| 7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) In the core rulebook states that you cannot make attack of opportunities while having the grappled condition.
Page 567 : "Grappled creatures cannot make attacks of opportunity."
My question is : Does a grappled creature threaten the squares around it? Threatening is something required in order to perform an attack of opportunity but this doesn't necessary mean the opposite too. So can a grappled ally be used in order to flank an enemy standing between the two of you?
2) In the weapon specialization feat states that :
"Weapon Specialization (Combat)
You are skilled at dealing damage with one weapon. Choose
one type of weapon (including unarmed strike or grapple)
for which you have already selected the Weapon Focus feat.
You deal extra damage when using this weapon."
Since in the path finder rules of grapple you can deal your unarmed damage in the grapple what does weapon specialization in grapple means?
a) If you take weapon specialization in grapple whenever you deal damage with an unarmed strike, light weapon or one handed weapon you deal +2 damage?
b) It only refers to unarmed strikes during grapple, so it is something weaker than taking an unarmed strike specialization feat. (so it shouldn't exist at all)
c) Or you can take both unarmed strike spec and grapple spec and deal +4 damage with unarmed strikes during grapple? (So they stack)
Any suggestions or at least how do you play it?
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
1) I don't know a rule for this. I'd say as a GM: Once you're out of AoO's or if you can't make any AoO's - you don't threaten.
2) Pg 200.
Damage: You can inf lict 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.
Grapple does not deal damage by itself, Weapons Spec (Grapple) would be wasted.
1) I don't know a rule for this. I'd say as a GM: Once you're out of AoO's or if you can't make any AoO's - you don't threaten.
2) Pg 200.
Damage: You can inf lict 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.Grapple does not deal damage by itself, Weapons Spec (Grapple) would be wasted.
So in your opinion weapon spec grapple is something that shouldn't exist at all? It is something that should be removed from the description of the feat and fixed with errata. In my first look at it I had the same idea but on the other hand I cannot be sure that the designers didn't have something else in mind that we missed.
Any other opinions?
|
In 3.5 it explicitly stated you didn't threaten squares if you were grappling. So whether Pathfinder's change of phrase was deliberate (meaning you could flank even if grappling) or just a sloppy change where they equated AoO to Threatening (even through they aren't the same thing) I don't know.
This is not the first time Paizo has changed something that was perfectly clear in 3.5 to something that becomes ambiguous in PF RPG (the other instance I can think of is equating Flat Footed to Losing Dex Bonus to AC for Uncanny Dodge, when Flat Footed =/= Losing Dex Bonus to AC).
|
|
Yes, by RAW you threaten because you threaten squares that you can attack.
IMO it's intentional, otherwise you couldn't be flanked or sneak-attacked from a side when grappled, which doesn't make much sense (in 3.5 you loose your Dex bonus).
Eh? Whether you are threatening or not when grappling has nothing to do with wether you can be flanked or sneak attacked.
If anything, it is harder to sneak attack a grappling character in Pathfinder than it was in 3.5 (in 3.5 you lost your dex bonus as soon as you started grappling, in PF it now only happens if you are pinned or are pinning someone).
Have I misundertood you?
1) Weapon Spec (Grapple) and Damage. Yes, you are able to do damage! However, damage is equal to your unarmed strike as in rules
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 would mean you are just making a PC who grapple all the time. The +2 to damage from W.S does NOT apply to anything else than to Grapple Damage
Grapple Damage = Unarmed Strike Damage | 1d3+2 medium, 1d4+2 medium
2)Yes. You are threatening squares around you! However!!
If you don´t have two (2) hands free, you suffer -4 penalty! E.G Grapple with one (1) hand is made by CMB - 4. If you succeed-> You will have for the next rounds +5. -4 Still applies if you are only using 1 hand and make AoO´s . So CMB + 1 instead of +5.
Flanking... well, other creatures or persons are apple to "Aid Another" action, granting +2 to grappler for CMB or to grappled for CMB +2. When you think about this and reading also old rules, you can state make assumption that flanking is possible, even if that doesn´t read in core rules. You could threat this as a Polearm Master ability from APG
At 9th level, a polearm master may choose any square adjacent to him and treat that square as his location for determining who he is flanking, even if that square is occupied by a creature, object, or solid barrier.
However, this will work only against then grappled / grappling opponent.
Even if we forget this-> grappled /grappling opponent is in adjacent square and you are able to threat him with CMB, so flanking should be possible (it´s after all GM decision how he wants it to be)
-------------------------
Guy in cleaning duty of random dungeon
|
|
If the enemy that is grappling you doesn't threaten with some weapon or armed attack then you can't be flanked from the opposite square, i.e.
Ah I understand now, you mean if Adam is grappling Barry and Adam wasn't threatending then Charlie (Adam's ally) couldn't flank Barry using Adam as the flanking partner.
A>B<C
In which case I agree. Mind you, unless Adam has a weapon in hand (and suffer the –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll) he still wouldn't be threatening unless he also had the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.
Though it does lead to interesting situations where Adam could help Charlie flank other foes as well (X), even whilst still grappling Barry (I guess he blindly flicks out his weapon behind him every so often, or kicks backwards if he has Improved Unarmed Strike.
C>X<AB
Adam is called then Monk :) hehe
EDIT: MUCH more interesting question now from this: Does the Monk suffer -4 penalty from this? Adam´s (monk) whole body is considered as a weapon so he could attack with one leg while grappling with both hands hmmmm
EDIT2: As further expending my research: You still need Greater Grapple Feat in order to attack-> Grapple is considered standard action. Without the "Greater Grapple" feat, you can´t attack another creature but, you can flank. Qualifies even to monk?? but grapple is quite well defined here
Once you are grappling an opponent, a successful check allows you to continue grappling the foe, and also allows you to perform one of the following actions (as part of the standard action spent to maintain the grapple, 1)Move, 2)Damage, 3)Pin, 4)Tie Up).
With the feat-> You can harm the grappled opponent AND attack the other people.
So to conclude
1) To make AoO while grappling-> suffer -4 to CMB: Grapple or No AoO
1.1) Monk can make AoO without -4 penalty
2) If you succeed with grappling check and maintain for next turn-> you gain +5 bonus to CMB:grapple, (-4 + 5) giving you total CMB:Grapple +1
Note: Still requires you to have 1 arm free! Monk will have full CMB:Grapple +5
3) With Greater Grapple Feat, you are able to grapple and damage grappled AND also to hit another woe, but having still CMB:Grapple +1
3.1) Monk is also required to have this feat in order to hit another foe, but still maintains CMB:Grapple +5
Some other blabla information
#####################
Extra Note: With Improved & Greater Grapple: Increase your CMB:Grapple checks by +4 so bringing the total together
a) Non-Monk ; CMB:Grapple +5
b) Monk ; CMB:Grapple +9
------------
The man in cleaning duty of random dungeon
Any other opinions?1) I don't know a rule for this. I'd say as a GM: Once you're out of AoO's or if you can't make any AoO's - you don't threaten.This is horribly unfair to rouges trying to get their comrades to flank, and its not implied anywhere in the rules. Someone may not have their attacks of opportunity available right that second, but within 6 seconds (at most) they're going to have their regular attacks.
2) Pg 200.
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.Grapple does not deal damage by itself, Weapons Spec (Grapple) would be wasted.
In general, if an interpretation of the rules would mean that something they bothered to spell out specifically shouldn't be there, then that interpretation is wrong. The specialization in grapple exists. This implies that 1) there is supposed to be some use for it 2) that unarmed strike and grapple are two different weapons.
As for threatening squares and flanking, i believe pathfinder changed how this works for characters who are grappling (it appears to be the same as 3.5 for those who are pinned) There's nothing in the grapple condition about loosing your ability to threaten squares around you, and on page 201 first paragraph it specifically mentions attacking any area within your reach with a one handed weapon (albiet with a -2 penalty)
So that would imply that the person BEING grappled still threatens, but the person DOING the grappling does not (their hands are occupied) unless, like a monk or a dragon, they have some means of kicking your ass with two hands tied behind their back.
Huom! Read my Edited Post
But to make it again just shortly->
Grappling with one hand-> -4 penalty! = AoO-> possible since one hand free
Grappling with two hand-> = AoO no possible or suffer -4 penalty if going for 1 hand
TWF= oooh... this is interesting but I would rule here that its -4 since he is not using another hand to attack or even attacking with two hands.
Monk is only one who doesn´t suffer -4 since he can attack even without arms.
Shield-> Yes since you can use it as a weapon in this case.
However!! You will suffer -1 +-4 = -5 (plus out) IF you don´t have proficiency with shield to attack. Also you loose your AC if not having correct feat to retain your AC bonus
Shield Proficiency - No penalties on attack rolls when using a shield
Improved Shield Bash* Shield Proficiency Keep your shield bonus when shield bashing
------------
The man in cleaning duty of random dungeon
Ok. Sorry if I was confusing but I will try to lay it down quite simple. Hopefully this will clear it down.
So, I will break it to brackets.
Persons: A & C is team 1
Persons: B & D is team 2
Grapple: 2 hand
1. A CMB:Grapple vs CMD:Grapple B
2. A wins, so B is grappled (ignore B´s round)
3. D attacks A = A takes damage because A cant attack back = hands are tied
Ok, so far its okey.
Grapple: 1 hand
4. A CMB:Grapple vs CMD:Grapple B with 1 hand = A takes -4 to CMB
5. A wins, so B is grappled (ignore B´s round)
6. D moves to A´s threatened square = A can take AoO because he has one hand free
still okey so far?
Grapple: 2 hands, 2nd round
7. A has +5 to CMB:Grapple this round
Repeat the Scenario 3
still okey?
Grapple: 1 hands, 2nd round
8. A has +5 to CMB:Grapple this round. Last round he received -4 because grappling with 1 hand. So put these two modifier together and he has CMB:Grapple +1
still okey?
9. Repeat the Scenarios 6
Okey, so far that was everything. This is getting long, I know and I hope I am keeping it simple so far.
10. With Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple feat. You get to both 2-hand Grapple and 1-hand Grapple CMB:Grapple +4
11. Now A can take two actions (because of Greater Grapple feat) against B: move action and standard action
or
A attack:Grapple B and attack: standard action D
---Thing is that A CANT attack D without the feats---
Monk: Monks whole body is a weapon. The difference is just that!!!
12. C (Monk) can make AoO even while grappling with 2 hands B, when D comes too close. C doesn´t suffer penalties.
About the shield
13. Grappling with one hand + Shield in one hand.
When you grapple - you take -4.
Without Shield Proficiency: You suffer -1 penalty more to Shield attack
Without Imp. Shield Proficiency: You will not retain your shield armor to your AC because of the attack
------------
The man in cleaning duty of random dungeon
|
TL:DR
The simple answer: creatures in a grapple don't can't make AoO so it makes sense that they don't threaten.
The BS about one handed vs two-handed is prety abstract and a little above the rule's ability to extrapolate it out. Also, glancing above, Aventi says to ignore B's round if he is in a grapple, which you do not.
Ah, I ment the Ignore B´s round just to fasten the explanation- Assume that B makes Escape Artist or CMB against but A wins.
And well, it might be: yes quite abstract! but quite true anyway.
|
|
I think I understand now (though had to look up the IMproved Grapple and Greater Grapple feats (the latter which is new to PF it seems)
3. D attacks A = A takes damage because A cant attack back = hands are tied
What do you mean by "because A can't attack back"?
6. D moves to A´s threatened square = A can take AoO because he has one hand free
A can't take an AoO because he is grappling, whether he has one hand free or not. He can threaten the square by a strict reading of the RAW, but not make AoOs.
10. With Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple feat. You get to both 2-hand Grapple and 1-hand Grapple CMB:Grapple +4
You still suffer the -4 when one handed though yes? So 1 hand grapple with those two feats would overall be at +0, and 2 handed would be +4 overall, correct?
---Thing is that A CANT attack D without the feats---
I am not sure what you mean by this, do you mean that without Greater Grapple A could not attack a foe he is not grappling against and still maintain the grapple (because without the feat that would require two Standard Actions)?
Overall, I really do think Paizo introduced unnecessary extra complexity into grappling whilst streamlining Combat manouevres overall. Its just another thing that puts me off PF RPG and makes me want to stick with 3.5.
|
|
Any houserule that wouldn't allow Charlie the Rogue to flank an enemy while this foe is grappled by his good friend Jonas the Monk would be BS imo.
I wouldn't necessarily agree, as long as the houserule allows Charlie to gain some advantage over the grappled foe, and he does already anyway; a grappled foe takes a -4 penalty to Dex, equating to a -2 to AC (the same benefit as having a +2 to attack for flanking).
3.5 didn't allow Charlie to use Adam as his flanking partner when Adam was grappling Barry (especially as Adam and Barry are in the same square in 3.5) - however Charlie got the benefit that Barry lost his Dex bonus to AC (which admittedly, if he had no Dex bonus in the first place, means no difference) and he could also Sneak Attack (if Charlie was a rogue).
Well, just further reading, discussing and thinking the situation.
I would like to suggest then some (house?)rules to this.
Rule 1) Able to threaten while grappling with one-hand [as you said, will be quite strict RAW reading but since it allows this, ok]
Rule 2) Allows the flanking: Jonas the Monk & Charlie the Rogue can flank Ted the Fighter (Jonas is grappling Ted) [In grapple, they speak about dragging - in this case Ted - next to adjacent square, if you were succesful last round. You can do this by doing "move" action... but anyway, lets just say now flanking is possible maybe]
Rule 3)... well, I can maybe say that AoO is not possible but then... well, the threaten issue :S
And to your questions:
one-handed gives you -4 penalty and 2 feats give you +4 addiotional. They undo each other. two-hand grapple, he would have +4 = so yes correct. Just that if in 2nd round and still grapple: he get +5
About the feat: yes, since Greater Grapple allows you to make grapple action and something else if you wish -> without the feat, it would be just 2 standard action, which is not possible
-4 Dex = -2 AC # +2 flanking bonus... well yes. As this is not clear, well just need to leave it up to GM to decide how to handle. Just my thinking but not everybody always think the same way :)
------------
The man in cleaning duty of random dungeon
|
|
I would like to suggest then some (house?)rules to this.
Rule 1) Able to threaten while grappling with one-hand [as you said, will be quite strict RAW reading but since it allows this, ok]
Rule 2) Allows the flanking: Jonas the Monk & Charlie the Rogue can flank Ted the Fighter (Jonas is grappling Ted) [In grapple, they speak about dragging - in this case Ted - next to adjacent square, if you were succesful last round. You can do this by doing "move" action... but anyway, lets just say now flanking is possible maybe]
That seems to be the RAW, so no house rule needed - basically if you are able to threaten (have a weapon in hand, or have IMproved UNarmed Strike feat or are a Monk) you can threaten when grappling (you just can't make AoO, but could help flank)
Rule 3)... well, I can maybe say that AoO is not possible but then... well, the threaten issue :S
As intimated by the OP, there are other benefits to Threatening squares other than gaining AoO, so it is still useful to be able to Threaten even if you can't make AoOs.
Having read a bit though, I am not sure that IMproved Unarmed Strike feat gives you the ability to strike with your feet (i.e. kick), only the Monk seems able to do this (according to RAW)!
So in response to OP's question 1) IMHO yes you can use a grappling ally to help you flank the foe grappling your ally, but only if your ally:
a) is grappling one handed and has a weapon in his free hand
b) is grappling one handed and has the Improved Unarmed Feat
c) is grappling with one or two hands and is a Monk (and so even with only his legs free he could threaten with his knees and feet)
Well at least if I ever do play PF again I will have that figured out, not an issue in 3.5 though.
Ok so it seems that most of us agree more or less that grappled characters threaten the area around them in a familiar way they would threaten it otherwise (if they are holding an onehanded weapon, have a free hand and improved unarmed etc...)
Considering my first question what is your opinion?
A PC with both unarmed spec and grapple spec gains :
1) +4 damage
2) +2 damage they do not stack
3) there is no grapple spec it is a mistake that needs errata.
I whould also like to mention that weapon focus also states that can be taken for grapple. I guess that means that you gain a +1 to your grapple checks... right?
One extra question :
A grappled character takes -4 to dexterity
"Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity."
This measn that escape artist also takes a -2 penalty since it is affected by Dex.
The pinned character is considered flat footed and the effects of pinned and grapple do not stuck since pinned is a more severe comndition:
"A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is flat-footed. 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."
This by RAW means that a pinned character has a greater chance to use escape artist than a grappled one by +2(from the -4 dex). This is something that needs to be fixed. Am I right?
Number 2)
They don´t stack because they are clearly defined in this case. Either way you take a)Weapon Spec : Unarmed Strike or b) Weapon Spec : Grapple.
Weapon focus to grapple +1 is also true. So W-F: Grapple +1 to check and W-SS : Grapple +2 damage
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You guys are making this too complicated.
If You Are Grappled: ... Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as ... make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach,
It's that simple. You can attack any creature you can reach. That means you threaten them.
Those creatures within reach have absolutely no freakin clue whether you intend to grapple with one hand or two, or whether you intend to attack them. But since you can attack them, you do threaten them - which also means you flank them (when apprpriate).
But you still cannot take AoOs because the Grappled condition explicitly says so.
It really is that easy.
Ahaha, yeah. We noticed that and already concluded it that : a) yes, you are able to threaten but not able to make AoO :P
The question about Weapon Focus/Weapon Specialization in Grapple is a bit more complicated.
According to the Grapple rules, you can attack with any light or one handed weapon, including unarmed. If you maintain a grapple, you can choose to do damage with
a. unarmed strike
b. armor spikes
c. light or one-handed weapon
d. natural attack
e. grappled damage equal to your unarmed strike
For options a-d, you would use your Weapon Focus/Specialization in whatever that attack is.
But for option e, you are basically squeezing, choking, twisting, bending joints, etc. - doing grapple damage without striking, hitting, biting, or spiking your enemy. In which case, your other Weapon Focus/Specialization in any of those other attacks won't help you, not even in Unarmed Strike. Just because you're a boxer, for example, who has taken Weapon Specialization (Unarmed Strike) so you can do extra damage with your punches, doesn't mean that when you're choking some guy you can apply that specialization.
So it really is a separate kind of damage, requiring a separate set of Weapon Focus and Weapon Sepcialization skills.
However, the funny thing is that you don't need to do it. You can just speicalize in Unarmed Strikes and get the full benefit. Grapple this round, then next round if you successfully maintain the grapple you can punch the guy. You don't have to let go, or suffer the one-hand penalty because the rules say you can punch him. And since both hands are empty (you're not holding a sword, for example), you still have both hands free for maintaining the grapple.
Best of both worlds.
I would only even consider Weapon Focus/Specialization in Grapple for some guy who is ONLY a wrestler and who only trains for grappling without the "ground-n-pound" MMA mentality.
Ahaha, yeah. We noticed that and already concluded it that : a) yes, you are able to threaten but not able to make AoO :P
Ah, well then, maybe I missed that in the myriad of gratuitous examples, confusion, and occasional misinformation.
Carry on then.