to cut your throat as a full-round-action.
If you are merely pinned: You can move...you can make a grapple check, an escape artist check, etc...and act(cast still spell e.g.)
The thing is: While you are locked in a grapple with an opponent, it is not defined how you are so. If you ever watched any kind of wrestling as child, there's quite a few ways of pinning an opponent, several of which either require your limbs to hold him, or, if you use a limb to do something different(such as draw a knife) also releases a limb of his, or, in other instances, some of his limbs could be free completely, or his throat well out of reach.
Now, in SOME instances, you may well be able to hold him with body weight alone, have his hands fixed away from his throat, and a hand free to get out a knife.
But not in all instances. Therefore, pinned should not automatically be helpless.
If someone is bound up, yeah, they can still take the same actions, trying to escape or casting still spells. But they are at your mercy in that if they are properly bound, they have no way of defending themselves or their throat when you slowly draw closer with your knife.
A pinned person is still struggling violently and will fight for his live. Even placing a hand between throat and knife will prevent that coup-de-grace...it'll be painful and bloody, but you'll live. But that you can bring a hand up to your throat does not mean you are able to shake off the twice-as-heavy guy sitting on your back and slowly sawing off your fingers with his butter knife, you better hope for backup.
And if he janks back your arm and binds them so you lose use of them(bound) then good luck and pray one of your buddies drops him before he picks up that knife again.
Exemples:
For the character who pin:
p 200 Pin: "...Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC."
I mind (for the ex) the last sentence replaces the "-4 Dex".
For the pinned character:
case A: pinned as -4 AC, flatfooted
Case B: pinned as -4 CA, flatfooted, -4 Dex
Case C: pinned as -4 CA, flatfooted, Dex =0
The grappler: Fighter 5 Dex 16 Str 20 CMB +10 CMD 23
The grappled: Rogue 5 Dex 18 Str 10 CMB +3 CMD 17 Escape Artist +12 (5 ranks, +3 bonus class skill, +4 bonus Dex)
Rogue is Grappled:
The rogue can escape the grapple with
1) check of CMB against CMD: his CMB +3 against CMD Fighter 23-2 (-4 Dex)= 21
2) check of Escape Artist: his escape artist (+12-2)=+10 against CMD Fighter 21
It is easier for the check CMB but nothing changes for check Escape Artist (50% to escape).
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -2 =15
Rogue is Pinned:
The rogue can escape the pin with:
case A:
1) check CMB: CMB +3 against CMD Fighter 23 -3 =20
2) check escape artist: Esc Artist +12 -4= +8 against CMD fighter 23 -3 =20
so 45% to escape
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -4 -4 =9
case B:
1) check CMB: see case A, no change
2) check escape artist: Esc Artist +12 -4 -2= +6 against CMD fighter 23 -3 =20
so 35% to escape
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -2 -4 -4 =7
case C:
1) check CMB: see case A, no change
2) check escape artist: Esc Artist +12 -4 -5= +3 against CMD fighter 23 -3 =20
so 20% to escape
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -4 -5 -4 =4
What if the "rogue" has Dex 8? (so escape artist 5 ranks + 3 bonus class skill -1 bonus Dex =+7)
the check CMB vs CMD doesn't change.
Rogue grappled:
check of Escape Artist: his escape artist (+7-2)=+5 against CMD Fighter 21
so 25% to escape
Rogue pinned:
Escape Artist:
case A: Esc Artist +7 +1= +8 against CMD fighter 23 -3 =20
so 45% to escape
case B: Esc Artist +7 +1 -2= +6 against CMD fighter 23 -3 =20
so 35% to escape
case C: Esc Artist +7 +1 -5= +3 against CMD fighter 23 -3 =20
so 20% to escape
CONCLUSION:
1) whatever your score in Dexterity, it doesn't change your chances of escape artist WHEN you are pinned
2) A character with bad Dex (less than 10) have more chance to escape artiste a pinned condition than a grappled one for case A & B.
Why in case A and B you give a -4 penalty in escape artist and CMB while being pinned?
Where did it came from. A pinned character has -4 to AC not -4 to its escpale artist or CMB to escape.
Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: Why in case A and B you give a -4 penalty in escape artist and CMB while being pinned?
Where did it came from. A pinned character has -4 to AC not -4 to its escpale artist or CMB to escape.
+12 escape artist = 5 ranks + 4 bonus dex + 3 class skill bonus
when pinned, character is flatfooted so lose his bonus Dex +4
so
case A:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill =+8
case B:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill -2 penalty (-4 Dex) =+6
case C:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill -5 penalty (Dex of 0) =+3
Defraeter wrote: Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: Why in case A and B you give a -4 penalty in escape artist and CMB while being pinned?
Where did it came from. A pinned character has -4 to AC not -4 to its escpale artist or CMB to escape.
+12 escape artist = 5 ranks + 4 bonus dex + 3 class skill bonus
when pinned, character is flatfooted so lose his bonus Dex +4
so
case A:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill =+8
case B:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill -2 penalty (-4 Dex) =+6
case C:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill -5 penalty (Dex of 0) =+3 Why?
18 Dex=>+4 bonus.(to everything)
A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC and Combat Manuever Defense (CMD).(Note that this does NOT include escape artist, but lets continue anyway)
18 Dex=>+4 bonus, lost=> 0 bonus. (to AC and CMD)
18 Dex=>+4 bonus. (to escape artist)
Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity.
18-4 Dex=> 14 Dex=>+2 bonus, lost=> 0 bonus. (to AC and CMD)
18-4 Dex=> 14 Dex=>+2 bonus (to Escape Artist)
If it was only 12 Dex, different.
Then it's
12-4 Dex=> 8 Dex=>-1 penalty.
But as written, you lose your dex bonus because you are flatfooted, not your dex score. And grappled only gives a penalty to your dex score...so you shouldn't get a penalty unless you have low dex to begin with. A person with 14 or more dex will still have enough dexterity while grappled to not incure a penalty...even if he could not use higher dexterity to his own benefit in regards to AC and CMD in the situation.
So yeah, Case B is nonexistant and in the other cases you don't lose Dex from Escape Artist.
Defraeter wrote: Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: Why in case A and B you give a -4 penalty in escape artist and CMB while being pinned?
Where did it came from. A pinned character has -4 to AC not -4 to its escpale artist or CMB to escape.
+12 escape artist = 5 ranks + 4 bonus dex + 3 class skill bonus
when pinned, character is flatfooted so lose his bonus Dex +4
so
case A:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill =+8
case B:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill -2 penalty (-4 Dex) =+6
case C:
escape artist pinned = 5 ranks + 0 bonus dex (flatfooted) +3 bonus class skill -5 penalty (Dex of 0) =+3 I flat footed creature only looses his Dex bonus from AC and CMD not generally. And I am sure about this. It was always like this and it will always be like this. There is no reason to apply -4 to escape artist. An as you can clearly see this changes everything in the above analysis. I propose to fix this and analyze it again.
"Flat-Footed
A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC and Combat Manuever Defense (CMD) (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity, unless he has the Combat Reflexes feat or Uncanny Dodge class ability.
Characters with Uncanny Dodge retain their Dexterity bonus to their AC and can make attacks of opportunity before they have acted in the first round of combat. "
yes you're right... a mistake! ;)
CORRECTED!!!
Exemples:
For the character who pin:
p 200 Pin: "...Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC."
For the pinned character:
case A: pinned as -4 AC, flatfooted
Case B: pinned as -4 CA, flatfooted, -4 Dex
Case C: pinned as -4 CA, flatfooted, Dex =0
The grappler: Fighter 5 Dex 16 Str 20 CMB +10 CMD 23
The grappled: Rogue 5 Dex 18 Str 10 CMB +3 CMD 17 Escape Artist +12 (5 ranks, +3 bonus class skill, +4 bonus Dex)
Rogue is Grappled:
The rogue can escape the grapple with
1) check of CMB against CMD: his CMB +3 against CMD Fighter 23-2 (-4 Dex)= 21
2) check of Escape Artist: his escape artist (+12-2)=+10 against CMD Fighter 21
so 50% to escape
It is easier for the check CMB but nothing changes for check Escape Artist.
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -2 =15
Rogue is Pinned:
The rogue can escape the pin with:
case A:
1) check CMB: same as grapple
2) check escape artist: Esc Artist +12 = +12 against CMD fighter 23 -2 =21
so 60% to escape
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -4 =13
case B:
1) check CMB: see case A, no change
2) check escape artist: Esc Artist +12 -2= +10 against CMD fighter 23 -2 =21
so 50% to escape
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -2 -4 = 11
case C:
1) check CMB: see case A, no change
2) check escape artist: Esc Artist +12 -4 -5= +3 against CMD fighter 23 -2 =21
so 15% to escape
The fighter can maintain grapple CMB +10 +5= +15 against CMD rogue 17 -4 -5 -4 =4
What if the "rogue" has Dex 8? (so escape artist 5 ranks + 3 bonus class skill -1 bonus Dex =+7)
the check CMB vs CMD doesn't change.
Rogue grappled:
check of Escape Artist: his escape artist (+7-2)=+5 against CMD Fighter 21
so 25% to escape
Rogue pinned:
Escape Artist:
case A: Esc Artist +7 = +7 against CMD fighter 23 -2 =21
so 35% to escape
case B: Esc Artist +7 -2= +5 against CMD fighter 23 -2 =21
so 25% to escape
case C: Esc Artist +7 -4= +3 against CMD fighter 23 -2 =21
so 15% to escape
DigitalMage wrote: DigitalMage wrote: Defraeter wrote: The definition of helpless in the glossary is not exactly the same than these p 197...
The word "held" is just written in the glossary, not p 197... that's why i didn't use it.
Good spot! I was using the PRD, but I just checked my PDF and you are correct, so there is a discrepancy between the glossary and pahge 197.
I will have to check whether the 3.5.PHB has the same discrepancy or whether Paizo corrected the issue on page 197 but not the glossary. I checked a PHB last night and its the same there too, the main text doesn't mention held but the glossary does. Take the common sense answer. The wording that you are helpless when held refers to the hold person, hold monster etc. spells, not to a character being rendered helpless whenever anyone grabs their arm.
Perhaps i have made another mistake for CMD
1) Does flatfooted means you lose dexterity bonus for CMD?
2) the character who pin (i.e the grappler):
p 200 Pin: "...Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC."
Does it means the grappler lose his dexterity bonus for his CMD when he pins an opponent?
If 1) & 2) are ok:
For my Ex:
CMD fighter grappler 23-2 =21
CMD fighter who pin 23 -3 =20
So all the Escape Artist will gain +5% chances of escape "pinned" on my exemple
CMD rogue pinned
Dex 18 Case A.....CMD 17 -4 AC -4 flatfooted= 9 (instead of 13)
Dex 8 Case A.....CMD 12 -4 AC = 8 (no change)
Dex 18 Case B.....CMD 17 -4 AC -4 flatfooted= 9 (instead of 11)
Dex 8 Case B.....CMD 12 -4 AC -2 penalty (-4 Dex)= 6 (no change)
For case C, no change
So
I see it as pretty common sense if someone is pinned (to the floor, to a wall, or any which way) that another person could come and coup de grace them with a full round action. The idea that you have to cut his/her throat to coup de grace is a misnomer, as long as they can be critted, they can be coup de grace'd, and you can even coup de gras with a ranged weapon if you are adjacent to them. Yes, a pinned creature can try to wriggle out from a pin, but they cannot otherwise move, much at all... remember, they cannot cast spells with a somatic or material component, so the idea that they can possible cover a specific part of their body when you are pinning them is pretty nonsensical. Yes, I agree that this is powerful, maybe too powerful, but I still read this as the rules. I do say that the person pinning cannot perform the coup de grace, as they are actively stopping the pinned character from moving and such, and therefore do not have the ability to take a full round action like coup de grace requires.
Stubs McKenzie wrote: I see it as pretty common sense if someone is pinned (to the floor, to a wall, or any which way) that another person could come and coup de grace them with a full round action. The idea that you have to cut his/her throat to coup de grace is a misnomer, as long as they can be critted, they can be coup de grace'd, and you can even coup de gras with a ranged weapon if you are adjacent to them. Yes, a pinned creature can try to wriggle out from a pin, but they cannot otherwise move, much at all... remember, they cannot cast spells with a somatic or material component, so the idea that they can possible cover a specific part of their body when you are pinning them is pretty nonsensical. Yes, I agree that this is powerful, maybe too powerful, but I still read this as the rules. I do say that the person pinning cannot perform the coup de grace, as they are actively stopping the pinned character from moving and such, and therefore do not have the ability to take a full round action like coup de grace requires. yay greater grapple.
First action=> Grapple.
Second action=> Pin
Third action=> Have your buddy slit his throat :P
You know, casters sometimes fail their check on courtesy of the chain shirt they wear :P
It's a different think jerking up a limb to somehow be between a knife and hour head, and making "the delicate movements required for spellcasting". Even for an Divine Caster, if the somatic component involves scratching your back, fat chance of doing that during a grapple.
As said, it's quite possible a person will by held in a way that allows another to coup-de-grace them, but it's also entirely reasonable that a person may be held in a way that does NOT allow this. Or that the grappler covers the pinned in a way that will not expose vulnerable parts of the victim.(think a orc fighter pinning a halfling bard, i doubt you'll see much of that halfling). Seeing how it's quite reasonable to assume in several cases a coup-de-grace is unlikely to be possible, to me it seems the more sensibel choice as base.
And then allow coup-de-graces situationally. Maybe the player takes a penalty on his grapple check on account of trying to expose the pinned players throat? Yeah, go ahead.
I see it as pretty common sense if someone is pinned (to the floor, to a wall, or any which way) that another person could come and coup de grace them with a full round action.
Even when you have someone in a full nelson or a good bear hug or a camel clutch they're still wiggling around. Its kind of hard to get in a good swing against them without hitting your friend the grappler, and they can still move out of the way of your shots to some extent. There's a reason that they don't behead people by just having the executioners assistant hold them.
Also keep in mind that most D&D characters have armor or some other sort of protective device that make it harder to aim for a vital area.They don't need to move out of the way of the blow, they just need to turn a little so the blow digs into the metal instead of their lungs.
Quote: The idea that you have to cut his/her throat to coup de grace is a misnomer, as long as they can be critted, they can be coup de grace'd You can crit someone facing you, on full defense with combat expertise. You can't just declare "oh, i'll swing my two handed sword through his jugular and coup de grace him"
Quote: so the idea that they can possible cover a specific part of their body when you are pinning them is pretty nonsensical. Its absolutely sensible. Somatic components are precise, delicate, and specific movements that have to be made EXACTLY or they don't work. You can thrash around as much as you'd like in a random directly in order to keep the sickle from connecting with your neck.
Quote: Yes, I agree that this is powerful, maybe too powerful, but I still read this as the rules. Quote:
If pin made people helpless it would say so. Just because some ways of being held (like hold person) render one helpless does not mean that all ways of being held render someone helpless.
Stubs McKenzie wrote: I see it as pretty common sense if someone is pinned (to the floor, to a wall, or any which way) that another person could come and coup de grace them with a full round action. The idea that you have to cut his/her throat to coup de grace is a misnomer, as long as they can be critted, they can be coup de grace'd, and you can even coup de gras with a ranged weapon if you are adjacent to them. Yes, a pinned creature can try to wriggle out from a pin, but they cannot otherwise move, much at all... remember, they cannot cast spells with a somatic or material component, so the idea that they can possible cover a specific part of their body when you are pinning them is pretty nonsensical. Yes, I agree that this is powerful, maybe too powerful, but I still read this as the rules. I do say that the person pinning cannot perform the coup de grace, as they are actively stopping the pinned character from moving and such, and therefore do not have the ability to take a full round action like coup de grace requires. I completely disagree. A pinned character has a huge number of penalties to his AC. He receives a -4 to AC class, he is flat-footed and IMO he also has an extra -4 to Dex. So he is VERY vulnerable to the attack of any one, even by a peasant, so this reflects what are you saying that he cannot effectively protect himself. But he is still fighting to escape, he isn't left paralyzed w8 for his death in that way you cannot coup de grace him. Think of it differently with one example:
1) We have a knight with an enchanted Full Plate that is pinned.
2) We have a peasant or even a rogue with common clothes that is pinned.
In reality it is much easier to hit the rogue or peasant while being pinned compared to the full plate knight which has a small amount of vulnerable spots available.
With the rules as they are (not being able to coup de grace him) this fact is reflected well enough. With what you suggest it is equally easy to kill them in the above situation.
Defraeter wrote: Perhaps i have made another mistake for CMD
1) Does flatfooted means you lose dexterity bonus for CMD?
2) the character who pin (i.e the grappler):
p 200 Pin: "...Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC."
Does it means the grappler lose his dexterity bonus for his CMD when he pins an opponent?
If 1) & 2) are ok:
For my Ex:
CMD fighter grappler 23-2 =21
CMD fighter who pin 23 -3 =20
So all the Escape Artist will gain +5% chances of escape "pinned" on my exemple
CMD rogue pinned
Dex 18 Case A.....CMD 17 -4 AC -4 flatfooted= 9 (instead of 13)
Dex 8 Case A.....CMD 12 -4 AC = 8 (no change)
Dex 18 Case B.....CMD 17 -4 AC -4 flatfooted= 9 (instead of 11)
Dex 8 Case B.....CMD 12 -4 AC -2 penalty (-4 Dex)= 6 (no change)
For case C, no change
So
1) a flat-footed yes. BUT a the grappler that pins someone is not flat-footed. it says:
"Pin: You can give your opponent the pinned condition
(see Appendix 2). Despite pinning your opponent, you
still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your
Dexterity bonus to AC."
This is way it says the above and not flat-footed.
2) So the answer is No. The CMD of the fighter does not change and as you can see the desired analogy in your scenarios only remains in plan B. This is how and why I concluded to plan B and why IMO this is the right case. I tried to described all these with words but your analysis with examples helped me even more to show what I mean. Thank you very much.
MordredofFairy wrote: As said, it's quite possible a person will by held in a way that allows another to coup-de-grace them, but it's also entirely reasonable that a person may be held in a way that does NOT allow this. Or that the grappler covers the pinned in a way that will not expose vulnerable parts of the victim.(think a orc fighter pinning a halfling bard, i doubt you'll see much of that halfling). Seeing how it's quite reasonable to assume in several cases a coup-de-grace is unlikely to be possible, to me it seems the more sensibel choice as base. You can still attack a grappled or pinned character normally without any chance to hit your friend, so the whole idea of not being able to coup de grace because they are in the way doesn't make a lot of sense.
the pinned condition, and the bound condition are pretty much identical, and I find it silly to think that one couldn't coup de grace someone that is secured to a chair, no matter how much they try to wiggle out. That being said, I don't allow characters to coup de grace opponents if they take damage during the attempt, but instead roll to hit normally and do damage normally as if they miss the vital area slightly with that swing.
Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: In reality it is much easier to hit the rogue or peasant while being pinned compared to the full plate knight which has a small amount of vulnerable spots available.
With the rules as they are (not being able to coup de grace him) this fact is reflected well enough. With what you suggest it is equally easy to kill them in the above situation.
In reality, it is much easier to coup de grace a peasant or rogue while unconscious than it is a knight in full plate due to most of the "soft spots" being covered, but that isn't how coup de grace works. I'm not looking for how it works in reality when we are talking about armored vs not armored, because PF/D&D doesn't even come close to representing reality when it comes to different armors and how they function. On the other hand, with the grappling rules, I can somewhat equate it to reality, and when one wrestler has another completely under his control, in a pin, I could very much see someone else stabbing the pinned person in the kidney, or slicing their throat, or bludgeoning the back of their neck with a morningstar etc etc without much effort, as I think of a pinned character as if in a sort of submission-y move... they can still attempt to try and escape, but past trying to escape, they are pretty vulnerable.
You may see it differently, and I respect that. I don't play with people who optimize for grappling, or tripping, or much of anything to the detriment of other skills/abilities, as we would all find it incredibly boring to play a game like that, so again, I can see how an interpretation like this could imbalance another groups game.
Coriat wrote: Take the common sense answer. The wording that you are helpless when held refers to the hold person, hold monster etc. spells, not to a character being rendered helpless whenever anyone grabs their arm. I am not sure that is "common sense", I hadn't even considered it could be referring to the Hold spells. Still I like the thinking behind it, I am just not convinced that was what was originally meant. I think the 3.5 design team maybe changed their mind over whether Pinned should mean Helpless, decided not but didn't make that change everywhere.
Defraeter wrote: 1) Does flatfooted means you lose dexterity bonus for CMD? Yes, if you are flat footed you do not add your Dex bonus to CMD (PF RPG page 199).
Of course technically a character is only flat footed if he has not yet acted in the combat, so this will only be the case on the surprise round and / or first round of combat. However I suspect Paizo actually meant you lose your Dex Bonus to CMD whenever you are denied your Dex bonus to AC; another ambiguity because Paizo seem to use Flat Footed and Denied Dex Bonus to AC synonymously.
Defraeter wrote:
2) the character who pin (i.e the grappler):
p 200 Pin: "...Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC."
Does it means the grappler lose his dexterity bonus for his CMD when he pins an opponent?
Technically no, because you only lose your Dex bonus to CMD when Flat Footed and not just when you lose your Dex Bonus to AC. But once more I think Paizo didn't mean that and the ambiguity arises due to the inexact use of the term Flat Footed.
DigitalMage wrote: Of course technically a character is only flat footed if he has not yet acted in the combat, so this will only be the case on the surprise round and / or first round of combat. However I suspect Paizo actually meant you lose your Dex Bonus to CMD whenever you are denied your Dex bonus to AC; another ambiguity because Paizo seem to use Flat Footed and Denied Dex Bonus to AC synonymously.
Actually, reading the Glossary entry for Pinned it does say you become Flat Footed. Therefore I have to assume Paizo have deliberately changed the manner in which you can become Flat Footed.
Flat Footed still seems to be a condition that means you lose your Dex bonus to AC and cannot make AoOs. And in addition to it being caused by not having acted yet in the combat, it can now be caused by other conditions as well.
So now when I read the Glossary entry for Flat Footed I have to read it with an implicit addition:
Flat-Footed: A character who has not yet acted during a combat is flat-footed, unable to react normally to the situation. [Characters can also become Flat Footed for other reasons]. A flat-footed character loses his Dexterity bonus to AC (if any) and cannot make attacks of opportunity.
Now that I have had that epiphany I will have to re-evaluate all the other things that use the term Flat Footed.
The Pinned condition is obviously meant for grappling monster Rogues.
Stubs McKenzie wrote: MordredofFairy wrote: As said, it's quite possible a person will by held in a way that allows another to coup-de-grace them, but it's also entirely reasonable that a person may be held in a way that does NOT allow this. Or that the grappler covers the pinned in a way that will not expose vulnerable parts of the victim.(think a orc fighter pinning a halfling bard, i doubt you'll see much of that halfling). Seeing how it's quite reasonable to assume in several cases a coup-de-grace is unlikely to be possible, to me it seems the more sensibel choice as base. You can still attack a grappled or pinned character normally without any chance to hit your friend, so the whole idea of not being able to coup de grace because they are in the way doesn't make a lot of sense.
the pinned condition, and the bound condition are pretty much identical, and I find it silly to think that one couldn't coup de grace someone that is secured to a chair, no matter how much they try to wiggle out. That being said, I don't allow characters to coup de grace opponents if they take damage during the attempt, but instead roll to hit normally and do damage normally as if they miss the vital area slightly with that swing. You can attack the character normally, without a chance to hit your friend. But that does not mean they are helpless. The point is, this guy _IS_ squirming, trying to get free, and unlike a bound character, "pinned" does not imply that all your limbs are useless. I hate to mention wrestling again, as example, but there's holds in which the held person pretty much has free reign with their hands, but no way to use them to get free. Still they could easily interfere with someone trying to chop their head off.
Pinned means just that, someone has you in a hold, you can't move and you can't act freely, but you can still squirm.
As was said, it's sufficient if you can jerk a little to make the hit cut into your shoulder instead of your neck.
When BOUND, you can't jerk around, bound implies you have no use of your limbs and no mobility. The guy can take your head, place his knife, and cut you.
The _MECHANICS_ to free yourself work the same, in one you wiggle free from the ropes/manacles with escape artist, in the other you escape your grappler. But they are NOT the same.
With 2 lucky rolls, a character may break the pin and reverse the grapple, all in one round if he has greater grapple. It's a dynamic situation. You can't "reverse"-grapple the manacles, unless you're a retard.
The situation is different, despite being similar, just because some mechanics work in both does not mean they are identical.
As said, bound opponents=>helpless, they can't squirm around and do stuff because otherwise they are not properly bound.
Grappled=>not helpless, they are squirming around and within 6 seconds they could well reverse the situation completely.
Stubs McKenzie wrote: Aris Kosmopoulos wrote: In reality it is much easier to hit the rogue or peasant while being pinned compared to the full plate knight which has a small amount of vulnerable spots available.
With the rules as they are (not being able to coup de grace him) this fact is reflected well enough. With what you suggest it is equally easy to kill them in the above situation.
In reality, it is much easier to coup de grace a peasant or rogue while unconscious than it is a knight in full plate due to most of the "soft spots" being covered, but that isn't how coup de grace works. I'm not looking for how it works in reality when we are talking about armored vs not armored, because PF/D&D doesn't even come close to representing reality when it comes to different armors and how they function. On the other hand, with the grappling rules, I can somewhat equate it to reality, and when one wrestler has another completely under his control, in a pin, I could very much see someone else stabbing the pinned person in the kidney, or slicing their throat, or bludgeoning the back of their neck with a morningstar etc etc without much effort, as I think of a pinned character as if in a sort of submission-y move... they can still attempt to try and escape, but past trying to escape, they are pretty vulnerable.
You may see it differently, and I respect that. I don't play with people who optimize for grappling, or tripping, or much of anything to the detriment of other skills/abilities, as we would all find it incredibly boring to play a game like that, so again, I can see how an interpretation like this could imbalance another groups game.
You are ignoring the fact that the original intent of the posting was to show that it's already made a lot more likely to deal terrible, terrible damage to them. They _ARE_ penalized already.
As for coup-de-gracing a peasant versus knight in full plate: If you know where to hit and the knight is unconscious, not really. Heck, lift his visor and stab him in the face a couple times. *shrug*
Thats the point, a coup-de-grace is a full-round-action, you take your time to do that. For the Peasant, it's likely enough to swing your axe and cut him in half, in passing, not wasting the time you could do several hits in a normal combat in to deal ONE serious hit to him.
As said, to each their own. But especially if you do mention submission moves and stuff happening in wrestling, you should be aware there's a difference between being statically bound and being caught in a move.
This game is not static instances, initiative just helps reflect that. You don't come there and they are locked in a static image until you decide on an action. Everything within that round happens simultaneously. Yep, actions are time-split for easier game flow, but if you accept that technically, those guys are grappling all the while, fighting around on the floor, instead of seeing a frozen image of time in which he is the same as bound, then for me thats quite a case of lacking immersion. As said, grapple is a dynamic process. If the combatants are equal, it will move back and forth...if the combatants are not equal, as mentioned above, i'd well allow one character to take a penalty to his grapple check to keep his opponent still and exposed long enough for someone else to come and "off" him.
Also, there is still the option to "tie them up", taking only one more grapple, fixing them in a coup-de-graceable state.
Basically by not allowing pin to be helpless, you just add either a penalty or an additional (third)step before having the victim "offed".
Considering that it's an opposed roll, where quite a lot of attackers will have a serious advantage over the defenders they choose to attack, and the defenders being incapacitated(spellcasting becomes very difficult), several targets will never stand a chance against this, then it seems just fair.
core rulebook wrote: Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. core rulebook wrote: Pinned: A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions bold is mine.
Pinned implies directly that your limbs are useless by stating you are tightly bound, and a bound creature or character is helpless.
Pinned also states that it does not stack with grappled, so giving a creature -4 dex from grappled when pinned is strictly house ruling.
core rulebook wrote: Tie Up: If you have your target pinned, otherwise restrained, or unconscious, you can use rope to tie him up. This works like a pin effect, but the DC to escape the bonds is equal to 20 + your Combat Maneuver Bonus (instead of your CMD). The ropes do not need to make a check every round to maintain the pin. If you are grappling the target, you can attempt to tie him up in ropes, but doing so requires a combat maneuver check at a –10 penalty. If the DC to escape from these bindings is higher than 20 + the target’s CMB, the target cannot escape from the bonds, even with a natural 20 on the check. Finally, Tie up uses the same rules as Pinning, and references Pinning specifically in how it works.
When you say there is a difference in being statically bound and being caught in a move (referencing pinned), I can't see where you are getting it from. If you mean to say there SHOULD be a difference, ok fine, if you think so then more power to you, but the book doesn't think so (at least from what I can find).
Stubs McKenzie wrote: core rulebook wrote: Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent’s mercy. Bound is not a defined condition... Does that mean that a lvl 30 wizard with some rope on his hand and legs can be cut throated ?
If this same wizard was bound bondage style with a gag and something to blind him ok... But just bound with 2 meters of rope... :/
Before I type out my full response I will say this... IF someone was able in the first place to get a lvl 30 wizard into bindings there are many spells without somatic components that a wizard could use to get out of them, teleport being one... if the wizard has NOT ONE spell memorized or known that would allow him to get away from such, and no magic items that would help, especially an epic level wizard, then he should rightfully be screwed. On to the rest.
You are right that bound does not have a glossary definition in the back of the book.. but if you run a word search for bound through the entire core rulebook (pdf... dead tree version would take you a while :P) you find bound is used for very few things... the possible usage of the bound condition is for:
ropes, shackles, or other bindings;
Pinning;
Planar binding (safe to assume that the helpless condition doesn't apply to a bound creature in this context);
Soul Bind (again, can safely assume souls bound aren't helpless as per definition);
and binding on doors and such (which we can again assume doesn't mean the door is helpless to it's iron binding).
It is otherwise used in such ways: Land-bound, Water-bound, Bounds of the forest, etc.
When looking at the choices, or how it could be possibly interpreted, the only time bound is used as a definition of anything is under "Helpless" which I quoted before, and then "Pinned" which I also quoted. There is no other use of bound as a definition of ANYTHING, including with ropes (aka they didn't put common sense rules in, if someone is tied up, he is bound, makes sense). To press home the point, where the word bound is used, the only place it is used that is pertinent at all is to define what Pinned means (aka Pinned = bound), and as one of the conditions that makes you helpless (aka bound = helpless).
PS I'm not sure what everyone's fascination with slitting someones throat is when it comes to coup de grace.. there are tons and tons of imaginative ways to 'insta-kill' someone, slitting their throat one of the most obvious and most messy.
I'm aware that I am way late to this party, but for my 2 cents.
I am fully of the opinion that pinned could allow a coup-de-gras upon the victim. However...not from the person holding them. Both as written and in real life, it would be very possible to pull it off.
The grapple check is a best a move action (with greater grapple) which means mechanically the grappler can never do the coup against someone he's pinning. There is only one instance where it might be possible, and that would be on monsters with the grab ability (or snatch feat)...as that allows them to accept a -20 penalty to try and hold the creature with that limb only and not become grappled itself. Though like this even powerful creatures would have difficulty maintaining the grapple. (and I'm not sure I would allow it anyway as in most cases I would rule that you can't get them really pinned using only one limb, at least not in a way you could coup them)
However, as was discussed earlier in this thread being bound is listed as being helpless enough to perform a coup. And it is also listed that it should be treated as pinned, just using a static DC that would be equivalent to taking 20 on the check. And from pinned, the target is restrained enough that you can do this with another normal grapple check, something that would otherwise require unconsciousness. It should also be noted that in the chart for armor class modifiers....pinned and helpless have identical entries.
Good examples of this would be modern police officers making an arrest. Before they try putting on the cuffs they usually have the victim solidly pinned, especially if they are fighting, before they try and cuff em. And the times where they don't get the person pinned the cops tend to have much difficulty getting the cuffs on (a depiction of the -10 penalty suffered when you try to do it from just a grapple). Another example would be one of the first scenes from the game Shadows of Mordor (I won't say the scene due to potential spoilers, but those who have played will know...and those who haven't should play it), it demonstrates the condition of pinned quite well.
If you are in a helpless enough position that you could be tied up, you're in a helpless enough position that you could be coup'ed. And even if you aren't, you would be the following turn when you become bound.
The reason this isn't really much of a thing, is that grappled penalizes both sides fairly hard...and actually might be more dangerous to the grappler than the grappled.
This is because the grappled foe can still make a full attack against you (albeit at a -2, but you're taking the same penalty to your dex, so effectively non-finesse fighters can beat on you with no penalty to hit save they can't use a 2 hander), and his friends all now will have a bonus on beating you. And trying to pull someone into a pin will immediately pull pretty much all the aggro onto you, especially from the rogues who now get automatic sneak attack. To top it off, at this point...it's usually preferable to just bind the foe and remove him from the combat for later 'questioning'. It requires less of an action investment and doesn't need a teammate, and if you built a greater grapple build...you could potentially do this in the same motion as pinning the opponent, freeing you from the penalties of holding them pinned.
So in order for this to work, you will need to spend at least 2 rounds eating penalties and getting beat on, and then yell for one of your teammates to come over and murder this guy or have it pre-planned. And in order to do so, the teammate would have to come over or be standing right by you...and either be readied for your call to kill the guy (potentially wasting turns if you slip up or they break free) or do it on his natural turn, both of which leave him and you vulnerable.
Also as a gm, in this situation...I would likely give the victim a free attempt to break the pin with a bonus due to the imminent death, as though it were the provoked AoO from the coup. Success would let the victim break free of the pin and ruin the coup attempt (and the actions lost), and the victim is free of the grapple.
I would also call this a explicitly evil action in most scenarios, and could potentially threaten alignment change for both the participants (and possibly other party members depending on the situation and if it was premeditated).
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
