Okay, I am sorry for bringing this up yet again, but it just seems like there's some horrific disconnect between what I have in my head and what happens in the game.
Let's take a grapple-based creature: a chuul (has grab on both primary natural attacks, has constrict).
So in combat, if it hits with it's first attack, it gets to deal damage, make a grapple check, and if it succeeds, it additionally deals constrict damage. (Based on info here and here)
At this point, it has to make a choice. Either it is done for the round, since it's used it's standard action to attack and it's now the controller of a grapple, where it can't take additional attacks by the RAW. Or it can let the grapple go as a free action and take its second attack of the round, potentially doing the same thing as above. It would then remain grappled for the rest of the round. So that's 8d6+28 damage assuming it can hit the target's AC at a +14 reliably (not usually a huge issue at level 7) and succeed on CMB checks at a +19 (same deal).
Assuming it's target didn't break out, on round 2, it could either use a standard action to maintain the grapple, and deal it's claw damage with the constrict for a 4d6+14 damage or it could let go as a free action and repeat what it did above for twice the damage (good trade, assuming it can hit on 10 or less - again not usually an issue at this level)
Well what about it's paralytic tentacles? It's apparently a move action to transfer the victim up to it's mouth and hold him there, but if the chuul does that, he will have to continue grappling and forgo his normal claw attacks.
This seems WRONG! Why would taking advantage of an ability the creature has (paralytic tentacles) put it at a huge disadvantage vs just releasing and attacking repeatedly? How come the most effective way of grappling is by letting go and grabbing repeatedly? This is true for almost every creature that grapples as a primary means of attack - releasing and grabbing is better than continuing the grapple since you lose iterative attacks...
What's more, the grapple controller loses ALL attacks and still has to make the grapple check to hold the target (dealing damage once, if at all) while the target can continue to take its full attacks freely as long as it's with a single handed weapon. Doesn't it seem like being the controller of a grapple should put you at an advantage, not a HUGE disadvantage?
How can all this be remedied? I would suggest making the grapple check to maintain grapple an "attack" equivalent instead of a standard action, and limit grapple-dependent effects (constrict, rake, etc) to triggering once per round on a successful grapple check. I would also say that the +5 to maintain grapple only applies IF you choose to only grapple that round. I think that would be much more balanced as that both solves the "constrict 5 times a round on each attack" problem and the "omg I'm grappling, but it's horrifically crippling!" problem.
Am I seeing something wrong? Am I doing something wrong? Do you think my solution is balanced?
Wow, I'm surprised to not see any opinions!
Well what about it's paralytic tentacles? It's apparently a move action to transfer the victim up to it's mouth and hold him there, but if the chuul does that, he will have to continue grappling and forgo his normal claw attacks.
Then he probably shouldn't try to eat someone until everyone else around him is pretty much subdued.
|
There's nothing that says that you can't make attacks while grappled. The only restriction is that it usually takes a standard action to make or maintain a grapple and any attacks made while grappled need to be one-handed and are made at a -2 penalty. Since Grab lets you make grapple attempts as a free action as part of an attack, you can get around the standard action restriction to establish the grapple.
So your Chuul could make a full attack, hit with the first attack, succeed in the grapple (and deal additional constrict damage), and then make its second attack at -2. (You could even use that attack on a second target, and use Grab to grapple and Constrict it as well. You'll have to let one of them go the next round, though.)
Then in the subsequent rounds, you spend a standard action to maintain the grapple at +5. If successful, as part of the Grab feature, you automatically deal damage for the attack that established the grapple. Since it also has Constrict, you automatically deal the damage listed for that ability, as well. That still leaves you with the normal action you get for maintaining a grapple, so you could use that to deal even more damage.
The tentacle ability is somewhat contradictory in that it claims it doesn't deal any damage but also deals 1d8+7 from its mandibles. I'd interpret that as it no longer does the automatic damage from Grab attack but instead does the damage for the mandibles along with the paralyze chance.
You could conceivably, attack, grapple (with constrict), release, and repeat, for four attacks worth of damage on four four attack rolls. Or you get three attacks worth of damage and a paralyze attempt for just one one attack roll at +5. Seems like a worthwhile trade to me.
Incorrect. Grappling largely favors the grappled target not the grappler.
See this FAQ.
It's silly but the OP is correct. Largely, grappling is just bad and puts the creature doing the grappling at a disadvantage. It gets really bad if you actually try to pin your target. Then, not only are you behind damage-wise but you're also losing the action economy war.
|
|
That section refers to the victim. If you're grappled you can basically do anything.
If you're the grappler you can do the following.
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).
Move
You can move both yourself and your target up to half your speed. At the end of your movement, you can place your target in any square adjacent to you. If you attempt to place your foe in a hazardous location, such as in a wall of fire or over a pit, the target receives a free attempt to break your grapple with a +4 bonus.
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.
Pin
You can give your opponent the pinned condition (see Conditions). Despite pinning your opponent, you still only have the grappled condition, but you lose your Dexterity bonus to AC.
Tie Up
If you have your target pinned, otherwise restrained, or unconscious, you can use rope to tie him up. This works like a pin effect, but the DC to escape the bonds is equal to 20 + your Combat Maneuver Bonus (instead of your CMD). The ropes do not need to make a check every round to maintain the pin. If you are grappling the target, you can attempt to tie him up in ropes, but doing so requires a combat maneuver check at a –10 penalty. If the DC to escape from these bindings is higher than 20 + the target's CMB, the target cannot escape from the bonds, even with a natural 20 on the check.
Note how none of those options are "Attack normally".
|
|
The Grab ability says that you automatically deal damage from the Grab attack whenever you successfully maintain a grapple and the Constrict ability automatically deals whenever you make a successful grapple attempt, either the initial attempt or to maintain. Neither replaces the regular action you get. You can still use that action to deal damage, move the grappled opponent, pin, etc.
Right so in the case of the chuul the OP used if he started his turn with a victim grappled he could grapple for damage once (and deal bonus constrict damage) and be done.
Alternatively, he could full attack, dealing constrict damage twice.
It gets even worse when you're looking at a creature that doesn't have constrict like a bear.
A dire bear can full attack dealing 1d6+7, 1d6+7, and 1d8+7.
Or it can maintain its grapple and deal 1d6+7.
Why would a bear ever bother grappling?
Why would a bear ever bother grappling?
To keep its prey from doing things like running away or casting spells.
The point of grappling is to limit your opponent to things like grappling too. The action economy seems bad until you also incorporate the limitations imposed on your opponent's actions. If the giant octopus is fighting five fighters, its dumb to grapple. One mage? Or even one vastly superior fighter it can beat on a grapple check? Grapple.
|
|
The point of grappling is to limit your opponent to things like grappling too. The action economy seems bad until you also incorporate the limitations imposed on your opponent's actions. If the giant octopus is fighting five fighters, its dumb to grapple. One mage? Or even one vastly superior fighter it can beat on a grapple check? Grapple.
Right, so in most situations grappling monsters shouldn't bother grappling since they will either being far weaker than the heroes (and thus will be unable to land a CMB check) or they will be stronger than the heroes and outnumbered (making grappling a terrible idea).
|
The Grab ability says that you automatically deal damage from the Grab attack whenever you successfully maintain a grapple and the Constrict ability automatically deals whenever you make a successful grapple attempt, either the initial attempt or to maintain. Neither replaces the regular action you get. You can still use that action to deal damage, move the grappled opponent, pin, etc.Right so in the case of the chuul the OP used if he started his turn with a victim grappled he could grapple for damage once (and deal bonus constrict damage) and be done.
Alternatively, he could full attack, dealing constrict damage twice.
It gets even worse when you're looking at a creature that doesn't have constrict like a bear.
A dire bear can full attack dealing 1d6+7, 1d6+7, and 1d8+7.
Or it can maintain its grapple and deal 1d6+7.
Why would a bear ever bother grappling?
So they can hold onto their prey and keep it from escaping. They have a lot of hp and can take a beating. They only have a 2 int. They are pretty focused on either catching food and eating it, or ripping something to shreds for coming near its cub.
More inteligent creatures might view the situation more tactically and realize that not every situation calls for a grapple, but when you see a greatsword-wielding fighter, you grapple him to deny the use of his best weapon.
The fundamental problem with grappling is that the rules were designed with humanoids in mind, and they quickly stop working properly as you apply them to more monstrous forms.
If a dragon or Roc cannot swoop down, grab up an adventurer, and swoop back up; or a Kraken can somehow only hold onto one sailor at a time in its countless lashing tentacles...then something is fundamentally wrong with the rules, as far as I am concerned.
My totally house-ruled solution is to allow the Grab ability to substitute for the IUS prerequisite for the Improved/Greater Grapple feat, and say that with Greater Grapple, you do not gain the Grappled condition yourself in a grapple you control. Also, that for creatures that could establish multiple grapples, they make a single maintain check against the CMD of every creature they're grappling. Absolutely none of this is remotely RAW, of course.
Right, so in most situations grappling monsters shouldn't bother grappling since they will either being far weaker than the heroes (and thus will be unable to land a CMB check) or they will be stronger than the heroes and outnumbered (making grappling a terrible idea).
Depends on how good the critter is at grappling, and who he's grappling. Mages are pretty easy to grapple, and grappling them is much more effective than just punching them, because they still get to cast after being punched.
I get the desire to try and 'fix' grappling though, because you'd think it'd work better than it does.
I think an easier fix than most others I've seen would be to change 'constrict' so that instead of doing extra damage, it just puts the target in the "currently being grappled" bucket and frees the monster's attacks up. In other words, let it be the thing that fixes the loss of multiple attacks problem.
I've started running my games where maintaining grapple replaces a melee attack with the natural weapon/hand that the grapple was initiated. Otherwise, you conduct your attacks normally (with the grappled penalties). Additionally, any special attacks that trigger in grapple (constrict, rake, etc), can only trigger once per turn.
Seems to be working so far!
The counter intuitive thing about the Pathfinder Grab ability is that critters with many attacks are better off releasing a grabbed victim at the start of Its turn to launch another full attack. This head scratching rise and repeat tactic is often better than maintaining the grapple.
Why the victim of a grapple, constricted by (in this case) the claws of the chuul, should be able to whatever he likes, included full attacks, while the monster spend actions to keep the grapple on? Please notice how this make NO SENSE AT ALL.
When I am DMing, I tend to house rules this situations basing on the circumstances, but keeping in mind that a grappled creatures cannot have advantages over the 'grappler'.
Pathfinder should really take care of this!
|
|
The recent 'clarifications' served only to make grappling even worse.
So now if spend two standard actions grappling and then pinning your victim, they get to spend one to break free.
It's a little better if you're a high level character with the feats to make grappling less than a standard but for grapplers without Greater Grapple or monster it's just painful.
Against my current 7th level cleric with an AC of 28 and a grapple CMD of 14, the rounds could look like this. I will use average damage for this. It has 6 more initiative than me so it's probably going first.
Surprise Round: Chuul grapples and constricts 14 dmg to me.
Round 1: Chuul maintains grapple 19+5 against my grappled CMD of 12. 14 more damage to me with constrict. Chooses to damage dealing 14 more damage. Moves me to its mouth as a move action where I must now make a DC 19 fortitude save, which I can fail 30% of the time. Even if I don't fail that, I take 10 more damage from the mandables.
My round 1:I'm not escaping.
I have now taken 52 damage. Next turn, I will have another 30% chance of being paralyzed and an auto 10 more damage at the beginning of its. After which if I fail the paralysis, I am cou de gras'd... or... I make it and just get killed the old fashioned way.
My comrades must make it to me through difficult terrain and do 85 damage to the critter by round 2 or I am rolling a new character :-p
The Chuul could instead choose to move with me back into the murky water it came from 10 feet at a time, gaining miss chance and lowered damage from underwater combat.
My AC is pretty high for level 7, but if it clawed me and then grabbed in the surprise round... I'd be dead before I got a turn. :-)
I am built to be a tank, most other characters would be dead earlier. I don't mind my encounters a littler harder than normal though, maintaining a grapple as an attack action instead of a standard action seems cool for creatures with the grab ability.
Against my current 7th level cleric with an AC of 28 and a grapple CMD of 14, the rounds could look like this. I will use average damage for this. It has 6 more initiative than me so it's probably going first.
Surprise Round: Chuul grapples and constricts 14 dmg to me.
Round 1: Chuul maintains grapple 19+5 against my grappled CMD of 12. 14 more damage to me with constrict. Chooses to damage dealing 14 more damage. Moves me to its mouth as a move action where I must now make a DC 19 fortitude save, which I can fail 30% of the time. Even if I don't fail that, I take 10 more damage from the mandables.
My round 1:I'm not escaping.
I have now taken 52 damage. Next turn, I will have another 30% chance of being paralyzed and an auto 10 more damage at the beginning of its. After which if I fail the paralysis, I am cou de gras'd... or... I make it and just get killed the old fashioned way.
My comrades must make it to me through difficult terrain and do 85 damage to the critter by round 2 or I am rolling a new character :-p
The Chuul could instead choose to move with me back into the murky water it came from 10 feet at a time, gaining miss chance and lowered damage from underwater combat.
My AC is pretty high for level 7, but if it clawed me and then grabbed in the surprise round... I'd be dead before I got a turn. :-)
I am built to be a tank, most other characters would be dead earlier. I don't mind my encounters a littler harder than normal though, maintaining a grapple as an attack action instead of a standard action seems cool for creatures with the grab ability.
Yes, it has been pointed out previously that grappling creatures do GREAT one on one with a caster without support since grapple negates casting most of the time. In a real party situation, unless something really gets the drop on you (in which case it SHOULD wreak havoc on your party), casters aren't going to be sitting in the open all alone with no support, so the scenario given above doesn't play out great as soon as there are other characters swarming the chuul that is mysteriously unable to attack them with its completely free claws because it's got a paralyzed cleric in it's mouth.
Realistically, I just want to get away from the most effective way of "grappling" being attack-constrict-release. It just doesn't feel like it's in the spirit of what's meant to happen in the game.
Having the option to either maintain grapple as an attack equivalent (effectively giving up one attack's worth of damage to hold down an opponent) or conduct the grapple as written (dealing damage, but giving up other attacks) seems to give grapple the power and flexibility it's meant to have without going overboard. We'll see with more playtesting!
Of course it's going to get stomped if it goes up against a whole crew of adventurers alone. What CR-appropriate single monster won't?
Okay, look at it this way. Using Mathias' cleric's stats up there, you attack with your Chuul. You've got a 35% chance to hit with a claw and a 95% chance to connect with the resulting grapple for a combined likelihood of around 33% to get your constrict. That's an average of 4.9 damage per claw and 4.66 damage for the constrict. Let's call it 9.5 damage. Do that twice and you're averaging 19 damage a round from the claw-grab-constrict-release game.
Now let's say you've got ahold of him with a grab. You roll once to maintain the grapple. This roll will only fail on a 1. You're looking at a 95% chance to put down 6d6+21 damage automatically. That averages around 40 damage a round.
Say you don't use grab. You just grapple normally. You've got a 95% chance to get him. Then use your move action to stick him in your mouth. That's 24 damage on average in the first round from constrict and tentacle acid. Then you maintain the grapple the next round doing both the constrict and the acid tentacle damage along with the damage from one claw as part of maintaining the grapple. That's 38 damage per round plus a pretty decent chance to paralyze.
All this costs you is 2 AC from the dex penalty.
Clearly the most effective way to "grapple" with a grapple-specialized creature is to actually grapple!
It scales even better against fighters. They still won't have enough CMD to reliably shake a grapple attempt but they'll probably have higher AC against your claws.
Err, first of all, I don't know a ton of lvl 7 front line combatants with 28 AC unless they're set up to be all AC, which is very very few fighters. Most front line combatants have an AC around 22ish at this level, which is where you're going to be with a two-handed weapon or two weapons without a ton of buffs.
So it's got a 65% chance to hit someone at 22 AC on any given round, dealing 28 damage per swing (ignoring the 5% chance to fail the grab). So that's two swings at 65% for 28 each for an average damage of ~36/round. Or grapple with an almost sure success to inflict the claw+constrict once, dealing an average of ~28/round. So wait, where's the advantage of grappling?
If you bring in OTHER special abilities, like the tentacles, it actually gets WORSE, since the wording says you transfer a grappled victim to the tentacles, thus releasing him from the claw. So the victim now takes the mandible damage with constrict, an average of a massive ~25/round and a ~30%ish chance of paralysis (assuming good fort save).
So 25 damage/round grappling vs 36/round with constrict-release. Huh?
You're leaving 14 points of damage out for the grapple numbers. You still get to inflict normal damage along with the constrict and the grab/mandibles. It's close, but it still puts maintaining a grapple higher and you still have a non-trivial chance to paralyze.
And while 28 AC is high, 22 AC is about the minimum I'd expect out of a decent front-line fighter. And as you said yourself, that person is going to have a two-handed weapon or two weapons. That's precisely the kind of person you want to grapple since it restricts their damage considerably.
Yeah, you'll do more average damage with the grab-constrict-release routine as long as they've got an AC of 20 or less. But those are going to be spellcasters and ranged attackers against whom grappling has even more advantages when it comes to action restrictions.
First of all, you're admitting that a grapple-oriented character does more damage with grab-constrict-release than actually GRAPPLING, even from an optimistic point of view. The system is already broken at that point.
Second, no I'm not leaving 14 damage out of anywhere since a grapple check results in claw damage (2d6+7 = 14 avg) + constrict (2d6+7 = 14 avg) for a 28 average, exactly as stated above.
Third, I'm not sure what exactly a "decent front-line fighter" is, but typical front-line characters in my recent parties around this level include a lvl 7 barbarian with AC 21 (+8 armor, +2 dex, +1 natural, +2 deflection, - 2 rage), a lvl 7 paladin with AC 23 (+11 armor, +1 deflection, +1 natural), and a lvl 7 magus with AC 22 (+5 armor, +6 dex, +1 deflection). That's not counting monks, rangers, and rogues running similar or lower AC. Unless you're running a specifically AC-oriented build (like the cleric in the previous example), I doubt you're gonna have the equipment for anything beyond this at this level.
Yeah, you still left out a claw.
Constrict (2d6+7=14) + Claw[Grab](2d6+7=14) + Claw (2d6+7=14)
The first two are automatic. The third is your option for maintaining the grapple. You still get to do that as part of your grapple action. You could instead pin or move if you wanted, but since we're comparing it to a full attack, I assume the damage is the relevant part.
My whole point from the getgo was to point out that you're leaving out parts. If you still want to melee with a Chull, that's fine. Just make sure you know what you're comparing it against.
At this point, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree about what "better" means with grappling. Even if melee were strictly better in damage for all circumstances, I think it's worth grappling in a lot of cases for the control options it gives you. And even if grappling were strictly higher damage, it wouldn't be an all the time thing either, because some targets are bad news to have in a grapple even for a specialized creature.
Just know how your tools work, is what I'm saying.
Actually, you should review how your tools work.
Constrict ability excerpt: A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, when it makes a successful grapple check (in addition to any other effects caused by a successful check, including additional damage). The amount of damage is given in the creature's entry and is typically equal to the amount of damage caused by the creature's melee attack.
The grab ability explicitly states that there is no additional damage. Thus, a successful grapple check deals your basic claw damage and then deals the additional damage per the constrict ability.
Note that the constrict ability explicitly says that the damage is in addition to any other damage done by the grapple check while the grab ability does NOT. Thus you automatically deal damage with the appendage that you grabbed with on successful grapple checks instead of the normal damage/move/pin choice not in addition to. If you are adding extra damage, you are house-ruling something completely different.
As for grapple being sometimes better and sometimes not, that is a problem in it of itself. I as a DM try to play the monsters according to their Int scores, so Int 1 animals and magical beasts built to grapple aren't sitting around with an abacus figuring out how to maximize their damage, and are instead massively crippling themselves by grappling in all situations. The system should allow even these creatures to benefit from their abilities when they use them.
The grab rules very plainly say that on a successful grapple check a creature with grab deals damage for the attack that established the hold and deals constriction damage as well. That's it. It explicitly calls out where the damage comes from.
There is no mention of additional damage from the "option from making the grapple". It makes no sense on a common sense level either. Why would a snake (with only one natural attack, a bite) deal damage from it's bite twice on a successful grapple check as well as the constrict?
Grab says that the creature using it "may start a grapple." So you use the rules for a grapple. No where does grab say it replaces anything, therefore all the normal grapple rules still apply.
And it doesn't have to always make sense. The rules are an abstraction. Having one attack doesn't just mean that the snake only strikes once per round, it means that amongst all the confusion of the battle with feints and clear misses, it gets one really good attempt in. Maybe once it has an enemy wrapped up, it can get two good bites in.
At the point where you're telling me that the rules don't need to make sense, this conversation is over, since I'm interested in interpreting the rules in the way that makes the most sense possible, making our views incompatible.
If you want to review previous discussions about this, feel free to read up here: http://paizo.com/forums/dmtz2sdv&page=1?Grab-the-grapple-actions
This has been asked so many times, I don't understand why Paizo won't address it formally. There are so many questions about the whole mess. Including apparently whether the Grab ability on its own lets you automatically deal damage in addition to the damage deal by a grapple check normally (new one to me).