|
This question has come up a few times, and I can't find an official ruling in the Core Rulebook.
In order to pin an opponent, a grappler needs to make two successful grapple checks, one to establish the grapple, and one to maintain. Does the grappled character then need to make two successful checks to break grapple in order to be entirely free from it? In other words, if a pinned character makes one successful CMB or Escape Artist check, is he simply moved from the pinned condition back to the grappled condition, or is he totally out of the grapple altogether? The latter is the way we've been playing it, but one player has been making a huge fuss about that, so for the time being I've decided to meet him in the middle and house rule that it will stay as we've been doing it, but on a natural 20, the character can break out of both the grapple and the pin (and conversely, on a natural 1, the character takes a -4 on his next attempt to break grapple). But I would like to know if this is specifically clarified anywhere in the rules.
It seems to me, rereading the grapple rules, that you move from pinned to clear out of the grapple but I don't find the rules exceedingly clear either way.
|
I agree. The pinned condition description says that a pinned creature can attempt to "free itself" but says nowhere what happens if it succeeds, so the rule, if it is such, is incomplete. For lack of a different defined action, it looks as if "free itself" means that the pinned creature can try to break the grapple.
I suggest FAQ-ing it if you're that curious. >.> *does so*
It seems to me, rereading the grapple rules, that you move from pinned to clear out of the grapple but I don't find the rules exceedingly clear either way.
I'm fairly sure this is what happens, as grappling isn't really composed of multiple "steps" that you have to break individually. The person being pinned is being grappled with more penalties heaped on to it (AKA If you were grappled and have been pinned go see the condition on what other limitations you have until you make your roll to break free).
For it being not clear, if you are trying to read something into it or looking for something else I could see that I guess. But I wouldn't say I find the rules particularly "muddy" or unclear just reading them and taking them at what they say either.
|
|
I guess part of the dilemma is how much of the 3.5 SRD is still intact beyond what is explicitly written in the core rulebook? After all, in the 3.5 version, it explicitly states that if you succeed in breaking out of a pin, you are still grappled. And while the Pathfinder core doesn't explicitly include that, it doesn't expressly refute it either. And the Pathfinder version does still require multiple steps to establish a pin. If it takes more than one step to establish a pin, and only one to get out of everything, that seems to stack the deck in favor of the grapplee over the grappler, especially since neither the grappled nor pinned conditions confer any kind of penalty to the CMB to escape, and only a minimal penalty to an Escape Artist check to escape(and even worse, the pinned condition doesn't give any greater penalty to break out than the grappled condition, which is the very least that it *should* do).
I guess part of the dilemma is how much of the 3.5 SRD is still intact beyond what is explicitly written in the core rulebook? After all, in the 3.5 version, it explicitly states that if you succeed in breaking out of a pin, you are still grappled. And while the Pathfinder core doesn't explicitly include that, it doesn't expressly refute it either. And the Pathfinder version does still require multiple steps to establish a pin. If it takes more than one step to establish a pin, and only one to get out of everything, that seems to stack the deck in favor of the grapplee over the grappler, especially since neither the grappled nor pinned conditions confer any kind of penalty to the CMB to escape, and only a minimal penalty to an Escape Artist check to escape(and even worse, the pinned condition doesn't give any greater penalty to break out than the grappled condition, which is the very least that it *should* do).
Do not even go to the 3.5 SRD, it means nothing in regards to PFRPG. Even though PFRPG is based off of 3.5 and you want to think it matters, the truth is PPFRPG is basically a collection of house rules that the crew of Paizo published. As such "rulings" from 3.5 have no bearing on what the PFRPG rules work like. Sometimes they sync, sometimes they don't. From a rules perspective, it is just easier to not even think 3.5 errata/FAQ rulings exist.
By no means am I belittling PFRPG, but explaining it that way is probably the easiest way to wrap your head around why 3.5 rulings mean nothing.
I know it might seem "wrong", I feel you. But it will save your sanity by not even going "there."
In answer to what you were mentioning, grappling (and tripping) was one of the more broken aspects of 3.5 combat. PFRPG was an attempt to "fix" broken rules in 3.5, changes were made to things like trip and grapple because "denial" actions aren't "fun" when used against you. As such I wouldn't be completely surprised if the "grapplee" is favored. The "grappler" gets a bonus from keeping the grapple (+5 I think right?) so it becomes harder for the "grapplee" to get out. That is the penalty the "graplee" is suffering, an opponents bonus is in effect a targets penalty.
Just agreeing with the other folks -- there's nothing that says being pinned prevents you from breaking out of a grapple as usual.