|
Ok, these are my last questions for awhile. Just need to get clarification on how sneak attacks, a few feats, and grapple work together.
1) Grapple doesn't mention any size requirements. Is that correct? How about pinning opponents? Can a goblin pin an ancient dragon (assuming it was the will of the gods?)
2) When I have an opponent pinned, they lose their dexterity bonus to AC. Does that mean when I deal damage to them via unarmed strike, I also deal sneak attack damage with it?
3) Situation 2, but now I have the Strangler feat. Can I maintain the pin, deal damage, and get 2 doses of sneak attack off?
4) I have the opponent pinned, and I have the greater grapple feat. Can I, in one round, tie them up as a move action, and then deal damage to them as a combat maneuver check?
5) In the case of situation 4, and in addition I have the pinning knockout feat. Do I double ALL non-lethal damage dealt, including sneak attacks?
6) I can: Round 1, grapple opponent. Round 2, tie up opponent with -10 to the check as a move action, and then deal damage as a standard action. Correct?
Thanks in advance guys! Your awesome!
1. Yes
2. Anytime dex to AC is lost sneak attack is activated.
3. You can sneak attack anytime you meet the conditions for it.
4. See 2 and 3. :)
5. yes
6. Yes
Ah one more question.
Assuming I have greater grapple:
Can I, in one round, initiate a grapple (standard action) and then attempt to tie them up as a move action?
As long as you have both actions available.
Its the equivalent of a full-round grapple =)Keep in mind though, that Strangler is a swift action to use, so you can't use Strangler (A) multiple times per round or (B) in conjunction with Rapid Grappler.
Also, you do not get the +5 bonus on checks to maintain on the round in which you initiate the Grapple. It explicitly states that you get this bonus "in subsequent rounds"
Also, if you are looking to Knock people out, you might want to look at Sap Adept (+2 dmg per sneak attack die when dealing non-lethal) and Knockout Artist (+1 dmg per sneak attack die when dealing non-lethal with an unarmed strike).
|
|
Thats the entire point of having them tied up is to use sap master, but also keep them pinned so I can also apply pinning knockout.
At level 12, I can do this to a tied up opponet:
attack damage + ((6d6 * 2(sap master) + 12 (sap adept)) * 2 (Pinning knockout)
=
attack damage + 24d6 + 24, and thats for each attack, which I can get three of (Standard action grapple attack, move action grapple attack, and swift action apply sneak attack).
So, in one turn, I can deal : 2x attack damage + 72d6 + 72 damage nonlethal damage. This all relies, however, on my ability to grapple, which decreases significantly at higher levels.
(For kicks and giggles, level 20 = 120d6 + 120 nonlethal damage per sneak attack while pinning the opponent).
One problem.
Pinned =/= Flat-Footed
Tied up = Pinned with alternate escape DC
So, no Sap Master.
This may seem counter-intuitive, but its true. Getting flat-footed is pretty difficult, and there are only a select few ways to do it. Sap Adept, OTOH does not have this requirement, nor does KO artist.
That is true for some GMs, I'm sure... its not RAW though.
Helpless characters can't take actions, tied up characters can still try to escape or cast spells or use Su abilities.
Why? Because they aren't helpless (this is some bad logic that has been rolling around because the Helpless condition mentions "bound") they are, in fact, pinned.
Take a moment to think how silly it would be to specifically state that a tied up character is pinned (loses dex to AC) if it also meant that they were helpless (treated as having Dex 0).
You will also find that the entries for Paralyzed, Unconscious etc. specifically say that the target is "helpless". There is no entry for tied up because it points directly to Pinned. The only real difference is the CMB check needed to break out.
Either way, if that is what flies at your table, more power to ya.
"Bound" can mean a lot of things, not just being bound by ropes or chains. This isn't the clearest rule in the book, so expect a little table variation.
I always wondered if there were rules for tying somebody up more. I mean, there's a big difference between using a length of rope to tie someone up and wrapping them in a hemp cocoon so they look like a rope basket. Given enough time and rope, you should be able to secure someone even if your CMB is not that high and theirs is.
|
|
If your hands and feet were bound, you'd be helpless no? Helpless, in my opinion, means you cannot defend yourself. Hence coup de gras. Can you imagine coup de gras being perform on someone tied up?
It might seem cheesy to get someone from normal to tied up in one round (which is possible with greater grapple (6 BaB), provided you have the rope on hand literally, at a -10 to the check). But then again, that's one full round spent tying them up. A wizard can perform similar feats with spells at all most levels, such as sleep spells. But rulings shouldn't made on comparisons to other classes... or should they?
RAW I think I'm right (What other things give the bound condition? I've gone through the spells and only found a "rope" spell and a bard spell that makes creatures spellbound and thus paralyzed. I parsed over a thousand spells with my computer fu looking for the word "bound". The hold person spell doesn't cause someone to be bound, but rather paralyzed as well...)
RAI is what your questioning here.
Where, exactly, does it say that helpless == cannot take actions? A sleeping character is helpless, but he can wake up. A paralyzed character can't take physical actions, but he can take purely mental actions, but he's still helpless. "Bound" is one of the factors that leads to the Helpless condition so a tied up character is, by definition, helpless. That doesn't, however, prevent him from any and all actions; you refer to the pinned condition which clarifies that you can take few actions beyond purely mental actions and escape checks. So, yes, it is RAW that a bound character is helpless.
There wasn't any RAW in your post at all.
The description of circumstances that might lead to someone being helpless is not a rule.Otherwise, lets go one further. If I grapple you, I am "holding" you. Therefore you are held. "Held" is one of the factors that leads to the Helpless condition so a tied up character is, by definition, helpless.
This sound right to anyone? Yeah, didnt think so. Otherwise, everyone I hug is immediately helpless. I am pretty suave, but that is taking it a bit far no?
Paralyzed condition: Calls out Helpless
Unconscious condition: Calls out helpless
Petrified: refers to unconscious, therefore helpless
Dying: refers to unconscious, therefore helpless
Sleep, spell: calls out helpless
Hold Person, Spell: calls out paralyzed, therefore helpless
Now, lets look at 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).
So, it works like a Pin effect.
Pinned: A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions. A pinned creature cannot move and is denied its Dexterity bonus. A pinned character also takes an additional –4 penalty to his Armor Class. A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take.
So... there is your RAW. Tied Up = Pinned with a different escape CMD and the grappler does not need to maintain the pin. That is all it does. It does NOT make a target helpless.
If your hands and feet were bound, you'd be helpless no? Helpless, in my opinion, means you cannot defend yourself. Hence coup de gras. Can you imagine coup de gras being perform on someone tied up?
Since this sentence is not in a RAW context, I'll respond in a non-RAW context:
If they were bound to a fixed object, maybe. If they were simply bound, not really. You could still roll about and possibly even crawl. You would not be subject to coup de grâce in my game if you were still capable of nontrivial movement. The helpless condition is only for creatures completely at the mercy of their opponents with no physical chance of preventing an attacker from striking exactly where and how she wants to.
As for other effects giving the bound condition: There is no bound condition. Grappled, pinned, and helpless are conditions. Bound is not.
If your hands and feet were bound, you'd be helpless no? Helpless, in my opinion, means you cannot defend yourself. Hence coup de gras. Can you imagine coup de gras being perform on someone tied up?
It might seem cheesy to get someone from normal to tied up in one round (which is possible with greater grapple (6 BaB), provided you have the rope on hand literally, at a -10 to the check). But then again, that's one full round spent tying them up. A wizard can perform similar feats with spells at all most levels, such as sleep spells. But rulings shouldn't made on comparisons to other classes... or should they?
RAW I think I'm right (What other things give the bound condition? I've gone through the spells and only found a "rope" spell and a bard spell that makes creatures spellbound and thus paralyzed. I parsed over a thousand spells with my computer fu looking for the word "bound". The hold person spell doesn't cause someone to be bound, but rather paralyzed as well...)
RAI is what your questioning here.
No need for RAI.... Tied up explicitly states that it works "like a Pin effect". The benefit is also explicit. You can leave the target pinned without maintaining the Grapple, and you change the check for the target to break out to 20+CMB (which is generally MUCH higher than CMD). Plus, the target can't break out at all if it needs a natural 20.
As for having rope on hand, this is where having a Robe of Infinite Twine becomes SUPER useful. Pinned is still darn good. And you can still use sneak attack, knockout artist, sap adept and strangler on that target. Just not Sap Master.
I would say, however, that Rapid Grappler sort of defeats the purpose of Strangler if you intend to Pin them anyway since they are both Swift actions.
So, you're basically implying that if a person were tied up and leaned over a chopping block, the headsman cannot make a CDG to cut his head off because being bound, despite being explicitly listed as a state that causes one to be helpless, doesn't count as helpless? I call BS. You've got to be able to read both the explicit and the implicit in order to properly comprehend rules. You also are not permitted to claim, "there's no RAW in what you wrote" and then, in the very next breath, proclaim, "I know it says 'bound' and 'held' but those really don't count because it doesn't make sense".
Helpless: A helpless character is paralyzed, held, bound, sleeping, unconscious, or otherwise completely at an opponent's mercy. A helpless target is treated as having a Dexterity of 0 (–5 modifier). Melee attacks against a helpless target get a +4 bonus (equivalent to attacking a prone target). Ranged attacks get no special bonus against helpless targets. Rogues can sneak attack helpless targets.The bolded section implies that all aforementioned conditions involve being completely at an opponent's mercy. So being held or bound in such a manner that places you completely at an opponent's mercy (which would include being tied up) count as being helpless. It's written, but it takes a little bit of comprehension to figure it out because it's written in an implicit manner and not handed to you on a silver platter. You can't limit yourself to only explicit meanings; language, especially English, doesn't work that way. You've basically committed a fallacy; you presume that since some conditions and effects explicitly call out being helpless, those that don't automatically don't qualify even though they are described in the Helpless condition and it even has a "catch-all" in its list of qualifying conditions. Why do Sleep, Paralyzed, etc. bother listing being Helpless if it's already listed in the Helpless condition? Because redundancy is helpful. Why would some...
What is unclear in the section for Tie Up where it says "This works like a pin effect"?
You, and others, are taking this set of steps where it says that
"a helpless creature is bound etc etc" (a section that mentions some conditions that lead to being helpless not any sort of applicable rule)
Then you jump to saying that "Tied Up" must be equivalent to being bound. Makes sense, if you are tied up, you are bound... that is english.
Then the big leap is to completely ignore the Tie Up section of rules where it lays out precisely what happens when you are tied up as part of a grapple.
The Target is affected by the Tie Up action which is "like a pin effect". This differs from a normal Pin in three ways:
1. The Escape CMD becomes your CMB+20
2. You no longer need to use an action to maintain the pin
3. The target cannot break free on a natural 20 if that roll would not also meet or exceed the new escape CMD.
This is all laid out perfectly well.
Can a target become helpless by being tied up in some other way? Using some other method outside of combat? Sure! Can a prisoner be 'bound' in such a way that they are helpless? Absolutely.
But that isn't what we are talking about here. We are talking about tying someone up during a grapple in 6 seconds or less during combat. The rules are very clear as to how this works, and trying to make some leap toward Helpless that ignores the specific rules for the Tie Up action under grapple is ridiculous. You don't get to completely incapacitate a target and ready them for a Coup De Grace in a single round with Greater Grapple. You could, ostensibly, tie up a target in such a way that they become "unable to defend themselves", but since the Tie Up option under grapple specifically states that it is a Pin effect, we know that tying someone up in this rapid manner is not sufficient to do so.
When a specific section of rules (in this case Tie Up) tells you precisely how to handle something, you go with that specific set of rules rather than a general rule located elsewhere in the book. This is the old adage "specific trumps general"
There is no way you are going to physically tie someone up in 6 seconds in such a way that they qualify as "completely at the mercy of an opponent", at least not without something immobile to tie them to. It just isn't going to happen.
Here is the first sentence from the Pinned Condition: "A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions."
Amazing, then, how pinned has its own whole condition when it really just means that they are helpless. Seems ridiculous doesn't it?
Clearly by your logic, pinned = helpless.
No need to tie them up at all!
|
|
So, your argument is that by RAW, you are not bound, even though it says you are?
Your argument is that since it is like a pin effect, it cannot give you the helpless condition?
Is it also your argument that someone tied up outside of combat, like a prisoner, is helpless, but a character who is tied up while being grappled isn't, even though the rules for tying up someone who is unconscious, paralyzed, asleep, etc... use the exact same rules?
If you have your target pinned, otherwise restrained, or unconscious, you can use rope to tie him up.
On a RAI standpoint:
It is your argument that someone who cannot move, who cannot attack, who cannot do anything but try to escape or take purely mental actions, is not helpless?My friends, RAW ISN'T PERFECT. You have valid points RAI speaking, but because of how it is written, whether you like it or not, whether you think it should work differently or not, being tied up makes you helpless. If you don't like it, go get it changed.
What if I wanted to make someone helpless by tying them up, how many rounds do I have to spend doing it? Is there any RAW for that?
What do you think they meant when they included being bound in the list of options for being helpless?
I think that they meant trapped by a spell like Planar Binding for one. I think they may have meant completely tied up in a way that makes a person helpless... which is something that would require some narrative adjudication from the GM.
I do not think that they meant the Pinned condition.
I will note again, the first sentence of the pinned condition: "A pinned creature is tightly bound and can take few actions."
Just because the word bound is used in a sentence, doesn't mean that this condition is meaningless and only points to helpless.
Tie Up says that it acts like a pin.
Pinned refers to the target as being bound.
These are both true, but the intent is pretty clear. A pinned creature gets -4 AC, loses their Dex modifier and can only perform mental or verbal actions or attempt to escape the pin.
If pinned meant helpless, then pinned would just point to helpless... it wouldn't list a bunch of rules for what happens when you are pinned, and they certainly wouldn't have stuck a Dexterity penalty onto a condition that makes you helpless... because helpless gives you zero dex.
I mean... I don't know what else I can quote. Even if a person who is tied up is helpless, this wouldn't apply to the Tie Up option in grapple because that specificaly states that it acts like a pin effect and specific trumps general.
Do you really think that when Pinned says "tightly bound" in the description for the condition that this means that any pinned creature is helpless?
|
|
They do gained the pinned condition. But it does say bound, and helpless is clear in saying that when they are bound they are helpless.
I understand where your coming from with the redundancy, but note that paralyzed shares redundancy with helpless (both set your dexterity to effectively zero).
I can see a "loose" interpretation of helpless being applied to pinned, yes. The concepts between pinned and helpless are already close (The only difference between paralyzed and pinned is that you can "try" to escape being pinned).
Also, if being bound didn't produce becoming helpless, then what do manacles do? All they say that they do is "bind a medium sized creature", nothing else. Not even pin them, just bind, which in and of itself does nothing. If someone is in manacles, are they helpless?
Much of what you wrote, however, is more of based on RAI. Pathfinder society focuses on RAW strictly. There are many instances that I wish that weren't true because it weakens different character ideas and dulls creativity.In this case, I wish it was more clear that it was intended that being tied up meant you were helpless. It encourages more options for character design, and thus creativity (This honestly makes me want to build a lawful rogue type, or vigilante, that refuses to kill people).
From my stand point, and among others, non-magical classes are at a disadvantage. While it is never an excuse to make a ruling based on that, I do like the idea of having them become more powerful mid to late levels (Where greater grapple becomes available). But this might make them more powerful earlier as well...
We both have very valid points, this thread though is more about sneaks attacks and grapples. Just to make sure I have your thoughts down correctly (and I won't try to shoot them down, completely neutral at this point so I can better understand) your saying that:
A. Being tied up is being pinned with just a few changes.
B. If being "bound" produces helpless, then by extension, the pinned condition ought to produce the helpless condition as well, which does not fit current understanding of RAI.
Was there anything concise that you wanted to add to that or re word?
My point of view:
A. The target does become bound as per the text, and thus should gain the helpless condition on top of whatever else it gains.
B. If being bound by rope doesn't qualify as being bound for the helpless condition, what does qualify then?
I think that attempting to tie someone up with rope with the expressed goal of making them helpless could make them helpless. Manacles could work as well, but obviously a guy with manacles on his hands and feet without also being tethered isnt usually helpless. Since creatures vary in limb number and shape (hard to tie up or bind an Ooze) I think they left this up to the GM except in the cases where "bound" is used in a different way (such as in planar binding).
I think that the Tie Up option under grapple is a more specific sort of action that uses its own very specific rules. This makes sense because it is a combat option that just takes a standard action to perform (or a move action with greater grapple) and the benefits are obvious.
I also think that pinned is not equal with helpless for the same reason. It is similar in many ways, but it is its own specific thing.
You can still sneak attack a pinned target, so no worries there, but they just aren't helpless.
Oh... well either way, you aren't flat-footed while helpless.
Flat-footed is a very weird thing now....
For example, when you are pinned, you lose your Dex bonus to AC and can't make attacks of opportunity....but you aren't flat-footed. This holds true for paralyzed stunned, unconscious....
Its very odd. Really, flat-footed only happens on the first round of combat, before a target acts. (or the entire first round with ambush) Or from using : shatter defenses, scout's charge/skirmisher, unbalancing counter (flowing monk 2)... not a lot of options.
I mean, flat-footed is not easy to get. Back in 3.5 the term got thrown around a whole lot more, but Paizo has cut it out in a lot of places. The removal of the word flat-footed from the grapple rules was, in fact, an errata. So its not that universal term anymore that refers to being without your dexterity... it is really more specific than that.
Its unfortunate that sap master uses the term, though it does make sense. If you are looking to Sap Master regularly, I would suggest taking the Scout Archtype and simply moving 10ft.
Grappling is ultimately very difficult for a rogue, and at CR 10+ starts becoming downright impossible.
Even if by level 12 you have a 24 strength, anaconda coils, gauntles of the skilled maneuver, improved and greater grapple... your CMB is going to be a struggle against anything near your CR.
bab 9, +4 feats, +7 str, +2 belt, +2 gauntlets = +24
Take a glance at CR 12 monster CMDs... it aint pretty. Its also even harder to keep up your CMD, since none of those bonuses except for Improved Grapple are adding to it. Keep in mind, also, that you lose 4 dex when grappling which translates to -2 CMD. So grappling is best left to Barbarians and Tetori monks.
OTOH, at that same level you could be rolling up with the Scout archtype and hitting for 18d6+44 (avg: 107) with no setup required.
(Sap Adept, Sap Master, Bludgeoner, Vital Strike, Power Attack, Furious Focus, 22 str, and a +2 impact dwarven longhammer)
Or, if you want to roll with unarmed strikes, cut out bludgeoner/furious focus add in the Ninja trick for Imp unarmed strike and knockout artist + Dragon style. Buy a +1 AoMF and a chain shirt of brawling.
That damage is 1d3+12d6+54 (avg: 98)