dire tiger have grab ability on both his bite and claw attack,lets say that tiger charge something (5 attacks with pounce).
he hit on his first attack (bite) and decide to use the free grapple manoeuver, he succeed ... what happen now ?
they both gain grappled condition , does that mean the other 4 attacks cant be executed ?
in PRD at grappled it say that you get a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. but i assume that you can only attack when you win a grapple manoeuver ?
in PRD at grapple : 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)....
he hit on his first attack (bite) and decide to use the free grapple manoeuver, he succeed ... what happen now ?
They both become grappled or the Tigeer can opt to 'hold' his foe, at a -20 grapple modifier, which allows him to grapple his foe without becoming grappled himself and complete his attacks. The third, and best option IMO is to use your Dire Tigers Rake ability to do the claw damage during the grapple.
does that mean the other 4 attacks cant be executed ?
Correct, if he grapples his foe he can no longer make any more regular attacks. Check out Rake again.
so i assumed right (even if i had trouble in putting it down in words (english aint my first language))
so for a dire tiger the best option on a charge would be : rake , rake , bite (grab -20) , claw (grab -20) , claw (grab)
that way he get to do all his attack and still have some chance of doing a grapple.
that bring another question about the dire tiger (i use that form with a druid) , if my druid have greater grapple and i use two move action to do something while grappling , does the 2 rake attacks work with both check (making 4 free attack + any action i actually choose to do) ?
Nothing in the grapple rules prevents you from making more attacks that round. Typically you won't have any more ACTIONS to perform any more attacks, but that is not to say that you cannot make anymore attacks. Any creature with the grab ability can obviously get around that issue, as it's a free action. Note that you will take a -2 on any attacks after you use grab to grapple someone (as you have the grappled condition as well), so it is often best to save it until last.
(And if you are going to incorrectly rule that grappling DOES end any further attacks... just use the attack with the grab ability last... Problem solved.)
Again, nothing in the grapple rules says you cannot make attacks after gaining the grappled condition. Thus you can, so long as you pay attention to the rest of the grappled condition (-4 Dex, can't move, -2 to attacks, can't use an attack that requires 2 hands).
Grappled:
A grappled creature is restrained by a creature, trap, or effect. Grappled creatures cannot move and take a –4 penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a –2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform. A grappled character who attempts to cast a spell or use a spell-like ability must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level), or lose the spell. Grappled creatures cannot make attacks of opportunity.
A grappled creature cannot use Stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if a special ability, such as hide in plain sight, would normally allow it to do so. If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives no other benefit.
Raythyr is probably right, the problem is that Paizo wrote the grapple rules poorly ... even poorer than the D20 ones in fact IMO.
Some of the actions you can perform (like normal attacking without grapple checks) while you are grappled are in a section which suggests it's only valid for people who don't control the grapple.
Raythyr is probably right, the problem is that Paizo wrote the grapple rules poorly ... even poorer than the D20 ones in fact IMO.
Some of the actions you can perform (like normal attacking without grapple checks) while you are grappled are in a section which suggests it's only valid for people who don't control the grapple.
The first round, a monster can make as much as grab it has. If it has 3 attacks with grab, it may make and grab 3 ennemies (under conditions described by Raythir).
The second round, to MAINTAIN a grapple, the monster has to make a "standard action".
So if it has 3 ennemies grappled, it has to release (free action) 2 ennemies and it could try to maintain on the 3rd.
If the monster succeed to maintain, it can do one of the 4 actions decribed in rules of grapple p200.
Often a "grab-monster" has seldom interest to maintain a grapple, except if the ennemy is alone.
So the monster do attack-grab-constrict-relase for each of its attacks in full round action.
The victim of the grapple can do a "normal round" except it has to follow conditions "grappled": just one hand and not possible to draw weapon or equipment.
If you're going to be using grapple alot, maybe print this out, it guides you through the steps, and will help you understand the mechanics.
Notice how as the attacker, once you've gained the grappled condition your turn ends, and you have the choice maintain the grapple, then make a a single natural attack against your foe. Keep in mind when your Dire Tiger has the grappled condition(attacker of defender), it gets to Rake - 2 claw attacks - as free actions.
Grab, ofcourse is just grappling with a -20 penalty to not count as grappled, which you want for Rake attacks.
Those charts would mean something if they were at all official. But do note that the chart assumes you start the grapple as a standard action. That's not the case with Grab.
The limitations of grappling are defined clearly in the rules and there is no limitation to attacking when grappled. The only thing keeping you from doing it is that you usually need a standard action to start or maintain. Since Grab lets you make a grapple attempt as a free action, you can do it in the middle of your full attack and it does not interrupt.
Additionally, the rake attacks granted when grappling are given as a free action. Whether or not you take the -20 penalty to hold has nothing to do with being able to use them.
@MacGurcules. True, they are not 'official' but are posted on the PFsrd, and I can't find any flaw in them.
Firstly, the Rake speacil attack is only relevant when already grappling. He cannot apply the round he intiates the grapple, only subsequent rounds he has maintained it.
Secondly, if he can grapple his foe successfully with a -20 to maintain 'grab' as a free action, all the power to him. Keep in mind that every 'grab' attempt that fails ends the grapple, and it has to be reattempted, thus losing the free rake damage. It makes more optimal sense to maintain the grapple (standard action) and gain the free rake attacks vs a powerful foe, while disabling them via grapple. Ofcourse, vs weaker foes, go to town.
Sure. Rake only works when you start a round grappling. I don't disagree.
There's no reason you need to be using the -20 grab option, though. You don't get to maintain that for free at -20. Maybe you're supposed to, but it's not in the rules. So it's still a standard action to maintain a hold at -20. All it really does for you is eliminate the penalties for being grappled.
Um...maybe I'm overlooking something somewhere, but where is the -20 to maintain grab as a free action coming from? There is no free action unless the monster strikes with an attack with which it has the grab ability, like a tiger's claw or an eel's bite.
Monster attacks -> Hit's PC AC -> Damage dealt -> Optional grapple attempt for free due to grab ability -> resolve remainder of attacks
If the monster wishes to take the -20 on it's attempt to maintain it does not gain the grapple condition itself and can take a full attack. If it makes the regular attempt to maintain it requires a standard action and both parties are considered grappled unless otherwise stated under some special circumstance. Most monsters with the grab ability, however, have some form of special damage that goes with a grab such as constrict damage, automatic bite damage, feed damage in the case of some plants, etc., so being grappled is not necessarily as much of a drawback as it would be for PCs. Your tiger is a perfect example. A PC who is grappled can't do a whole lot unless they've specifically built their character for grappling. A tiger on the other hand can attack, grab, and rake rake rake.
Please show me the RULE that states "once you've gained the grappled condition your turn ends". Not a chart. You won't find one, because it doesn't exist.
(Also, that chart is not the greatest, it works as a rough outline, but doesn't consider many of the corner cases. For example, how does greater grapple/swift grapple work in? Do you lose you move and swift actions as soon as you start a grapple as a standard? Unlikely.)
Sure. Rake only works when you start a round grappling. I don't disagree.
There's no reason you need to be using the -20 grab option, though. You don't get to maintain that for free at -20. Maybe you're supposed to, but it's not in the rules. So it's still a standard action to maintain a hold at -20. All it really does for you is eliminate the penalties for being grappled.
I agree with Corren28.
The free action for -20 grab/hold?
hum... may be
If the monster begin the round with just a -20 grab/hold, what happens?
The monster isn't grappled.
That point is important.
As the monster isn't grappled and it doesn't grapple an ennemy, just "hold the ennemy", it isn't subject to the rules of grapple.
So the grab-monster may do a full-attack action. For its limb that hold, it has to make a choice: maintain the hold at -20 or "release and attack".
The problem is nothing is written for "maintain the hold", just do a CMB check at -20.
Some could say it needs a standard action to do that, but nothing in rules confirm that.
To maintain the grab/hold, as the monster is NOT grappled, the monster has just to do a grapple check at -20 for the limb.
There's no reason you need to be using the -20 grab option, though. You don't get to maintain that for free at -20. Maybe you're supposed to, but it's not in the rules. So it's still a standard action to maintain a hold at -20. All it really does for you is eliminate the penalties for being grappled.
Grab ...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... Emphasis mine.
Rathyr wrote:
Please show me the RULE that states "once you've gained the grappled condition your turn ends". Not a chart. You won't find one, because it doesn't exist.
Its stuff like this that makes me hate grappling. The reasoning behind this statement concerns a Standard Action grapple, which doesn't literally 'end your turn'. But once successfully grappling you gain the grappled condition, meaning if you didn't use your move action, you can't now. Grapple is normally not substituable for any attack (like disarm, trip, sunder) and thus cannot be used with a Full Attack, meaning you have no extra attacks to make anyway. So, if you have a Swift or Free action you can take without your hands you can...otherwise you have nothing else you can do.
In this case, we're looking at a creature that has Grab. It is not a standard action, it is a free action - and nowhere in the rules does it discuss grappling as a free action. We're stuck with our own logic. I'm inclined to agree with you and Corren28 that in this case, with Grab allowing a normal Grapple as a free action that it would not interfere with the rest of his attacks, the issue occurs if he wishes to maintain the grapple. His options in round 2 become
1)Maintain the Grapple (standard action) take the additional attack or other options this provides (pin, move, etc) and do Rake damage(free action).
or
2)Maintain the Grapple with Grab (free action -20, lose damage from the attack currently 'holding' the foe) and do anything else possible in a turn.
or
3)Release his foe (free action) Full Attack with all attacks or use a full turn as per normal.
Greater grapple (or Grab (ex)) changes that situation, which is why it is important to get it right from the start. Initially, its not a concern, but player will eventually be able to use their move (and swift) in a grapple.
Also, if he is granted extra actions, (or is a Master of Maneuvers), he should be able to use them. Grappled is just a condition, and it doesn't say your turn ends, so it doesn't.
@Rathyr I'm sensing some hostility. Please read my whole post, I specificaly state I'm agreeing with you, that his turn doesn't 'end'. I'm merely pointing out that when you have the grappled condition, attacker or defender, it begins to greatly limit the actions that you can take - regardless of their speed or how many extra ones you have. Depending on how a GM interprets 'cannot move' it can either mean 'no movement taken' to 'no Move Actions'. For most characters that become grappled your turn essentially ends, because you don't have any other options.
Also, you're mentioning many specific situations - that certainly do change the general rules to specific exceptions - they are just that, specific exceptions. In an attempt to help the OP I've kept my comments specific to the case - ie: the Dire Tiger - or to grappling in general to help him choose between standard and Grab rulings. I have not assumed it would be gaining character levels as a Maneuver Master or gaining Greater Grapple.
Keep in mind this is a Rules Question messageboard, we're attempting to clarify rules, and aid our fellow players and ourselves in their understanding. Adding further mud to the already murky waters of grappling rules isn't neccesary, and comes off more as you needing to be 'right' then helpful.
Greater Grapple, if the Dire Tiger had it, would allow it to maintain its grapple as a move action, instead of a standard action. It would also allow it to 'maintain' the grapple and perform a 'grapple action' in one roll. If such a situation occured it'd be the most economic use of his 'grab' to hold a foe and execute a second action at the same time, if he feels the -20 penalty is not insurmountable.
Maneuver Master, if the Dire Tiger is trained as this Monk Archetype, would immediately give him Flurry of Maneuvers, which allows him to make extra Combat Maneuvers every round. If he continues to progress it would give him abilities making certain feats more optimal and many, many exceptioins to general grappling rules - but again - applying exceptions requires you to know the basics.
If I've misinterpreted "Grappled is just a condition, and it doesn't say your turn ends, so it doesn't." as attitude where none is present, then I'll merely say please be more careful with reading the posts of those who respond to you. If I have not, please leave your ego out of our comments, as we're trying to have a consturctive community here.
I'm trying to keep it as simple as possible. I've stated why considering "I have limited actions, so my turn is ESSENTIALLY over" could be a problem. It might not be relevant to this particular poster's situation, but try and keep in mind why I mentioned Greater/Swift/MoM. These are the reason why I stated that your turn doesn't end once you gained the condition. It's not me trying to "be right" or muddy the waters, but explain why even in a situation where it doesn't benefit the user, his turn doesn't automatically end. My initial post to him made no mention of either of those things, it was only after several posts that I felt the need to clarify why grapple works this way. Grab (ex), itself, is a corner case of grapple rules.
I don't think there is any point mincing words when attempting to resolve RAW issues. Not trying to come off hostile, I just like to cut to the chase as quickly as possible. Simple is better when discussing complex rules, and I think we all agree that grapple fits that category.
No, it doesn't say your turn ends, nor does your turn end. In the case of a monster with grab, the standard action usually used to initiate the grapple IS the attack which is why, logically, the grapple attempt is a free action. If more actions are made available through other means such as haste, other class abilities, or feats, then by all means those extra actions are available.
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 can only be used against targets of a size equal to or smaller than the creature with this ability. If the creature can use grab on creatures of other sizes, it is noted in the creature's Special Attacks line. 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.
Format: grab; Location: individual attacks.
You will note that in the description of Grab, it does not say that the free grapple must be started immediately after the attack that allows the Grab, before other attacks are made.
Simplest way to deal with it is to start at the beginning of the Melee stat line and roll for 2 claw attacks (if both are successful apply the Rake damage), then go ahead and roll for your bite. If any of the above are successful roll for each Grab attempt.
If you get a Grab from one of the attempts then next round you begin with the Grapple condition.
NOTE!!!!!!
Nowhere in either Grab, Grapple, or the Grapple condition does it say you cannot have more than one grapple going. In the Dire Tiger's situation it can grapple with 2 claws and a bite. This requires the Dire Tiger to maintain three grapples* and if it does, it auto damages with those claws and bites. The defender must break THREE grapples to effectively escape a Dire Tiger.
Though I would rule that the penalties from grapple stack, as they are unnamed penalties.
*Now the only question arises is in MAINTAINING the three grapples since they normally require a standard action to maintain each. Does the fact that they were originally Free actions change that? Also does the fact that the creature is able to initiate three grapples affect anything? I see nothing in the rules that allows maintaining three grapples. The only defense I can imagine is why on earth give a creature the ability to initiate three grapples if it cannot maintain them all. Alas, that kind of ruling rarely holds up in Rules Appeals Court.
So for that first round of combat I would allow the Tiger three grapples, requiring the defender to escape all three if possible before escaping. Then on subsequent rounds it maintains a single grapple and auto damages with it, forsaking other attacks. (I think in a house game I would allow all three grapples to be maintained- and the associated auto damage and even the rake- ... but not for PFS).
How would this apply for humanoids?
Ezren has the artifact and must set it on the altar to keep the world from blowing up. Ezren is being chased by Gogmurt, who is being chased by Valeros. So Gogmurt grapples Ezren to keep him from moving toward the altar. Valeros grapples Gogmurt to hamper his grapple with Ezren. Gogmurt has two grapples on him, the one he started and the one Valeros started. In addition Ezren can make any attack action he wants (within the rules- albeit at a penalty) that would seem useful, including combat maneuvers such as Dirty Trick**. Gogmurt is at a serious disadvantage now. He suffers a -8 penalty to his Dex compared to Ezren and Valeros (who suffer -4 penalties), thus lowering his CMD a total of -4 for the grapples. (NOTE that in this case Ezren and Valeros do not use the multiple attackers rule for grappling because Ezren did not INITIATE that grapple.)
Humanoids have no ability to initiate multiple grapples (that I can think of off the top of my head) but certainly can be involved in multiple grapples such as poor Gogmurt.
** Someone said earlier that you cannot use Combat Maneuvers in a grapple, such as sunder or disarm... that is not true. A Combat Maneuver is an attack action, and attack actions ARE allowed in grappling under specific limitations. So Maneuvers are possible. The only maneuvers I see that are not possible in a grapple are Bull Rush, Overrun, Drag and Reposition due to the need to actually move to achieve the maneuvers.
@Corren28 - I don't know what part of the above posts and core rule book you misread, so I'll clarify your comment to help anyone reading it.
Quote:
In the case of a monster with grab, the standard action usually used to initiate the grapple IS the attack which is why, logically, the grapple attempt is a free action.
When a monster makes a natural attack with the grab ability, the successful attack triggers the option of a free grapple attempt or a 'hold'. Both of these options have been discussed above. They are seperate actions. The grab ability is a free action, this is RAW, not logic.
@Corren28 - I don't know what part of the above posts and core rule book you misread, so I'll clarify your comment to help anyone reading it.
Quote:
In the case of a monster with grab, the standard action usually used to initiate the grapple IS the attack which is why, logically, the grapple attempt is a free action.
When a monster makes a natural attack with the grab ability, the successful attack triggers the option of a free grapple attempt or a 'hold'. Both of these options have been discussed above. They are seperate actions. The grab ability is a free action, this is RAW, not logic.
Funny how you two really seem to be arguing for essentially the same thing just using different routes to the same destination.
Greater Grapple, if the Dire Tiger had it, would allow it to maintain its grapple as a move action, instead of a standard action. It would also allow it to 'maintain' the grapple and perform a 'grapple action' in one roll. If such a situation occured it'd be the most economic use of his 'grab' to hold a foe and execute a second action at the same time, if he feels the -20 penalty is not insurmountable.
What are you talking about here? No offense, but this is a very confusing paragraph to read. Anyone with Greater Grapple can maintain the grapple as move action (which is why you saying 'Depending on how a GM interprets 'cannot move' it can either mean 'no movement taken' to 'no Move Actions'' earlier is VERY wrong). This leaves the grappler with their standard action to perform a SECOND maintain grapple check, or to simply make an attack (assuming they didn't spend any other actions already).
'It would also allow it to 'maintain' the grapple and perform a 'grapple action' in one roll.' ALL successful maintain grapple checks, regardless of Greater Grapple, do this. If you succeed in a grapple check to maintain, you get to chose one of the grapple options (pin/damage/move/etc). Mentioning it in this fashion makes it sound like Greater Grapple is the only on that does this.
The last line about -20 makes no sense. If the Tiger makes a natural attack with Grab (ex) (I'm assuming a standard action attack, or we wont have a move action), and succeeds on his free grapple check from Grab(ex), he can maintain that grapple as a move action after the attack has resolved. Why does Hold at a -20 (almost always a trap option) enter into it?
Honestly, I think you have some confusion about the -20 option after carefully rereading some of your posts. The -20 ONLY comes into play if you decide NOT to conduct the Grab(ex) grapple normally. And the *only* benefit is you don't gain the grappled condition. It's a *terrible* option with very minimal gains (unless you no longer have to spend actions to maintain the grapple... but it doesn't state that, only that you don't have the grapple condition).
Here is the attack routine for a Grab(Ex).
ROUND 1
1. Hit with a natural attack with the grab (ex)
2a. Make a free grapple check (with a +4) to initiate a grapple. If you succeed, you are both grappled. OR
2b. Make a free grapple check with the -20 (so -16 after the +4 bonus) to initiate a grapple. Only the defender gains the grapple condition.
ROUND 2
Both have to maintain the grapple as a standard (+4 for grab, +5 for creature not breaking free, -20 if the grappler took the trap option). If they succeed, they get a grapple option.
Also, you made a mention of 2)Maintain the Grapple with Grab (free action -20, lose damage from the attack currently 'holding' the foe) and do anything else possible in a turn. . This is not an option at all. Grab (ex) can be used to start a grapple, not maintain, and you need to decide whether or not to take the -20 right at the start of the grapple. You don't get to switch later on and maintain as a free action.
@Krome. You cannot "re-grapple" a creature. Grab(ex) can only be used to START a grapple. Once you have a creature grappled, you can only maintain a grapple, not inflict an entirely new grapple (again, Grab(ex) does not give you free a 'universal' grapple checks everytime you hit, only a check to START grapples). Booksy and myself are not actually agreeing on very many issues at all, now that I examine some of his points more clearly.
I should really make a 'Grappling and You!' thread. This stuff is too complex to expect people to know.
I'm not arguing anything, just stating what "is" in terms of RAW. If we want to start arguing, I think the grab ability is the most @#$%^#$%#$ ability that can be given to a monster. In my experience, it's responsible for more PC deaths than any other ability.
Step 1: Charge, because of pounce Tiger makes 5 attacks (Bite, Claw, Claw, Rake-Claw, Rake-Claw).
Step 2: Resolve all 5 attacks and damage from those attacks.
Step 3: Resolve any grapple attempts resulting from the Bite, Claw, and Claw attacks. There is no -20 penalty unless the tiger is trying to not have the grappled condition.
There is not a mechanical advantage to do them between attacks and no requirement to do so.
This cleanly sidesteps the problem of 'Does grapple stop my remaining attacks?'. Note: it does not but clearly not all people believe this.
Step 4: End turn since there is not much else the tiger can do.
Targets turn: Make attacks if possible or attempt to get out of the grapple (check DC = Tigers CMD).
Tiger's turn again:
Make grapple check (standard action) to maintain the grapple with a +9 bonus (+4grab, +5for maintaining grapple in subsequent rounds).
If successful then roll damage. Also, make two rake-claw attacks.
Step 1: Charge, because of pounce Tiger makes 5 attacks (Bite, Claw, Claw, Rake-Claw, Rake-Claw).
Step 2: Resolve all 5 attacks and damage from those attacks.
Step 3: Resolve any grapple attempts resulting from the Bite, Claw, and Claw attacks. There is no -20 penalty unless the tiger is trying to not have the grappled condition.
There is not a mechanical advantage to do them between attacks and no requirement to do so.
This cleanly sidesteps the problem of 'Does grapple stop my remaining attacks?'. Note: it does not but clearly not all people believe this.
Step 4: End turn since there is not much else the tiger can do.
Targets turn: Make attacks if possible or attempt to get out of the grapple (check DC = Tigers CMD).
Tiger's turn again:
Make grapple check (standard action) to maintain the grapple with a +9 bonus (+4grab, +5for maintaining grapple in subsequent rounds).
If successful then roll damage. Also, make two rake-claw attacks.
- Gauss
There is a slight mechanical difference in making grapple attempts in between attacks. If you succeed on the grab attempt from the first attack, all of your remaining attacks that round are going to be at -2 because of the Grappled condition. Now that usually washes out with the -4 to Dex.
However, if either grappler has a way to avoid grappling penalties, or if the grab-er uses Dex in place of Str for grappling (Agile Maneuvers, tiny size, etc), then the penalties become lopsided. There are also other considerations like Snake Style granting AoOs on missed attacks, etc.
Most of the time, you're safe to just roll all of the grapple attempts at the end of the full attack to streamline the process. Just be aware of the situations when it makes a difference.
There is a slight mechanical difference in making grapple attempts in between attacks. If you succeed on the grab attempt from the first attack, all of your remaining attacks that round are going to be at -2 because of the Grappled condition. Now that usually washes out with the -4 to Dex.
However, if either grappler has a way to avoid grappling penalties, or if the grab-er uses Dex in place of Str for grappling (Agile Maneuvers, tiny size, etc), then the penalties become lopsided. There are also other considerations like Snake Style granting AoOs on missed attacks, etc.
Most of the time, you're safe to just roll all of the grapple attempts at the end of the full attack to streamline the process. Just be aware of the situations when it makes a difference.
What about using one grab attack as the main attack, and using the "Join a grapple" option for the other (As they are essentially free grapple attempts). Then the Tiger would get one grapple at +4 for the two additional attacks (if the hit).
There is a slight mechanical difference in making grapple attempts in between attacks. If you succeed on the grab attempt from the first attack, all of your remaining attacks that round are going to be at -2 because of the Grappled condition. Now that usually washes out with the -4 to Dex.
However, if either grappler has a way to avoid grappling penalties, or if the grab-er uses Dex in place of Str for grappling (Agile Maneuvers, tiny size, etc), then the penalties become lopsided. There are also other considerations like Snake Style granting AoOs on missed attacks, etc.
Most of the time, you're safe to just roll all of the grapple attempts at the end of the full attack to streamline the process. Just be aware of the situations when it makes a difference.
What about using one grab attack as the main attack, and using the "Join a grapple" option for the other (As they are essentially free grapple attempts). Then the Tiger would get one grapple at +4 for the two additional attacks (if the hit).
No.
Grab{ex} are not 'free grapple attempts' for everything, only checks to START a grapple.
The -20 option is a trap. It will never be worth it. It doesn't add extra damage. You STILL have to maintain it.
Disregard it. Don't consider it.
I looked at.
He didn't answered on what type of action to maintain an hold. However, if you have to do a standard action to maintain a grab/hold -20, the hold -20 option has no interests as Rathyr comments.
NOTE: if monster has "constrict" with the limb which hold with the -20 option, the constrict damage applies.
If i have to do an houserule to have an -20 option interesting, i will do that.
Rule may be MAINTAIN GRAB/HOLD i.e -20 option
Monster have to do a check CMB -20 to maintain the hold -20 for the limb which grab/hold. This check may be part of a full-round action.
So doing a grab/hold -20 option could be more attractive for a monster, and i don't think it will be "overpowered" nor "far from RAI".
He didn't need to say that, because it didn't need to be spelled out. All a '-20 hold' does is remove the grappled condition. EVERYTHING else is the same, including the action to maintain a hold. Grab(ex) doesn't let you maintain a grapple at a discounted action rate, therefore the '-20 option' is the same.
It's not a big deal, really. Grab(ex) lets you make an attack, get a free grapple (WITH a bonus) and do additional damage on EACH successful grapple check in the next round. Just ignore the -20 and pretend it never existed.
It's a pretty baller ability. if you can get Grab, Constrict, greater grapple and swift grapple on a character, it's a very lethal combination.
Step 3: Resolve any grapple attempts resulting from the Bite, Claw, and Claw attacks. There is no -20 penalty unless the tiger is trying to not have the grappled condition.
There is not a mechanical advantage to do them between attacks and no requirement to do so.
So what you're saying is:
"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."
really means
"Gauss' 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 any time during it's turn as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity."
rather than
"Conservative 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 immediately attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity."
Yes?
Is there a particular reason you think the grapple can be made at any time, rather than being made when the specific grab attack hits?
Especially since each of those five pounce attacks should be made individually, since the tiger could kill the initial target and change targets with the rest of its attacks.
I think the Grapple check should be made immediately after the attack that spawned it is resolved, and before any remaining attacks. The idea of having loose Grapple checks floating around until the end of your turn doesn't sit well with me.
It doesn't say you can't (or can), but following the described sequence of events seems much less confusing.
MacGurcules: I did not say there was no mechanical difference. I stated there was no mechanical advantage to grappling between attacks. For a Tiger it is a wash. For a Leopard (also has Grab on the bite attack only) the Leopard should make bite the very last attack since it's attacks are dex based and grapple will penalize it.
Grick: Nothing states the free action must be taken immediately. But for the moment lets assume your conservative grab is how it works.
So what happens when you successfully Grab between attacks? You are now both grappled. Your remaining attacks still occur. Why do they still occur? Because you are making a full-attack action and nothing in grapple states it interrupts that. This is the point many people seem to have problems with. Many people seem to think that since you are the grappler you must make a check to do damage. That is true..on successive rounds. This is not a successive round.
Numerically, the Tiger's grapple condition offsets the penalties the target has so attacks are still conducted normally. The Tiger's -2 attack offsets the target's -4dex penalty.
What if the tiger grapples and then kills the target but still has attacks remaining? It is a free action to release the grapple. Then make the remaining attacks normally against other targets within your reach.
Ultimately, the wording does not indicate that the grapple checks are immediately made but even if they are the tiger may still make its remaining attacks.
The wording indicates 'immediately' more than 'a free roaming action that you can take at any point', IMO. I can't think of any other triggered action that acts like that, and I despise making new rules out of nothing because 'it doesn't say I cant'. I can think of many MANY events that happen immediately before or after their trigger, and none that wait around until you decide.
It's kind of a moot point. As we've all pointed out, if gaining the grappled condition would be a problem, you can leave that attack for last. That is 100% correct and can't be contested, which I think is preferable to adding a wishy-washy new rule to an already bloated system.
Rathyr, the problem is that some people believe that the grappled condition prevents all remaining attacks.
The tiger has THREE grab attacks. Following those peoples interpretation the tiger would be out 2 attacks if the first succeeded to grapple.
I was not making a new rule, the existing rule is unclear on exactly when that grab attempt should occur. My point is that since it really does not make a difference when it occurs just resolve all attacks then resolve all grapple attempts. I was not suggesting a house rule or alternate rule.
Pathfinder uses a basic premise of 'resolve attacks in the most advantageous method provided the rules do not state otherwise'. This would seem to fall under that premise since grapple attempts are attacks. If it does not suit your idea of how grapple works, it is your game, do what you want.
Rathyr, the problem is that some people believe that the grappled condition prevents all remaining attacks.
The tiger has THREE grab attacks. Following those peoples interpretation the tiger would be out 2 attacks if the first succeeded to grapple.
I was not making a new rule, the existing rule is unclear on exactly when that grab attempt should occur. My point is that since it really does not make a difference when it occurs just resolve all attacks then resolve all grapple attempts. I was not suggesting a house rule or alternate rule.
Pathfinder uses a basic premise of 'do things when they are advantageous provided the rules do not state otherwise'. This would seem to fall under that premise. If it does not suit your idea of how grapple works, it is your game, do what you want.
- Gauss
I'm not worrying about those people. Neither should you. Those people are, defined within the rules, INCORRECT. There are no "alternate" reading of rules or "wishy-washy" definition that they taking liberties with. They are, in fact, simply making up an entirely new rule. Nowhere does gaining grappled stop your attacks. Neither does prone. Neither does sickened, or dazzled. The burden of proof falls on them to explain why the grappled condition ends your attack, and they will ALWAYS come up short.
The problem with that line of thinking is it rapidly gets out of hand. Pretty much, you are saying that as long as it happens after the attack, it's fine. So lets take that further. Where does it say that you need to take it this turn? Maybe they hang around until next turn. It doesn't say they don't. Where does it say it must be against the creature you hit with the natural attack? It just says "attempts to start a grapple" not "attempts to start a grapple against the creature it hit". It's... frustrating... to see people rationalize arguments that way.
It is a bad idea to get started on that train of thought. Developers aren't going to babystep us through every single resolution. Again, there are NUMEROUS examples of triggered actions. They interrupt the flow of events, you resolve them, and you continue on. Attacking, triggering an event, resolving that event, and then resolving the rest of your attacks is COMMONPLACE, and we can find explicit examples of those everywhere in the game. So yes, we can make up an ENTIRELY new way of resolving a triggered event, or follow the tested, rational and commonly accepted standard that many others follow. Your call, your game, but expect to be challenged on it if you come to the rules forum.
I won't be able to provide you with a rule that states you cannot do what you are saying. I also can't provide you with an example that exists in the rules that works the way you think it should. I can provide you with examples of triggered events taking place immediately before/after their trigger. Take it or leave it, that's all the RAW you will get.
happily i've not seen grab-monster, until now, which have these feats with their grab/constrict ability
And you probably will not. James Jacobs replied to a post of mine saying to give a monster with grab/constrict greater grapple is mean and unfair. I believe this was before ultimate combat and Rapid Grappler even so now things can get crazy.
Rathyr, the problem is that some people believe that the grappled condition prevents all remaining attacks.
Grappled: "In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform."
Some people believe that means two hands at the same time, like wielding a longsword with two hands.
Other people believe that means one of your hands is tied up in the grapple, so any action that involves two hands, like making a full-attack with two weapons, cannot be made.
If Valeros somehow grappled someone as a free action, could he then full-attack with both his shortsword and his dagger? Wouldn't that require two hands?
