I'd allow it
I'd rule that you would go with him as nothing says a Bull Rush or other movement-forcing ability breaks grapples. It would be kind of funny too.
The one concern I have is the last line from Channel:
A cleric must be able to present her holy symbol to use this ability.
you have a hand free? present it with that hand.
grapples can be impossible to get out of for some spellcasters, this gives them an option, The option only has limited uses too.
The grappler has a save, so the grappler has a chance to stay attached.
let me ask - how would you rule it if an ally Bullrushed your foe while your grappled?
Dot
Dotted last night cause I wanted to comment.
Pathfinder has made this an issue and needs to expand on these rules. Adhesive Blood is a good example of this. What happens if your sword is stuck to the caster and you get bull rushed away? What happens if the caster runs away. Diminuendo has a good comment with "how would you rule it if an ally Bullrushed your foe while your grappled?"
I'd probably let the grappler make a grapple check versus the DC of the channel to hold on.
I'd probably let the grappler make a grapple check versus the DC of the channel to hold on.
Even if he failed his save? The failed save means he is going flying away. If he holds on then are you going flying with him? Does he get two chances to negate the spell? (one being the save the other being another grapple check)
I'd probably let the grappler make a grapple check versus the DC of the channel to hold on.
I'd either do this or give the cleric an extra break free grapple check using charisma bonus + cleric level as the CMB. There's nothing in the rules to set a precedent on the latter, it's just what I picture the designers doing.
I'd probably let the grappler make a grapple check versus the DC of the channel to hold on.Even if he failed his save? The failed save means he is going flying away. If he holds on then are you going flying with him? Does he get two chances to negate the spell? (one being the save the other being another grapple check)
He doesn't get two chances to negate the channel. He gets one chance to negate the channel: the saving throw. If he fails the save, he goes flying.
The grapple check is to mitigate the results of going flying. For example, if the target got pushed off a cliff by the channel, I would absolutely give him a reflex save to catch the edge of the cliff before he plummets to his death.
Likewise, I would give a grappling creature a grapple check to hold on to the grappled cleric. Unless there's something in the channel force tree that says "you drop everything you are carrying" or "you are flat-footed while moving" or "you are completely helpless", I don't see why the grappling creature wouldn't get a chance to hold on--especially considering that one of the options for maintaining a grapple is to move the grappled creature around.
@gwen smith: So how do you handle Adhesive Blood? When someone wants to run away with his sword? What if the Caster wants to move? Are they considered grappled?
because casters don't have a hard enough time in melee already, we have to make up rules that limit their options more?
I'd also like to point out that this is a limited use response.
you say there needs to be a rule for the grappler to drop anything they are holding, but there is also no rule for negating another attack because you just happened to be in grapple.
Think of it as a set of conditions:
Grappler attempts to grapple in grapple range and has a sucessful check = foe is now grappled
Grappler is no longer in grapple range = grapple ends
The method used to take the grappler out of range is not affected by the two characters being in grapple unless the method specifically states it does.
What about other methods of breaking a grapple by pushing the foe away? would you rule the same on Hydraulic Push? Awesome Blow? None of these methods are you just win situations, in each case a check is made by either the attacker or reciever.
Can you get that without using a trait? link? I want it.
because casters don't have a hard enough time in melee already, we have to make up rules that limit their options more?
I'd also like to point out that this is a limited use response.
you say there needs to be a rule for the grappler to drop anything they are holding, but there is also no rule for negating another attack because you just happened to be in grapple.
Think of it as a set of conditions:
Grappler attempts to grapple in grapple range and has a sucessful check = foe is now grappled
Grappler is no longer in grapple range = grapple ends
The method used to take the grappler out of range is not affected by the two characters being in grapple unless the method specifically states it does.
What about other methods of breaking a grapple by pushing the foe away? would you rule the same on Hydraulic Push? Awesome Blow? None of these methods are you just win situations, in each case a check is made by either the attacker or reciever.
Options when grappled:
If You Are Grappled: If you are grappled, you can attempt to break the grapple as a standard action by making a combat maneuver check (DC equal to your opponent's CMD; this does not provoke an attack of opportunity) or Escape Artist check (with a DC equal to your opponent's CMD). If you succeed, you break the grapple and can act normally. Alternatively, if you succeed, you can become the grappler, grappling the other creature (meaning that the other creature cannot freely release the grapple without making a combat maneuver check, while you can). Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that doesn't require two hands to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack or full attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you.
Nothing in this text or in the grappled condition indicates that you can just "move out of range" of the grappler. Since the grappler a) moved the target to an adjacent square and b) can move the target as part of maintaining the grapple, I don't see any RAW option for "pushing the foe away" as a method of breaking the grapple.
Also, given that the Body Shield feat says
As an immediate action while you are grappling an adjacent creature, you can make a grapple combat maneuver check against that creature to gain cover against a single attack. If you are successful and the attack misses you, that attack targets the creature you used as cover, using the same attack roll.
It seems like the creature controlling the grapple has a whole lot of control over what happens to the grappled creature. Based on this, I would rule the opposite way: any method of pushing a grappler "out of range" doesn't work unless the method specifically says it does.
Some of the other options you discussed are based on Bull Rush. Looking at the text on Bull Rush, there's nothing to indicate what the effect is when you try to Bull Rush a creature that is grappling you. That's probably going to be a GM's discretion issue.
I suppose a reasonable ruling could be "Make your Bull Rush attempt against the character grappling you, using their CMD vs. Grapple and applying all your penalties for being grappled. If you make the Bull Rush attempt, you break the grapple."
But I don't see anything in the rules that would make this ruling anything other than a house rule.
I dont see how cover affects Channel Force
Soft Cover: Creatures, even your enemies, can provide you with cover against ranged attacks, giving you a +4 bonus to AC. However, such soft cover provides no bonus on Reflex saves, nor does soft cover allow you to make a Stealth check.
Im also not suggesting the grapple-ie just get up and walk away, im suggesting that they violently throw the grappler with such force - which the grappler can resist with a sucessful will save - away from them that their grip loosens. Now unless the grappler has arms like Mr Fantastic then the grapple ends when they are thrown 10 feet. A grapplers hands are not masterwork manicles.
I dont see how cover affects Channel Force
Actually, it had nothing to do with the cover bonus. To me, the relevant part was the idea that a grappling character can move the target of the grapple around as an immediate action, not on his turn. That seems to indicate a lot of control over the grappled character.
Im also not suggesting the grapple-ie just get up and walk away, im suggesting that they violently throw the grappler with such force - which the grappler can resist with a sucessful will save - away from them that their grip loosens.
That's basically why I suggested using a combat maneuver check to break the grapple.
Now unless the grappler has arms like Mr Fantastic then the grapple ends when they are thrown 10 feet. A grapplers hands are not masterwork manicles.
Or he holds on tightly and drags the other character with him. The grappling character is not being teleported away (which I would allow, BTW): he's being pushed away. Since there's already a mechanism for the grappling character to forcibly move the target of the grapple up to half his speed (which is usually at least 15 feet, and for a monk can easily be 20-30 feet), I don't see why being shoved 10 feet would automatically cause the grappling character to lose his hold.
You're right: a grappler's hands are not masterwork manacles. Masterwork manacles only have an Escape Artist check of 35 and only 20 effective hit points. A 6th level tetori monk can easily have a CMD of 38 or higher, and way, way more than 20 hit points. And he can react to changing circumstances, while manacles can't.
The immediate action only provides a cover bonus to an attack roll. channel energy doesn't not have an attasck roll. it is invalid for this argument.
If the grappler wants to hold on so tight with his hands he wont let go no matter what thats fine; just be advised the torsoe of the grappler will be moving at least 10 feet away.
your proposed rules stack the deck against spellcasters in melee, which is already an extreme weak point for them. you are requiring two checks for one action; one of which will almost definately be in the grapplers favor.
think of it this way in play:
Grapple-ee: I use Channel force; make a will save
Grappler: I fail the save.
Grapple-ee: then travel 10 feet away from me
Grappler: even though I failed the save a second chack should be made between my CMD and your CMB
Grapple-ee: I'm a Cleric; I dont have anything in my CMB...
Grappler: THEN IT DOESNT COUNT AND I DONT MOVE
Grapple-ee: then I just wasted a use of channel energy, you failed your save and nothing happens?
Grappler: yes