Tackling an Enemy

[HeXetic]

I tried a quick search but I couldn't find if this has been asked before. I know Pathfinder has the CMB/CMD system for combat manoeuvres like tripping someone, breaking their weapon (sunder), disarming an enemy, etc., but I don't see any rule for *tackling* someone.

Tackling in this case meaning running at them, grabbing them, and pulling them down (prone), with the tackler going down (prone) with the tackled.

I'm thinking this would be a CMB check against the opponent's CMD but maybe with a bonus because, unlike trip, sunder, disarm, etc., the tackler is "all-in", that is to say even if the tackle attempt succeeds, the tackler is down on the ground as well.

I see this being useful when ganging up on someone who is trying to run; whoever manages to catch up to the target tackles them and hopefully that is enough to slow them down (since getting up is a move action) so that the rest of the pursuers can catch up.

What sort of "extra tackle bonus" would be reasonable here? +2? +4?

For example, a lvl5 fighter (BAB+5, STR+4 = CMB +9) tackling a lvl5 wizard (unbuffed, BAB+2,STR+0,DEX+3 = CMD 15) would normally need to roll a 7 or greater to perform a combat manoeuvre on the wizard. With a +2 for tackling they would only need to roll a 5. With a +4 they would only need to roll a 3.

And what about if the target is running vs. standing still? Maybe a reduced bonus or none at all if the target is fleeing directly away from the tackler?

The other question is how long does a tackle take? It seems like it couldn't possibly be useful on a fleeing target if it were a standard action, because there would be no way you can catch up. I wonder if this is closer to a charge attack, a full-round action where you move 2x your speed and then tackle.

Any thoughts?

[Darklord Morius]

Well, Tackling could be made at the end of a charge, giving the +2 bonus naturally.

[Father Dagon]

You just need to equal the CMD, not exceed it - so that fighter with a +9 CMB would only need to roll a 6 to hit CMD 15. From there, it basically looks like this entire thing is a trip maneuver with a circumstance bonus added in for the attacker also ending up prone after the action is resolved (successful or not). As a DM I'd say sure to a +2 modifier on the check, along with another +2 if you're charging... You can already make a trip attempt as the attack at the end of a charge with a +2 by default. Physically, the only advantage a 'tackle' type attack has over a standard 'trip' (momentum of the charge aside) is that your reach is a bit extended. Tactically, ending up sprawled on your face after attempting an attack is a Very Bad Idea, unless you're a Drunken Master or something, heh.

If you were grappling the opponent, I'd allow the 'move' action of a successful grapple check to be used to drop you both prone and still grappling. That's a bit more involved in the action economy, however.

[BltzKrg242]

You're describing what I'd call an overrun. It causes the enemy to be prone at the end of the maneuver. If you wanted to get down prone with them it's a free action. but your not holding them...

OR you could call it a grapple since you want to be holding them at the end? But you wouldn't be prone until you took a free action to fall prone. As GM I'd give the bad guy an escape attempt if you did that tho..