During an encounter earlier today, my wizard hit an enemy rogue with telekinesis. In order to keep him from getting away while my party mates ran to catch up, I used the grapple maneuver to hold him. I succeeded--for two rounds.
Then he made a lucky roll and, as per the rules of grappling, he turned the telekinesis on me and grappled me! When the party showed up, I was his hostage and he used the poor grappled wizard as a bargaining chip with which to escape.
Was the GM right to do this? Or did he get the rules wrong somewhere?
Answer - Yes, he can because he is the GM. /grin Aside from that politely say you do not think an enemy can wrest control of a magic spell from your mind just because he is stronger then you physically. If he is adamant about the issue just drop it and move on with the game for now and discuss in more detail later without holding the game up excessively.
However, there is an easy solution as a player; telekinesis has a duration of Concentration. So just drop the spell and it cannot work even if the GM did rule he could use it to "Grapple you back". This is kind of like a trip weapon. Normally a failed check allows the opponent to reverse a trip, but as a free action you can drop the weapon to avoid being tripped.
Without knowing the specifics of why the GM did what he did it is hard to say if it was fair or not. (But it would take a pretty good argument on his/her part to convince me it was fair for anything but story based adventuring.)
I would allow a reverse but that would not give him control of the wizard.
A crude diagram: W....T*R
The W is for Wizard, the T is the telekinesis effect, the * is them grappling & the R is the rogue.
If the rogue succeeds on a reverse then he has grappled the telekinesis not the wizard. In other words he has negated the spell and held the spell hostage not the spellcaster.
Unless there are extremely extenuating circumstances, I'd say you just got yourself run over by the DM buggering train.
Just because he won a grapple check with the magical force that you were holding him with, doesn't mean he all of a sudden can wrest mental control of that magic away from you. Now if he were some sort of archmage with the plot-given ability to control the magic of others I might buy it. But a rogue? Even if he's a boss type NPC, there's a limit to how much non-magical types can do with magic and this goes far far FAR beyond what the rules would allow.
Heck, next time you roll a 20 on a saving throw against a magical effect, demand that your DM allow you to turn the spell on its caster, citing this as your precedent!
Only way I could see this happening is with a rather liberal interpretation of a ring of spell turning.
That was the first thing I asked about. The GM told me the enemy had no rings.
That use of the TK spell ends when you stop concentrating on it.
You could have let the spell drop any time you wanted to.
Yes, I realized this after the fact. :-/
I view it the same as if you had summoned a monster to grapple the rogue and hold him. Winning that grapple would not turn the monster on you to grapple, he would just have control over the grapple with the monster.
Also note, unless the rogue chose to break free, he would still have the "grappled" condition, with the TK force. As the caster, you could still stab him.
on a side note, that gives me a great idea for a rogue with a TK magic item. Grab and stab (for the sneak attack)!