How does one throw or slam someone a character after they have grappled them? Could someone do this in the same turn they grapples somebody? Examples includes a monk's judo throw or a fighter powerbombing someone into a table. Thank you.
|
How does one throw or slam someone a character after they have grappled them? Could someone do this in the same turn they grapples somebody? Examples includes a monk's judo throw or a fighter powerbombing someone into a table. Thank you.
As for throwing someone you are grappling I would personally call flavor more than anything else. Say you make your unarmed attack and as a free action release them at the same time, if you want to turn them so they go in a specific direction then you would have to use your move action to direct them.
Attempting to slam them gives them a free chance to break the grapple at a +4 circumstance modifier as you are attempting to put them in a "hazardous location"
This is how I read it at least.
How does one throw or slam someone a character after they have grappled them? Could someone do this in the same turn they grapples somebody? Examples includes a monk's judo throw or a fighter powerbombing someone into a table. Thank you.As for throwing someone you are grappling I would personally call flavor more than anything else. Say you make your unarmed attack and as a free action release them at the same time, if you want to turn them so they go in a specific direction then you would have to use your move action to direct them.
Attempting to slam them gives them a free chance to break the grapple at a +4 circumstance modifier as you are attempting to put them in a "hazardous location"
This is how I read it at least.
More houserules? You really should say so.
As for the RAW:
First problem: Judo throws (Jujitsu, Aikido, whatever) are out. Nothing in the grapple rules gives you the ability to make your opponent become Prone. You need to use Trip first to get him to the ground. Unfortunately, you cannot Trip and Grapple in the same round, so your enemy will almost always stand back up on his round, which makes it usually a moot point. If you get an ally to trip him and then you grapple him, well, he's already on the ground so it would be hard to throw him to the ground now. In short, getting your opponent to the ground and keeping him there is not covered by the RAW as part of Grapple, nor is it even possible with the existing Grapple rules.
So you and your DM need to fix that if you want to simulate throwing someone to the ground using the grapple rules. But if you do, it makes grappling very powerful, because prone enemies are easier to hit, they don't hit back very well, and they provoke AoOs when they stand up - that is a whole lot of free buffing/debuffing/damage coming off of (modified) Grapple rules, and it would probably make them overpowered.
As for the other kind of throwing, where you just slam someone into a wall or a table, that you can do. Sort of. But not the way you want to:
The round you initiate the grapple you can't do anything but that. Then on your victim's turn he can try to break free, or do other stuff. Then when your next round comes up, if he didn't break free, you now must maintain the grapple as a Standard action. You get +5 to your CMB for this roll.
It is also important to note that you can release the grapple as a free action at any time. Note that a skilled Aikido/Jujitsu master usually manages to throw the victim without letting go, so it's entirely valid to throw someone to the ground, or bounce them off a wall, and still maintain the grapple. Of course, sometimes they just throw and release, which can be done using your free action to release the grapple. It's your call.
If you successfully maintain the grapple, you can do one of several things as part of the same standard action that you used to maintain the grapple:
Move: You can move both yourself and your target up to half your speed. At the end of your movement, you can place your target in any square adjacent to you. If you attempt to place your foe in a hazardous location, such as in a wall of fire or over a pit, the target receives a free attempt to break your grapple with a +4 bonus.
This can represent a throw (but not a throw to the ground). Many throws, especially those popular in Aikido, are designed not to do damage. So, use this Move option to place your opponent where you want to - even if that means bouncing him off of a wall or table. Unfortunately, it does no damage.
Arguably, you could say that a spiked wall, or the corner of a table, or maybe just a hard unmoving surface, or whatever, might hurt the guy. If so, then it's similar to pushing him into a fire or over a pit, so he gets a free attempt to escape with a +4 bonus; if he fails, he takes some damage from the impact - how much is up to your DM. You can retain your grapple (because you already made that roll) or not - that's up to you.
Damage: You can inflict damage to your target equal to your unarmed strike, a natural attack, or an attack made with armor spikes or a light or one-handed weapon. This damage can be either lethal or nonlethal.
This can also represent a throw (but not to the ground). Assuming there is something adjacent to your grappled victim, you can say you slam him against that thing. A tree, a wall, whatever it is. You slam him so hard tht he takes your unarmed damage. However, he basically bounces off of this thing and remains in his same square, on his feet. You can retain your grapple (because you already made that roll) or not - that's up to you.
Pin: You can give your opponent the pinned condition (see Conditions). Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC.
Yep, you're both still on your feet, even though you have pinned him. My Jujitsu instructor had several nasty holds/pins that left me helpless while we were both on our feet. There is no way to move or damage your opponent using the Pin option, so it doesn't really represent throwing them in any fashion.
I wonder if the APG will adress this with expanded grapple rules. It's easy to make a few feats that do this, but is it overpowered if you can choose to trip your opponent with a grapple check instead of damaging them? Hard to say.
I don't think it would be overpowered to create an additional option for maintaining a grapple called "position opponent: you move your opponent to standing, kneeling, or prone at your option".
Get greater grapple, then you can maintain the grapple as a move and then use the standard to trip. You should have a good CMB and he cant take AoOs.
|
|
More houserules? You really should say so.
I fail to see how I stated houserules in any way. I simply stated what actions he has available to him in a grapple with the requisite feats. I assumed he would take these since the whole focus of the thread is grappling.
Slamming someone on a wall or dangerous otherwise some obstacle would indeed give a free chance to break at the requisite modifiers.
Perhaps before slamming others you develop some reading comprehension.
I don't think it would be overpowered to create an additional option for maintaining a grapple called "position opponent: you move your opponent to standing, kneeling, or prone at your option".
Absolutely!
I would actually create more than one houserule:
(rough drafts)
Hard Throw: You throw your opponent to the ground, inflicting lethal damage equal to your unarmed strike. You place your opponent in any square adjacent to you that you desire and he becomes prone, and you automatically release your grapple. If you attempt to throw your foe into a hazardous location, such as into a wall of fire or into a pit, the target receives a free attempt to break your grapple with a +4 bonus, in which case he remains standing in his own square and takes no damage.
Soft Throw: You throw your oppenent to the ground, inflicting as much non-lethal damage as you desire, up to a maximum amount equal to your STR modifier. You can choose to do no damage if you wish. The opponent falls prone in his own space, and you may choose to maintain your grapple if you wish, though if you do, you must become prone too.
Yes, I know, you can throw an opponent to the ground while you just bend over and and hang onto his arm, or you simply kneel down beside him, which doesn't make you prone, but we don't have conditions in this game for "bent over" or "kneeling" so making the grappler become prone with the victim is close enough for these simplified rules.
Furthrermore, those rough drafts don't account for the size or the number of legs of the victim (both of which are factors of the Trip maneuver). They probably should add something about limiting these options to foes only 1 size larger, and giving a -2 penalty on the CMB for each extra pair of legs - but then you also have to decide on these maneuvers before rolling to maintain the grapple. Currenly, you can simply roll to maintain and then decide to move, damage, or pin the foe after you find out if your roll is a success. Creating options like these that should impose potential penalties to the roll means the option must be selected before rolling to maintain the grapple (even if you're picking on of the standard options).
The Hard Throw is balanced by having to release the grapple. A normal Trip takes one standard action and does no damage. This option requires two standard actions and does one round of damage, and potentially moves the victim a little. That seems fairly balanced to me.
The Soft Throw is balanced by using two rounds to grapple a prone victim (who has three chances for your efforts to fail) and inflicts no lethal damage or fairly low non-lethal damage. It is also balanced by requiring the grappler to also become prone if he wants to maintain the grapple. It may still be unbalanced, since this option allows you to both trip and grapple, which is currently impossible by the rules. If it's just one lone grappler with one lone victim, it is balanced (both parties take the same penalties). If, however, the grappler has allies, this may be very unbalanced, since the victim suffers all the usual drawbacks of being grappled AND he suffers the drawbacks of being prone - and these drawbacks are not imposed on the grappler's allies. It would take some playtesting to find out if a group of PCs with a dedicated grappler gains too much benefit from this option.
More houserules? You really should say so.I fail to see how I stated houserules in any way. I simply stated what actions he has available to him in a grapple with the requisite feats. I assumed he would take these since the whole focus of the thread is grappling.
Slamming someone on a wall or dangerous otherwise some obstacle would indeed give a free chance to break at the requisite modifiers.
Perhaps before slamming others you develop some reading comprehension.
I read your post. Did you?
And I didn't slam anyone; I merely asked you to clarify that you are discussing houserules. So before you slam someone for slamming you, you should develop some reading comprehension...
As for throwing someone you are grappling I would personally call flavor more than anything else. Say you make your unarmed attack and as a free action release them at the same time,
I assume you're referring to inflicting your unarmed damage as a result of successfully maintaining your grapple, right? Since you cannot actually make an unarmed attack while grappling.
if you want to turn them so they go in a specific direction then you would have to use your move action to direct them.
This is a houserule. There is nothing at all in the Grapple rules that lets you direct your victim. Nor is there anything that lets you use your move action to impact your victim in any way.
Sure, if you maintain a grapple you can move your victim (using your standard action), but then you are not damaging them, and you preceded this quoted suggestion by using a different option (inflicting damage) so you cannot move the victim at all - you can't damage and move them with the RAW.
Attempting to slam them gives them a free chance to break the grapple at a +4 circumstance modifier as you are attempting to put them in a "hazardous location"
This is how I read it at least.
This last bit is mostly correct, unless you slam them into a wall or table in a way that doesn't inflict damage. I'm not sure why you would, other than to maybe intimidate them, or to impress them, or to put on a show for onlookers.
Note however that they get the free chance to escape at +4 if you move them into danger. On the other hand, you may just leave them in their own square and bounce them off an adjacent wall or tree. Regardless of whether this inflicts damage or not, the RAW doesn't exactly stipulate what kind of damage you do or whether they can try to escape or not - this is a gray area and assuming that you are putting them in a "hazardous location" when you're really leaving them in their own starting location may not be correct, and may not qualify for the free escape attempt.
|
|
A verbal quaff, you can use one of your two standard actions you get while grappling (with the requisite feat) to move the grappled opponent up to half your land speed. I never mentioned it doing any damage them, only that you would be moving them in a specific way, orienting them etc.
The slamming part would be one part move one part unarmed attack. Move them up against a wall or onto a table, then use your second action to slam their head into the wood dealing again your unarmed damage. As letting go is a free action he could just as easily play it off as grabbing a guy, pulling him over to a wall and throwing him headfirst into it releasing the guy.
Yea you have to add a little bit of "fluff" to have it all make sense, but that is the DM's job after all, and from what I can tell what he came her asking.
My deepest apologies for offering something other than pure extract of RAW.
A verbal quaff, you can use one of your two standard actions you get while grappling (with the requisite feat) to move the grappled opponent up to half your land speed. I never mentioned it doing any damage them, only that you would be moving them in a specific way, orienting them etc.
The slamming part would be one part move one part unarmed attack. Move them up against a wall or onto a table, then use your second action to slam their head into the wood dealing again your unarmed damage. As letting go is a free action he could just as easily play it off as grabbing a guy, pulling him over to a wall and throwing him headfirst into it releasing the guy.
Yea you have to add a little bit of "fluff" to have it all make sense, but that is the DM's job after all, and from what I can tell what he came her asking.My deepest apologies for offering something other than pure extract of RAW.
Just to clarify, the "requisite feat" you're referencing here is Greater Grapple, right? That doesn't give you two standard actions. You still get one move action and one standard action, but you can use your move action to maintain your grapple.
With this feat, you can almost do all the things you describe.
However, in your example of moving him to the wall (your move action to maintain the grapple is successful so you move up to half your movement rate, bringing the victim with you) and then slamming him into the wall, there is a problem.
The first part works beautifully (or you can do move him this round and try to slam him next round if you don't have Greater Grapple).
But, once you're next to the wall, you can move him into it (which does no damage) or you can damage him (which doesn't move him into the wall), or you can pin him (maybe even pin him to the wall if you so wish, but it does no damage either way).
You could build a case that moving him into a solid wall should do damage, and can houserule that the damage is the same as your unarmed strike (or make something else up), but then the free escape attempt at +4 should factor in.
You could also just use fluff to say that you maintain your grapple and inflict your unarmed damage by banging his head against the wall. This is perfectly valid by raw, since you are allowed to do this damage and it's just fluff to describe it how you want. I note that your posts state "throwing him headfirst into it releasing the guy" but releasing him is not even necessary by RAW, so you can choose to hang onto him or release him at your discretion.
The issue -can- be resolved with the existing rules, depending on how you want to do things.
"I slam him against the wall forcefully!"
Make a CMB roll vs his CMD, deal unarmed damage.
"I judo throw him across the room!"
Make a CMB roll vs his CMD, move action, drop grapple as free action.
"I flip him into the table to smash it!"
GREATER GRAPPLE:
Make a CMB roll vs his CMD, move action to move him to the table.
Make a CMB roll vs his CMD, deal unarmed damage.
"I flip him and throw him into the ground, then put my knee down against his throat so he can't get back up!"
GREATER GRAPPLE:
Make a CMB roll vs his CMD, deal unarmed damage.
Make a CMB roll vs his CMD, pin.
All of the grapple actions can be done with more flavor, it's what the rules are there for. Greater Grapple allows for more complicated or creative maneuvers.
It's not super polished this way (having only combination of Move, Pin, and Harm) but for the most part can get the job done without the need for homebrew feats.
