Grappled, and try to Trip: Combo

[Chovesh]

#1 If I grapple someone, and maintain the grapple (as a standard action), I have 3 choices.
1. Move
2. Damage
3. Pin

But what about knocking him prone with a Trip?

For example:
I decide not to attempt (as a standard action) to maintain the grapple, and instead, I use the Trip Maneuver as my standard action. I would have started the maneuver while in the grappled condition, which is my reasoning.

If I succeed on the trip, he's no longer grappled, but only prone. And as a move action, I can draw a weapon in preparation for when he tries to stand up.

#2 If he's prone, and I have a weapon, and his standing up represents an AOO, I can then initiate a grapple as my AOO (and drop the weapon I'm wielding in the process). However, being prone gives an attacker a +4 "Melee Attack" (while a Combat Maneuver is in place of a "Melee Attack". So it does not seem that I would gain any benefit from trying to grapple a prone defender as his loss to AC is not specifically defined as being Dexterity based.

Yet it also states regarding 'Miscellaneous Modifiers' that "Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD" So it's CMD should be 4 less, (meaning it is a 'wash' if I try to grapple him with one arm instead of two, as this gives a -4 penalty to the one-armed attempt).

#3 If an ally has someone else grappled, and I try to trip the opponent, then his CMD goes down by -4 (dexterity loss). Yet it also says, A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple.

Now is a "Combat Maneuver Check" only something made by the attacker, or is it something that 'happens' and would apply if one of the two involved has this penalty? (Effectively, combining the DEX and CMC Penalty would give a -4 to CMD (-2 & -2). Which strangely enough, is equal to the penalty to AC of a prone character. (His -2 to CMChecks never applies to a grapple or escape attempt, but would seem to apply to Trip Attempts.)

#4 So now the opponent is prone AND grappled. He is -4 to Dex, -4 to AC, and -2 to Combat Maneuver Checks. This represents a -6 to his CMD to resist a pin.

#5 The prone and grappled opponent wants to stand up. His -4 penalty on attack rolls for being prone would not apply. (I guess he's able to better use his feet since his back is on the ground.) However, would he have to break the grappled condition first in order to stand up? (He's not pinned.) Or would his standing up, which triggers an AOO, somehow, and I can't find it, allow for another grapple (and even a pin) attempt? Since you are 'unarmed' (unless using one hand for the grapple) it would seem that when he stands up, (unless you have improved unarmed attack) you would not be able to do anything as your 'melee attack' such as initiate a grapple or somesuch.

This standing up part while prone seems to need a little bit of work.

If you check my math in the five cases above, please let me know if you find any errors in the reasoning.

I'm planning on letting my PC's enter into a wresting competition and want to make sure I have the rules.

[reefwood]

Chovesh wrote:

#1 If I grapple someone, and maintain the grapple (as a standard action), I have 3 choices.

1. Move
2. Damage
3. Pin

But what about knocking him prone with a Trip?

For example:
I decide not to attempt (as a standard action) to maintain the grapple, and instead, I use the Trip Maneuver as my standard action. I would have started the maneuver while in the grappled condition, which is my reasoning.

If I succeed on the trip, he's no longer grappled, but only prone. And as a move action, I can draw a weapon in preparation for when he tries to stand up.

Based on the grapple rules:

"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)."

If you decide not to make a grapple check, it would seem that the grapple ends, and therefore, you will start the maneuver without you or your target being grappled.

My reasoning for this is that the rules make the real world fit into mechanics as well as possible, but they are not a perfect replication, so even though it may seem like you could trip someone while wresting, I don't think it is allowed in the rules as written. Of course, it's always up to the DM as to what is allowed, how rules are interpreted, and house rules. Also, while wrestling, both people are probably struggling the whole time, but to make it work with rules, the grappler just needs to make a check once per round, but the target is struggling the whole time, so when the grappler gives up (i.e. stops making grapple checks), the target frees itself.

Anyway, releasing the grapple is a free action, so you can still use a standard action to Trip and move action to draw a weapon, but the target suffers no penalties from the grappled condition once the grapple is released.

[Chovesh]

"a successful check allows you to continue grappling the foe" as a STANDARD ACTION. But at the start of your turn, you and they are in the grappled condition, with you needing to take a standard action to continue it. By making a trip instead, (from the starting point of already being 'grappled') you would or should expect to have a -2 to any combat maneuver check, which balances out with the defenders -4 Dex. It winds up being 6 of one, a half dozen of the other. (Unless you are using Agile Manuevers.)

[reefwood]

Chovesh wrote:

#2 If he's prone, and I have a weapon, and his standing up represents an AOO, I can then initiate a grapple as my AOO (and drop the weapon I'm wielding in the process). However, being prone gives an attacker a +4 "Melee Attack" (while a Combat Maneuver is in place of a "Melee Attack". So it does not seem that I would gain any benefit from trying to grapple a prone defender as his loss to AC is not specifically defined as being Dexterity based.

Yet it also states regarding 'Miscellaneous Modifiers' that "Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD" So it's CMD should be 4 less, (meaning it is a 'wash' if I try to grapple him with one arm instead of two, as this gives a -4 penalty to the one-armed attempt).

I would have assumed that a +4 bonus to melee attacks also applies to any attack that can be made in place of a melee attack, such as disarm, but a grapple is a standard action, so there is definitely some difference in that.

Although, I don't think being prone gives the attacker a +4 bonus to melee attacks. I believe it gives a -4 penalty to AC, and as you stated, this would apply to CMD as well...and yes, this penalty to CMD would "even out" the -4 penalty to the check for humanoids creatures who don't have two hands free.

Chovesh wrote:

#3 If an ally has someone else grappled, and I try to trip the opponent, then his CMD goes down by -4 (dexterity loss). Yet it also says, A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple.

Now is a "Combat Maneuver Check" only something made by the attacker, or is it something that 'happens' and would apply if one of the two involved has this penalty? (Effectively, combining the DEX and CMC Penalty would give a -4 to CMD (-2 & -2). Which strangely enough, is equal to the penalty to AC of a prone character. (His -2 to CMChecks never applies to a grapple or escape attempt, but...

A check is a roll, so yes, the combat maneuver check is only made by the attacker. The attacker is trying to hit the CMD of the target, which is essentially a DC. Or an alternate AC, if that makes more sense. And either way, you don't roll anything to determine DC or AC or CMD. These are all static numbers.

I don't follow everything stated above, but both people in the grapple gain the grappled condition and all the penalties that come with it. If an outsider wants to trip one of the grapplers, the attack roll is made as normal, and the target with the grappled condition has a -2 to CMD (from the -4 to Dex).

[Mojorat]

I think the premis of this is Flawed. a Couple things.
Theres no advantage to Grappling somone First then Tripping them (unless You have Greater Grapple which changs things) but assuming No feats or Just imp grapple and Imp trip There is no advantage

Pc Grappls Target
Pc decides he is going to trip the target next round, by doing so he is deciding to not maintain the grapple. the Victim looses all penalties and is not grappled. Then you Attempt your Trip.

( the Exception here is that if you have Greater Grapple you could Grapple somone as a Move action, then Trip them with your standard stndard)

Secondly I dont see the point of the AOO reference in your above example since you cant grapple somone in as an AOO.

Ie Tripping somone then standing over them with a weapon drawn doesnt Provide any benefits to grappling when its the oponents Turn. There is also no reason to drop your weapon if it is 1 handed as you can pin somone with one arm.

[James Risner]

Chovesh wrote:

#1 If I grapple someone, and Trip?

#2 initiate a grapple as my AOO

#3 ally has someone else grappled, and I try to trip ... his CMD goes down by -4 (dexterity loss). ... grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks

#5 However, would he have to break the grappled condition first in order to stand up?

1) You would need to release (Free Action) the grab then perform the Trip.

2) You can not take a standard action (or move action with Greater Grapple) on an AoO, so you can not take an AoO Grapple.

3) CMD != Combat Maneuver Check. Checks are when you are the aggressor. CMD is a static value. So he wouldn't take the -2 penalty from grapple on his CMD.

5) He could stand up (with whatever penalties he has at the time) and take the AoO without breaking the Grapple. If he wanted to move to a non-adjacent square, he would need to break the grapple.

[Chovesh]

Mojorat wrote:

Secondly I dont see the point of the AOO reference in your above example since you cant grapple somone in as an AOO.

If you are unarmed, you don't get an AOO without the appropriate feat: Improved Unarmed Strike.

James Risner wrote:

1) You would need to release (Free Action) the grab then perform the Trip.

Why? You are point blank with him, why not trip him while he is grappled (and where you lose the trip condition once you do, after the act which was a choice to 'not maintain' the grapple, as opposed to choosing to drop the grapple as a free action). The classic 'take down' while grappling? Either way you lose the grapple condition for 'trying' to trip, It seems that starting the grapple shouldn't require the grapple be dropped first. However, as I point out, with or without the grapple being present, it is a wash regarding the overall mathematical effects.

James Risner wrote:

2) You can not take a standard action (or move action with Greater Grapple) on an AoO, so you can not take an AoO Grapple.

I'm confusing Trip (which can be in place of a melee attack) vs the standard action.

[Mojorat]

Don't get me wrong, if you havengratervgrapple and impmgrapple you can combine them to rally screw an over. Trippingnthem firstvthen grappling in the same round would pretty much ensurevcontrol.

Butbthebexampke you have above doesn't work.

Trying tondo any of it with none of the improved featsvwould also trigger a lot of aoo

[James Risner]

Chovesh wrote:

Why?

Because it doesn't say you can. Without a rule laying out how this would work, you end up releasing before starting the Trip.

For example, to maintain the Grapple one must use one's standard action to maintain the Grapple. If one does not, one is no longer grappling. When you start the Trip, you did not start the Grapple maintenance and therefore are no longer grappling.

In order to (by "RAW") do it the way you suggest, there would need to be a rule stating "you can maintain them in the Grapple condition to the end of the next round unless you continue to use and action to maintain the Grapple" or something similar specifying it lasts until the end of the round (so when you Trip it is still present.) There is no rule like this to my knowledge.

[reefwood]

Chovesh wrote:

James Risner wrote:

1) You would need to release (Free Action) the grab then perform the Trip.

Why? You are point blank with him, why not trip him while he is grappled (and where you lose the trip condition once you do, after the act which was a choice to 'not maintain' the grapple, as opposed to choosing to drop the grapple as a free action). The classic 'take down' while grappling? Either way you lose the grapple condition for 'trying' to trip, It seems that starting the grapple shouldn't require the grapple be dropped first. However, as I point out, with or without the grapple being present, it is a wash regarding the overall mathematical effects.

Why? Because that is how the rules work. I'm not sure if you're having trouble understanding the rules, or if you disagree with them?

Another way to think of this type of situation is with spells that have a duration of concentration. Each round that you use a standard action on your turn to concentrate on the spell, the effect continues. The moment you use a standard action to do something else, such as cast another spell or make an attack, the "concentrated" spell ends immediately. It does not continue to have an effect during your new standard action.

Now, that is how it usually works with spells that have a duration of concentration, but there are exceptions. Some spells have a duration of "concentration +X rounds" and maybe there are other ways (feats? class features?) to make these spells last longer too. But if a spell only lasts as long as you concentrate, it ends as soon as you use a standard action to do something else.

If you simply disagree with the rules... well, going back to grappling, you could think of it as needing to be a really good wrestler to trip someone while wrestling. Someone who isn't trained as a wrestler can wrap up an opponent but doesn't have enough skill to also trip them while wrapped up. But a trained wrestler (i.e. Grapple feats) has the skill to wrap someone up easier than someone not trained, so they can spend some of their effort doing other things too, like tripping. Does that help?

[James Risner]

reefwood wrote:

Why? Because that is how the rules work. I'm not sure if you're having trouble understanding the rules, or if you disagree with them?

Neither, I disagree with you on whether or not that is "how the rules work".

Specifically, I believe the rules work as I said:
While maintain grapple, if you choose to not use your standard to Grapple you release the enemy as a free action before you perform your standard action.

You asked me to explain WHY the rules work this way. I attempted to do so.

[reefwood]

James Risner wrote:

reefwood wrote:

Why? Because that is how the rules work. I'm not sure if you're having trouble understanding the rules, or if you disagree with them?

Neither, I disagree with you on whether or not that is "how the rules work".

Specifically, I believe the rules work as I said:
While maintain grapple, if you choose to not use your standard to Grapple you release the enemy as a free action before you perform your standard action.

You asked me to explain WHY the rules work this way. I attempted to do so.

I think you are confused by my post because it came after your post, but it was a response that I started before you posted, and it was a response to the person who opened this thread (Chovesh). Not your post. Chovesh is the person I quoted, but that person was replying to one of your earlier posts, so perhaps therein lies the confusion.

My response essentially says the same thing as yours. I was just using other rules and real-world examples to try and explain how rule works and why it does work that way.