I'm back to not getting grapple. :(
I get the general gist, but there are a lot of specific cases where I'm not sure what the intent is.
Since a grappled creatures takes (among other things) a -4 Dex penalty, and Dex applies to CMD, does that mean that continuing a grapple is basically CMB + 5 vs. CMD - 2?
If a creature takes the -20 CMB penalty to use only a single tentacle/claw/whatever to conduct the grapple, can it grapple multiple foes simultaneously? A close reading of the rules suggests it cannot, but it's kind of weird that a kraken snatch up grab two sailors at once.
A creature grappling normally can, as a standard action, make a grapple check to move its speed and bring along a grappled victim. What are the options for a creature taking the -20 penalty, regarding moving? It's not grappled so it should be able to move normally. It'd be odd to be able to bring along grappled victims with impunity. On the other hand, it'd be odd to have to make checks to bring them along, since that's little different from a creature grappling without the -20 penalty.
|
First, here's a relevant link.
Since a grappled creatures takes (among other things) a -4 Dex penalty, and Dex applies to CMD, does that mean that continuing a grapple is basically CMB + 5 vs. CMD - 2?
Nope, the penalty specifically mentions that it doesn't apply to checks made to maintain or break a grapple.
If a creature takes the -20 CMB penalty to use only a single tentacle/claw/whatever to conduct the grapple, can it grapple multiple foes simultaneously? A close reading of the rules suggests it cannot, but it's kind of weird that a kraken snatch up grab two sailors at once.
The kraken (or any other creature) cannot maintain a grapple against multiple foes. It can grapple multiple foes (through various means, most prominent of which is a full-attack action), but when it comes time to maintain a grapple, it can only focus on one target (regardless of the -20).
Sure, this might not mesh with how you picture a kraken (or whatever) combating a ship (or whatever), but examine how such a creature's tactics are optimize while disassociating that creature from your mental image of how that creature fights. To use the kraken as an example, it doesn't need to maintain a grapple from round to round, it destroys more ship/sailor by full attacking each round, triggering a grab, which triggers a constrict. From the meta perspective, nothing the kraken has ever encountered has survived being grabbed; it just grabs once, drops 'em, then moves on to the next target, collecting food (or whatever) when all the living targets are dead.
A creature grappling normally can, as a standard action, make a grapple check to move its speed and bring along a grappled victim. What are the options for a creature taking the -20 penalty, regarding moving?
If the creature chooses to maintain the grapple (-20 penalty or not) it does so as a standard action and can choose "move" as the effect of maintaining the grapple.
creatures with REACH who are either krakens, taking the -20 grab option,
or are otherwise un-grappled while their target(s) are are grappled,
CAN move their opponents without making a special check (while they move self, if looked at meta-wise as contiuous action rather than segmented action)
when you initiate a grab, your target is moved next to you.
imagine a kraken next to Billy. kraken uses move action to move away, but still within reach, grabs Billy, who is automatically moved to an adjacent square. Billy now has the grappled condition and is next to the Kraken, and has moved the distance of the kraken`s reach from his original spot...
the kraken drops the grapple and re-grabs Billy. rinse and repeat. the kraken should be able to Move faster if it uses the Maintain:Move option, or it could proceed to Pin while moving away if it wishes at a slower rate (but that might mean moving away from other tasty humans it could be multiattack full attacking, dropping and re-grabbing them each round)
OR, reverse the order of actions when looked at as segmented turns:
kraken now starts next to billy, and proceeds to grab him right away, THEN uses a move action to move to the limit of his reach. Billy is still grappled by the kraken`s tentacles, and has the Grappled condition. When the kraken repeats, Billy is drawn towards the kraken and then the Kraken moves away with Billy still held by it`s tentacle.
the difference is that during one sequence, billy is adjacent to the kraken during his turn, after being grabbed by the kraken (and so can attack it directly), while in the other the kraken is apart from billy so unless billy can match it`s reach he can`t attack it during his turn (though the Feat Strike Back allows for Readied Attacks in this case). since the grapple rules make special allowance for always being able to grapple back to escape/reverse (and you never provoke for doing so), that is his main physical option. this seems in accordance with the imagery of a kraken holding mere humans at length with it`s tentacles.
If the kraken takes the -20 penalty on the first target and makes the check, does he automatically have to take the penalty to grapple another creature?
I'm of the opinion that a monster who takes the -20 penalty option successfully does not have to maintain (since creatures who are not considered grappled do not have to maintain a grapple). Essentially, it gets to maintain the hold for free.
If the kraken takes the -20 penalty on the first target and makes the check, does he automatically have to take the penalty to grapple another creature?
No, of course not.
If the kraken takes the -20 penalty on the first target and makes the check, does he automatically have to take the penalty to grapple another creature?No, that penalty applies only to the appendage that is conducting the -20 grapple.
If each appendage has it's own penalty can I use two appendages to get a bonus to my grapple checks?
PS: Before you guys think I have lost my mind I am playing devil's advocate.
I'm of the opinion that a monster who takes the -20 penalty option successfully does not have to maintain (since creatures who are not considered grappled do not have to maintain a grapple). Essentially, it gets to maintain the hold for free.
... WHERE do you come up with this stuff?
Re the original post:
You're confused because there are no grapple rules for dealing with non humanoids. The rules FOR humanoids are a mess. For non humanoids they're non existent.
I'm of the opinion that a monster who takes the -20 penalty option successfully does not have to maintain (since creatures who are not considered grappled do not have to maintain a grapple). Essentially, it gets to maintain the hold for free.... WHERE do you come up with this stuff?
Re the original post:
You're confused because there are no grapple rules for dealing with non humanoids. The rules FOR humanoids are a mess. For non humanoids they're non existent.
<no longer playing devils advocate>RD normally takes the most powerful interpretation of an ability and goes with that.
@RD: You always have to make a grapple check to maintain the hold. The grapple check is because you are holding something/someone and you want to keep it held. The beauty of the -20 grapple check is that your free appendages can be used to smack the remaining party members around.
<back in devil's advocate mode>
|
|
Before you guys think I have lost my mind I am playing devil's advocate.
I'll bite. (Even though I can't imagine the context under which two penalties create a bonus.)
If each appendage has it's own penalty can I use two appendages to get a bonus to my grapple checks?
Not a bonus, but you can (if, for example, you're making a full attack) use the second appendage to make another grab at -20. (So you have additional, or "bonus" options, but not a bonus in the traditional meaning of the word.)
(Or, if it helps you advocate for the devil.)
If each appendage has it's own penalty can I use two appendages to get a bonus to my grapple checks?
No, the ability inherent in grab allows for one appendage at -20, or you can conduct the grapple normally (using "all" appendages) without penalty. Anything in between is a house rule and is unsupported in any official capacity.
The beauty of the -20 grapple check is that your free appendages can be used to smack the remaining party members around.
I see absolutely nothing preventing a grappling creature from attacking creatures outside the grapple under the normal grapple rules, save the standard action to maintain (which, according to you, must still be spent even with the -20 option). Under your interpretation, the -20 option removes a few minor penalties (the grapple condition). Under my interpretation, tentacled beasts can actually be, you know, scary, and grapple multiple victims--as they should.
Back in the v3.X days, I used to think the -20 option was primarily so a grappling creature could drag away its victim with impunity, or else to grapple multiple creatures at once. Though since you can move a grapple normally in Pathfinder, the former case is not nearly as relevant as it used to be.
Before you guys think I have lost my mind I am playing devil's advocate.I'll bite. (Even though I can't imagine the context under which two penalties create a bonus.)
If each appendage has it's own penalty can I use two appendages to get a bonus to my grapple checks?Not a bonus, but you can (if, for example, you're making a full attack) use the second appendage to make another grab at -20. (So you have additional, or "bonus" options, but not a bonus in the traditional meaning of the word.)
(Or, if it helps you advocate for the devil.)
If each appendage has it's own penalty can I use two appendages to get a bonus to my grapple checks?No, the ability inherent in grab allows for one appendage at -20, or you can conduct the grapple normally (using "all" appendages) without penalty. Anything in between is a house rule and is unsupported in any official capacity.
Sorry for not being clear. Under the bonus example I was not taking the negative penalty. I am using two tentacles/arms/etc to grapple one target. If each appendage gets its own penalty instead of a penalty to the creature then why can multiple appendages give bonuses.
First, here's a relevant link.
One thing caught my attention here:
"You can give the target of your grapple, the Secondary Grappler, the pinned condition, while you remain grappled. Awesome. Remember though, pinned does not stack with grapple. To keep the target pinned, you must choose the pin grapple action each round that you maintain a grapple, or you can tie them up!"
Is this correct, and is so, why? The way I read it is that when you pin someone, they're pinned, and in the following rounds, you can damage, move, &c.; they're still pinned until they manage to escape from pin and "into" grapple.
Nope, the penalty specifically mentions that it doesn't apply to checks made to maintain or break a grapple.
I'm not sure you're right:
A grappled creature is restrained by a creature, trap, or effect. Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple.
I read this as 1) -4 Dex (affecting your CMD); 2) -2 attack (affecting your CMB, except for grappling). So the grappled condition doesn't make it any more difficult to escape that grapple, but it does make it easier for the opponent to damage/move/pin you.
I think your reading was the intended one, but they overdid it, I think, with the situational penalties.
CMB vs. CMD, but...
-4 CMB with only one hand
+5 CMB to maintain in subsequent rounds
-4 Dex for both*
* perhaps does not apply to grappling?
-2 to attacks**
** does not apply to grappling
lose Dex if pinning
+2 CMD if invisible
It's a lot to keep in mind in a fluid combat situation, which doesn't come up all the time (so people aren't as accustomed to it as they are to "cover is +4 AC", "flanking is +2 attack" &c.)
If the creature chooses to maintain the grapple (-20 penalty or not) it does so as a standard action and can choose "move" as the effect of maintaining the grapple.
So you're saying that a creature grappling with the -20 penalty cannot move, unless it succeeds on a grapple check (or releases the opponent)?
Grappled is basically:
-4 Dex (might not apply to grappling)
-2 attacks (does not apply to grappling)
can't move
The -20 penalty lets you grappled without suffering the grappled condition... but you still can't move, and you can't grapple multiple opponents?
That means that all you get for taking a -20 penalty is avoiding the -2 to attacks (that don't apply to what you're primarily doing anyway), and the -4 Dex?
That seems awfully little benefit for such a huge penalty.
Just to point out...
The Kraken doesn´t take the -20 penalty,
due to their Tenacious Grappler SQ they get the benefits without the penalty.
@RavingDork: Needing to Maintain a Grapple (to progress the Grapple sequence) is not dependent on having the Grapple Condition yourself. That condition is detailed in appendix, needing to Standard Action Maintain the Grapple is simply part of every Grapple. As mentioned many times, Grab creatures can Drop + Re-Grab every round, ´maintaining´ multiple Creatures Grappled but not moving to Pin them.
Grappled Creatures can already ATTACK creatures outside the Grapple (e.g. Tentacle Grab monster attacks and Grabs Target 1, and are now Grappled themselves, they can continue their Full Attack against Targets 2 3 and 4, potentially Grabbing all of them as well. Besides minor penalties, the only limitation of the Grappled Condition on attacking targets outside the Grapple (besides no 2 handed attacks, which doesn´t apply to non-Humanoids) is that they can´t take AoO´s.
As I wrote, besides all the minor penalties and AoO´s, the other signifigant benefit I see of not being Grappled youself is that you lose the no-Movement restriction, thus can Move AFTER Grappling somebody. There is no wording which would make the Grappled condition of your target go away before your next turn (if you don´t Maintain it) no matter how far away you move, though I feel it´s a reasonable house-rule to require keeping them within your threat range, i.e. where your tentacles could presumably be grappling them ala imagery of Krakens holding sailers in the air well away from their main body. (this would be a great Errata, putting reasonable limitations on it, while highlighting the utility that Krakens and -20 Grabbers get out of not being Grappled themselves, i.e. suggesting tactics)
Independent of Krakens/-20 Grabbers, ALL Grapplers with Reach (including Lunge) can in fact move their target without making a separate check to do so... Because your target is moved adjacent to you when you succeed on a Grapple check, you can essentially move them (Reach - 5´) the first round for free (since you can´t Move yourself if you are Grappled, normal Grapplers need to either use the Move option of Maintain to move any further while Maintaining the Grapple, OR drop the grapple, move up to (Reach-5´) and re-Initiate the Grapple WITHOUT the +5 bonus for Maintaining a Grapple... which is worse than maintaining the grapple). If you use the Move option of Maintaining a Grapple, you can move them and yourself up to your Movement rate. If you have Greater Grapple you can move them 2x Movement rate per round, or (Reach-5´) + Movement rate the first round (if they started out within reach). If using the Full Attack Grab approach, dropping and re-Initiating every round, ALL targets are moved adjacent to Grappler the first round (up to Reach -5´) so the Kraken could then 5´ step away (meaning targets can´t counter melee attack unless they have 10´ reach or want to Ready an attack via Strike Back Feat), repeating each subsequent round, moving all targets 5´ in the process... Which seems a cool imagery for a Kraken appearing and slowly but surely pulling multiple targets off a ship and into the water with it.
I think what´s important for some who find the dynamics counterintuitive (ie dropping and re-init´íng FulL Attack Grab) is to view it as all action being on-going rather than the abstraction of actions in turns. A tentacle grab monster essentially can keep multiple opponents continually grappled... PINNING one is more concentration, but if the targets can´t move and are hampered in their actions that seems sufficient for the needed imagery.
|
|
One thing caught my attention here:
I admit that what you point out as a possible interpretation is indeed a possible interpretation. I contend that my advice (my interpretation) allows the grapple rules to work (rather fluidly, once understood), while other interpretations cause the system to break down.
Based on that experience, I assert that the interpretation that I present as fact (also known as my advice) is how the rules work.
I admit that what you point out as a possible interpretation is indeed a possible interpretation. I contend that my advice (my interpretation) allows the grapple rules to work (rather fluidly, once understood), while other interpretations cause the system to break down.
Based on that experience, I assert that the interpretation that I present as fact (also known as my advice) is how the rules work.
How does it break down if you allow pin to last until escaped rather than having to be maintained every round?
Also, is there any reason for the pointedly fastidious phrasing of the post I'm quoting? It makes you sound annoyed and/or arrogant.
|
|
How does it break down if you allow pin to last until escaped rather than having to be maintained every round?
Well, I suppose one man's "break down" might be another's "works just fine," but — and again this is based on my experience — allowing a static pinned condition raises questions regarding other actions taken by the pinning character, questions that are removed if that character has to maintain the pin each round.
Also, is there any reason for the pointedly fastidious phrasing of the post I'm quoting? It makes you sound annoyed and/or arrogant.
Other than trying to be as precise as possible, all I can say is that's how I type. I'm certainly not annoyed (I would just go away, or not post in the first place). I won't say I'm not arrogant, but I'm definitely not trying to be.
Some more Grapple clarification needed:
I've grappled an opponent with both hands free. Next round, is this order of events correct?
1/ I choose to maintain the grapple so I roll CMB+5 and succeed
2/ I use a move action to draw a light weapon.
3/ I attack the grappled opponent with the light weapon (as the standard action).
I suppose this isn't right because I've somehow dodged the -4 penalty (only one free hand). Does maintaining the grapple imply that I have to perform the standard action first?
Also, the move action that's available each turn is allowed for everything but actually moving (since that's an option under the Grapple standard action). Right?
Some more Grapple clarification needed:
I've grappled an opponent with both hands free. Next round, is this order of events correct?
1/ I choose to maintain the grapple so I roll CMB+5 and succeed
2/ I use a move action to draw a light weapon.
3/ I attack the grappled opponent with the light weapon (as the standard action).I suppose this isn't right because I've somehow dodged the -4 penalty (only one free hand). Does maintaining the grapple imply that I have to perform the standard action first?
Also, the move action that's available each turn is allowed for everything but actually moving (since that's an option under the Grapple standard action). Right?
Maintaining the grapple is a standard action, so by #3, you've already used up both your actions for the turn. The grappler does not get to make normal attacks while holding someone. They only get to do constrict damage (when they make a successful check to maintain the grapple) and then can choose "damage" as their grapple action (which does damage as per a hit with their unarmed strike, natural attack, armor spikes, or a light or onehanded weapon that they're holding). Note that this damage is done automatically if you choose the "damage" option - you don't need to make a separate attack roll.
In your scenario in question, there's no advantage to starting the grapple with both hands free. However, you can take the move action to draw a light or one-handed weapon before the standard action to maintain the grapple, allowing you to deal damage with it after a successful grapple check.
Oh, so the standard action for maintaining a grapple doesn't need to be one's first action in a given turn. I visualized "maintaining" a bit to literally, I think. Thanks, makes sense now!
By the way, the "move" action that's left over after/before maintaining the grapple can never be used to actually move (unless the grapple hasn't started yet, or has ended). Right?
Also, does the Pinned condition imply a prone position? (Since the character cannot move.)
When a pinned character succeeds in breaking the pin (and goes back to grappled), this consequently implies a "standing up" as well? Which in turn should provoke an AoO but it doesn't.