Relevant text:
If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply to use the part of its body it used in the grab to
hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself.
If a creature decides to just hold, is not gaining the grappled condition the same as reducing the grapple from a standard to a free action?
Also, if a creature holds multiple creatures is the -20 penalty stacked (-20 for the first creature, -40 for the second, etc...).
I've seen a lot of grapple posts but nothing that specifically defines what kind of action 'holding' in a grapple is.
Normally, maintaining a grapple is a standard action.
For the purposes of this, with Grab, I do not know. It seems to imply that it is a free action, but does not say it at all. Flavor-wise, I think a free action is the best, but technically I think they use a standard action at -20 to not get the penalties of the grappled condition.
Normally, maintaining a grapple is a standard action.
For the purposes of this, with Grab, I do not know. It seems to imply that it is a free action, but does not say it at all. Flavor-wise, I think a free action is the best, but technically I think they use a standard action at -20 to not get the penalties of the grappled condition.
See that's my problem, it's implied that the creature can take other actions but I haven't seen it stated anywhere.
Because, otherwise it's not that useful. You still can only grapple one creature, without taking any other attacks. If you have 10 attacks, this is pretty harsh.
You're just a little harder to hit while holding someone, not that useful.
Relevant text:
If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply to use the part of its body it used in the grab to
hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself.If a creature decides to just hold, is not gaining the grappled condition the same as reducing the grapple from a standard to a free action?
Also, if a creature holds multiple creatures is the -20 penalty stacked (-20 for the first creature, -40 for the second, etc...).
I've seen a lot of grapple posts but nothing that specifically defines what kind of action 'holding' in a grapple is.
The Grab ability which is what you are referring to allows you to make a grapple check as a free action. If you wish to keep the opponent held you still have to make regular grapple check(standard action). The free action is only there on the initial attack as a rider affect for the initial damaging blow.
Using tigers as an example:If the tiger bites you he gets to make a grapple check as a free action. If he wishes to keep you held he must use a standard action.
If the monster is using his standard action to hold opponent number one then he won't have any actions left to grab anyone else. The -20 is really only viable in a small number of situation. The best is when the grappling creature has minions to keep the other bad guys off of him. Another idea(this works against someone trying to create distance) is to grapple the victim, get your remaining attacks against whoever you want. On their turn they are unlikely to break free if you can hold them with a -20
When it is the monster's go release them as a free action, hit them and grapple them again. Rinse, repeat.
I've seen a lot of grapple posts but nothing that specifically defines what kind of action 'holding' in a grapple is.
From my reading of the rules, it still says you have to maintain the grapple (at a -20 penalty) and maintaining a grapple is a standard action.
Yes, that means that the option to grapple with a -20 penalty is basically useless compared to 3.5 D&D.
A colossal squid can only grapple one person/object at a time?
The Grab ability which is what you are referring to allows you to make a grapple check as a free action. If you wish to keep the opponent held you still have to make regular grapple check(standard action). The free action is only there on the initial attack as a rider affect for the initial damaging blow.
Using tigers as an example:If the tiger bites you he gets to make a grapple check as a free action. If he wishes to keep you held he must use a standard action.
There's a difference between holding a creature and grappling a creature.
If you're 'holding' a creature, you get a -20 on your check and can do nothing else to the creature if you succeed (other than apply constriction damage). However, you do not gain the 'grappled' condition.
If you're 'grappling' a creature, you get your full bonus, can move, pin, or apply damage, in addition to constricting. However, you gain the grappled condition.
Is the grappled condition so bad that it's worth taking the -20 for not a lot of return?
So once a Kraken grapples a halfling wizard that's it? No more attacks with the other tentacles? Even if it's just holding?
That's why I feel that just holding a creature just uses up the limb doing the grappling. Any other applicable limbs should be free to continue attacking.
Has anyone seen anything official on this?
Is the grappled condition so bad that it's worth taking the -20 for not a lot of return?
So once a Kraken grapples a halfling wizard that's it? No more attacks with the other tentacles? Even if it's just holding?
That's why I feel that just holding a creature just uses up the limb doing the grappling. Any other applicable limbs should be free to continue attacking.
Has anyone seen anything official on this?
The question has been asked before, but I don't remember any official response. It's unfortunate that they carried over the wording verbatim from 3.5.
The grappling creature is not restrained in any way since he does not have the grappled condition so if he wants to continue to attack opponent 1 I don't see why he cant. The Kraken should be free to attack surrounding enemies. Making that -20 check is going to be hard though.
|
A successful check to hold allows you to pin, damage, move, tie up... etc. But the rules are intended for opponents of similar size grappling each other with all appendages.
Particularly well-coordinated monsters (such as octopi) and large monsters (huge and bigger) should be able to make other attacks while maintaining a grapple. There's no rule that I can find to enforce this, but it should be the case.
Long post
Grab is where the -20 comes from.
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
Long post
Grab is where the -20 comes from.
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
Yeah I re-read it, and deleted the post.
|
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
While the language is not crystal clear. When I am sitting in the GM seat the bold says to me that maintaining the grapple is a free action if the creature takes the -20 to any checks to maintain the grappler is at least one size larger then the grappled.
While the language is not crystal clear. When I am sitting in the GM seat the bold says to me that maintaining the grapple is a free action if the creature takes the -20 to any checks to maintain the grappler is at least one size larger then the grappled.
I think we're pretty much in agreement that that's what it should say, at any rate.
Grab (Ex) If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. Unless otherwise noted, grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a –20 penalty on its CMB check to make and maintain the grapple, but does not gain the grappled condition itself. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature's descriptive text).
Creatures with the grab special attack receive a +4 bonus on combat maneuver checks made to start and maintain a grapple.
While the language is not crystal clear. When I am sitting in the GM seat the bold says to me that maintaining the grapple is a free action if the creature takes the -20 to any checks to maintain the grappler is at least one size larger then the grappled.
PRD: it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action.
Start yes, maintain no. There is not even any wording to suggest the creature maintains as a free action.
I don't think it is right, but that is what it is. I think the penalty should be dropped down to -15, and apply as a free action if you take the -15.
|
The question has been asked before, but I don't remember any official response. It's unfortunate that they carried over the wording verbatim from 3.5.Is the grappled condition so bad that it's worth taking the -20 for not a lot of return?
So once a Kraken grapples a halfling wizard that's it? No more attacks with the other tentacles? Even if it's just holding?
That's why I feel that just holding a creature just uses up the limb doing the grappling. Any other applicable limbs should be free to continue attacking.
Has anyone seen anything official on this?
Me neither; now, I'm not sure if 'Grab' has been rewritten or refined in Bestiary 2 (haven't got my book yet) but as written the only benefit from taking -20 to your check is that you don't gain the 'grappled' condition. And, naturally, if you only have a single attack, it's often beat to maintain the grapple (and constrict).
However, if you have more than one attack, it's best to use 'Grab' only if you can constrict (free action) and then immediately let go (rinse and repeat for the rest of the attacks). No matter that it feels (and looks, from the characters' perspective, at least) weird, though.
One solution that I've been using is giving 'Greater Grapple' for free (choker, for example) to appropriate foes, or even tweaking 'Grab' for "many-limbed" creatures (such as octopi) so that it's a free action to maintain the grapple (allowing such monsters to grab multiple opponents).
But, yeah, 'Grab' should definitely be rewritten for PF RPG.
I don´t see anything in the ability about free maintains...
Maintains are about Pinning to large degree, and this ability doesn´t change the action economy of doing that.
For creatures wanting to maximize their damage and/or number of grapple targets, full attacking/cleaving/etc to do damage and the grab each round, dropping and repeating each round is very effective and essentially keeps the targets permanently grappled while beating them up.
Alternatively, the other main benefit of not having the grappled condition yourself, is besides evading minor penalties and being able to use 2handed weapons/items, the grabber CAN MOVE. So, attacking + grab-grappling the target THEN MOVING AWAY (out of target´s reach) is well do-able. (the rules don´t really speak to any limitations on doing this, but keeping the target within YOUR OWN reach if you want to maintain their grappled condition seems reasonable)
Also take in mind that some creatures, namely the Kraken, DON´T TAKE THE -20 penalty to do this, so are very capable of grabbing one target and moving away WITH the target (target is moved adjaced when grappled, then kraken takes their move), not to mention full attacking-grab/grappling AND 5´ stepping.
It seems pretty clear that you don´t ´stack´ the -2 from previous attacks - Because it´s only a penalty TO THE ONE ATTACK, not to ALL attacks you may take that round.
...Even if you don´t see many Monsters actually taking the -20 penalty when fighting PCs (because it´s too big a penalty), it still has value in an ´ecology´ way, e.g. explaining mechanically how monsters gather ´prey´. CR-par PCs are too much of a problem to really be ´prey´, ie. an enjoyable meal, but plenty of creatures COULD be predictably grabbed with that penalty. (predicatably =/= 100%)
Lots.
So let me put this out there, take a creature with 10 attacks, grab, and constrict, attacks a player.
Is it cheesy/cheap/legal to attack/grapple/constrict/release x9, and then attack/grapple/constrict/hold with the 10th attack, then release the grapple at the start of the next round and then repeat ad nausium?
|
So let me put this out there, take a creature with 10 attacks, grab, and constrict, attacks a player.
Is it cheesy/cheap/legal to attack/grapple/constrict/release x9, and then attack/grapple/constrict/hold with the 10th attack, then release the grapple at the start of the next round and then repeat ad nausium?
Cheesy, maybe, but effective. And exactly how you're supposed to run these creatures.
Now here's where it gets cool: Nothing says you can't execute 10 attacks, making a free grapple check with each one, then drop all 10 at the start of your next round and do the same thing all over again.
So now look at the big picture of What You Expect Grab To Do versus What Grab Does, you see the net result is the same. Each round, your Great Tentacled Beast is attacking anything within reach, grappling anything it gets hold of. The targets you released at the beginning of the round are *at least* going to get targeted with another attack, if not grappled again.
Cheesy, maybe, but effective. And exactly how you're supposed to run these creatures.
Now here's where it gets cool: Nothing says you can't execute 10 attacks, making a free grapple check with each one, then drop all 10 at the start of your next round and do the same thing all over again.
So now look at the big picture of What You Expect Grab To Do versus What Grab Does, you see the net result is the same. Each round, your Great Tentacled Beast is attacking anything within reach, grappling anything it gets hold of. The targets you released at the beginning of the round are *at least* going to get targeted with another attack, if not grappled again.
So a creature with 10 attacks could attack Player A 3 times (attempting to grapple and constrict with each one, good luck), Player B 3 times (with grab/constrict), Player C (with grab/constrict) twice, and Player D twice (with grab/constrict). At the end of its turn it could let go of any or all of these (though having multiple tentacles on the same person doesn’t have any extra effect so it might as well let go of some).
At the start of its next turn the creature can either maintain the grapple on one character, or let go of everyone and attack everyone again. If the creature decides to maintain it only inflicts grapple/constrict damage as per one tentacle, no matter how many made the initial grab.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So a creature with 10 attacks could attack Player A 3 times (attempting to grapple and constrict with each one, good luck), Player B 3 times (with grab/constrict), Player C (with grab/constrict) twice, and Player D twice (with grab/constrict).
Correct!
At the end of its turn it could let go of any or all of these (though having multiple tentacles on the same person doesn’t have any extra effect so it might as well let go of some).
It can end those grapples at any time, since doing so is a free action. It can end the grapple after inflicting constrict damage so that its next attack doesn't take penalties for being grappled. It can end those grapples at the start of its next turn so that it is free to take a full attack action.
At the start of its next turn the creature can either maintain the grapple on one character, or let go of everyone and attack everyone again. If the creature decides to maintain it only inflicts grapple/constrict damage as per one tentacle, no matter how many made the initial grab.
Correct, but unless the creature has some reason to want to hold on to a single target (like it was directed to capture someone) it would just execute another full attack.