Grappled, Grappling, & Casting Spells with somatic or material components


Rules Questions


I have found various threads on grappled and spell casting, but have not seen anyone who noted the difference between being grappled and grappling someone. Are the grapple rules trying to say a grappled character can do things that the grappling character cannot? Is the idea that the grappling character is using both hands to grapple the target?

Grapple:
Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that requires only one hand to perform, such as cast a spell or make an attack with a light or one-handed weapon against any creature within your reach, including the creature that is grappling you.

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 must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level), or lose the spell. Grappled creatures cannot make attacks of opportunity.

Pinned: A pinned creature is limited in the actions that it can take. A pinned creature can always attempt to free itself, usually through a combat maneuver check or Escape Artist check. A pinned creature can take verbal and mental actions, but cannot cast any spells that require a somatic or material component. A pinned character who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (DC 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level) or lose the spell. Pinned is a more severe version of grappled, and their effects do not stack.

Grappling or Pinned: The only spells you can cast while grappling or pinned are those without somatic components and whose material components (if any) you have in hand. Even so, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler's CMB + the level of the spell you're casting) or lose the spell.

It seems important to me that the Magic section uses "grappling" rather than grappled. I suppose it could be a typo, but I don’t think so. I think it is intended to limit the grappler as they are focused on hanging on to the grappled. Any thoughts?

Liberty's Edge

Big Blue 22 wrote:
I have found various threads on grappled and spell casting, but have not seen anyone who noted the difference between being grappled and grappling someone. Are the grapple rules trying to say a grappled character can do things that the grappling character cannot? Is the idea that the grappling character is using both hands to grapple the target?

No, depending on what you are you can use a paw, mooth, tentacle or whatever.

The problem is that most spellcasting is a standard action and maintaining a grapple is a standard action, so you generally can't do both at the same time.
If you can cast as a swift/immediate action you suffer the normal grappled effects. The grappler is grappled too.


Grapple rules: "If successful, both you and the target gain the grappled condition."


Matthew Downie wrote:
Grapple rules: "If successful, both you and the target gain the grappled condition."

I understand that. but it does not say grappled = grappling and grappling is more restrictive than grappled.


I think the rules could use tidying up.

There's an errata saying, "Casting a spell while you have the grappled or pinned condition is difficult and requires a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler’s CMB + the level of the spell you’re casting). Pinned creatures can only cast spells that do not have somatic components."

This implies "The only spells you can cast while grappling or pinned are those without somatic components and whose material components (if any) you have in hand" no longer applies.


Matthew Downie wrote:

I think the rules could use tidying up.

There's an errata saying, "Casting a spell while you have the grappled or pinned condition is difficult and requires a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler’s CMB + the level of the spell you’re casting). Pinned creatures can only cast spells that do not have somatic components."

This implies "The only spells you can cast while grappling or pinned are those without somatic components and whose material components (if any) you have in hand" no longer applies.

Is this errata on the website somewhere? I saw there was an FAQ on grappling, but it does not include the language you quoted.

Liberty's Edge

Big Blue 22 wrote:
Matthew Downie wrote:

I think the rules could use tidying up.

There's an errata saying, "Casting a spell while you have the grappled or pinned condition is difficult and requires a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler’s CMB + the level of the spell you’re casting). Pinned creatures can only cast spells that do not have somatic components."

This implies "The only spells you can cast while grappling or pinned are those without somatic components and whose material components (if any) you have in hand" no longer applies.

Is this errata on the website somewhere? I saw there was an FAQ on grappling, but it does not include the language you quoted.
PRD - concentration checks wrote:
Grappling or Pinned: Casting a spell while you have the grappled or pinned condition is difficult and it requires a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler's CMB + the level of the spell you're casting). Pinned creatures can only cast spells that do not have somatic components.

It is here.

PRD - Glossary wrote:

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.

PRD - Combat wrote:

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. See the grappled condition for additional details. If you are pinned, your actions are very limited. See the pinned condition in Conditions for additional details.è/quote]

From what I have seen, the old text Matthew Downie cited has been removed from the rules.


Diego Rossi wrote:
Big Blue 22 wrote:


Is this errata on the website somewhere? I saw there was an FAQ on grappling, but it does not include the language you quoted.
PRD - concentration checks wrote:
Grappling or Pinned: Casting a spell while you have the grappled or pinned condition is difficult and it requires a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler's CMB + the level of the spell you're casting). Pinned creatures can only cast spells that do not have somatic components.
It is here.

Ok thanks for linking it. After reading the official version I agree that the grappling grappled distinction appears to be irrelevant. However, the way the rules are written only pinned has the more restrictive no somatic components. Isn't the logical conclusion that in the grappled condition a spell with a somatic component can be cast with the proper concentration check?

Liberty's Edge

Yes, read the third citation I added. "you can take any action that doesn't require two hands to perform, such as cast a spell". There is no limitation there, beside " doesn't require two hands" and the concentration check because you are grappled.


Yes.

Note that in order to maintain a grapple you need to use a standard action, so normally you can't do that and cast spells.

The bit I was quoting before came from here
.
It contains a note about the implications of the FAQ.


Ok, thanks guys

Grand Lodge

It is a leftover from 3.5

Basically, in one of the older rules sets, you could not cast while grappled. They changed that in Pathfinder, but missed one of the references to that rule.


what about grapple and at will spells?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
G.ame O.perational D.irector wrote:
what about grapple and at will spells?

At Will spells still need a standard action to activate, unless it is one that doesn't. Which is said in the spell's description (See Grace, Windy Escape, and other Swift or Immediate spells).


Sorry to necro, but got a game coming up where a Raelis Azata has Greater Grapple+Rapid Grappler leaving standard action usually open to just cast a spell/spell like ability.

My biggest question is whose CMB do you use when you're the controller and casting a spell? Wouldn't quite make sense to use your own and also still need the roll, but it's not exactly clear if you would instead default to the opponent's as the text still says "grappler's CMB".

Liberty's Edge

AwesomenessDog wrote:

Sorry to necro, but got a game coming up where a Raelis Azata has Greater Grapple+Rapid Grappler leaving standard action usually open to just cast a spell/spell like ability.

My biggest question is whose CMB do you use when you're the controller and casting a spell? Wouldn't quite make sense to use your own and also still need the roll, but it's not exactly clear if you would instead default to the opponent's as the text still says "grappler's CMB".

LOL. The laugh is not referred to you, but to the people that wrote Greater Grapple without addressing the question.

RAW, you need to make the concentration check against the CMB of the one controlling the grapple. The rule assumes that the caster isn't the guy maintaining the grapple, as most casters don't go around grappling, and no one thought about addressing the problem, AFAIK.

Rule as Logic (that isn't even RAI) sees that as something strange, but we can justify that as "my concentration check is based on how hard is for me to maintain the grapple and cast a spell at the same time".
Any option I can see to house rule the Raelis feat combo and spellcasting seems really unfair for the target of the grapple.

There is an even more fun thing:

Raelis wrote:
Constant—freedom of movement, nondetection
Freedom of movement wrote:
All combat maneuver checks made to grapple the target automatically fail.

Any grapple maneuver made to grapple you automatically fails, but you apply the grappled condition against you when you successfully make your grappling attack.

The grapple maneuver against you automatically fails, but starting a grapple automatically applies that condition against you, but it automatically fails ... (restart cycle, not computing).

At this point, house rule as you see fit.
- If you want a tough fight, house rule that Freedom of movement allows the Raelis to freely cast the spell.
- If you want to do something less broken, house rule that the concentration check is against the opponent CMB, even if the opponent doesn't control the grapple.
- if you want strict but hardly logical RAW, use the Raelis CMB.

Sorry, I wasn't really helpful.


Diego Rossi wrote:
[The grapple maneuver against you automatically fails, but starting a grapple automatically applies that condition against you, but it automatically fails ... (restart cycle, not computing).

This is incorrect. You can still have the grapple condition applied to you if a combat maneuver check was not used to apply it (ie, you did it as a result of starting a grapple and winning). The important bit is this: "The subject automatically succeeds on any combat maneuver checks and Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin." So, you can automatically succeed on getting out of any grapple conditions, should they be applied somehow but you still must make the attempt/action to do so.

Now, as far as casting a spell while being in control of a grapple. Unless you are under the effect of said Freedom of Movement spell, you would either still need to make a concentration check OR use the rules for only grappling with one hand (ie, -4 to your attempt) so that your free hand is available for somatic gestures without the need for making a check. If you are under the effect of a freedom of movement spell, in control of the grapple, and wanting to cast a spell, you would be able to do so with having to make a concentration check (the grapple does not impede your movements).

Liberty's Edge

DeathlessOne wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
[The grapple maneuver against you automatically fails, but starting a grapple automatically applies that condition against you, but it automatically fails ... (restart cycle, not computing).

This is incorrect. You can still have the grapple condition applied to you if a combat maneuver check was not used to apply it (ie, you did it as a result of starting a grapple and winning). The important bit is this: "The subject automatically succeeds on any combat maneuver checks and Escape Artist checks made to escape a grapple or a pin." So, you can automatically succeed on getting out of any grapple conditions, should they be applied somehow but you still must make the attempt/action to do so.

Now, as far as casting a spell while being in control of a grapple. Unless you are under the effect of said Freedom of Movement spell, you would either still need to make a concentration check OR use the rules for only grappling with one hand (ie, -4 to your attempt) so that your free hand is available for somatic gestures without the need for making a check. If you are under the effect of a freedom of movement spell, in control of the grapple, and wanting to cast a spell, you would be able to do so with having to make a concentration check (the grapple does not impede your movements).

You suffer a penalty to make a grapple check with one hand, but, after making the check, your hands aren't blocked into maintaining it.

CRB wrote:
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.

The rules, again, don't consider people that can make a check to maintain the grapple with a movement or swift action, but after confirming the grapple you simply have the grappled condition and are in control of the grapple. AFAIK, nowhere does it say that both your hands are busy maintaining the grapple.

I know that you can get the grappled condition while under the effect of freedom of movement, but I only wanted underline how strange is the synergy of the abilities of the Raelis Azata.


Diego Rossi wrote:
You suffer a penalty to make a grapple check with one hand, but, after making the check, your hands aren't blocked into maintaining it. ... AFAIK, nowhere does it say that both your hands are busy maintaining the grapple.

Aside from the fact that you NEED at least one free hand to make the attempt, and take a penalty for not doing so, it goes to reason that unless you take that penalty each time to initiate AND maintain the grapple, both of your hands are tied up in the attempt. The list of things you can do in a grapple (as the controller, as part of the grapple maintain action) is limited to a specific list of things: Move, Damage, Pin, Tie-up.

Being the controller of the grapple, your hands are not as free to do anything you might wish (as opposed to the person being grappled, since they can choose to fight the grapple or let you keep control while they do something else.

Now, with the use of the Greater Grapple feat, you can reduce all that to a move action instead, freeing up your standard action for other things. Unless you are releasing your hold on the grappled target, you must still take account that one or more of your hands are occupied. This isn't a situation where you can free action remove and hand and free action it back into place like you do with a two-handed weapon. You are holding onto a moving, unwilling target.

One thing to point out is that the Greater Grapple feat never states that you are no longer exempt from the (narrow list of) actions you can take as the controller of the grapple. It merely reduces the maintaining of the grapple to a move action, letting you make two such checks a turn. Extrapolating a normal standard action from there is putting it beyond the realm of RAW.


DeathlessOne wrote:
One thing to point out is that the Greater Grapple feat never states that you are no longer exempt from the (narrow list of) actions you can take as the controller of the grapple. It merely reduces the maintaining of the grapple to a move action, letting you make two such checks a turn. Extrapolating a normal standard action from there is putting it beyond the realm of RAW.

While that is sorta true, a really obvious use of grappling as a move action is just attacking into the grapple with a weapon that may be better than your unarmed/grapple damage now that you've already confirmed that the enemy can't easily get away. Certainly you can take any standard action, even if that standard action would require a concentration check that you have no chance of making. However then that does raise the question of "If I can maintain with two hands without penalty as a move, then cast the spell with standard, then maintain again with both hands as a move action" since normally how you determine which hands are free/used and occluded is by how you spend just your standard action like said two handed example. Of course, just because you say you remove your off hand between turns doesn't mean you gain things like shield bonuses or magus casting after using a two handed weapon.

I think the good news at least for the target of the grapple, either way from both Diego and Deathless' comments, is that even if he can lock out one person and still cast spells, there's still the rest of the party to help against honestly not the most offensive spell selection. The only thing I think that would be really scary is if it could somehow bring the party members via dimension door to other encounters, but it can't as pinned/helpless isn't enough to force a creature to be willing.

I will probably go with using opponent CMB (although secondary question I don't think I've seen answered is what modifiers apply here for the DC 10+CMB+spell level calculation, such as the bonus to maintain, grapple maneuver specific modifiers, or is it just straight the bonus at the point of most recent grapple?).

So you were helpful Diego!

Liberty's Edge

DeathlessOne wrote:
One thing to point out is that the Greater Grapple feat never states that you are no longer exempt from the (narrow list of) actions you can take as the controller of the grapple. It merely reduces the maintaining of the grapple to a move action, letting you make two such checks a turn. Extrapolating a normal standard action from there is putting it beyond the realm of RAW.

Extrapolating "it requires both hands" is beyond the realm of RAW by a way wider margin.

"Sean K Reynolds"- Oct 15, 2012, 01:22 pm wrote:


Fatespinner wrote:


PRD wrote:
Grappling or Pinned: The only spells you can cast while grappling or pinned are those without somatic components and whose material components (if any) you have in hand. Even so, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + the grappler's CMB + the level of the spell you're casting) or lose the spell.
The above is a legacy of the 3E grapple rules. With PFRPG redefining grapple as "I have your arm, not your whole body," the above doesn't make sense, and it was only present in one part of the Core Rulebook (in the Concentration section, I think). So it's being removed in errata: the "no somatic components while you're grappled" rule shouldn't be in the book.

Written when he was the developer tasked with replying to rule questions.

And the rules are very clear: "when you are grappled you can take any action that doesn't require both hands". As the rules say that you are grappled when grappling, if you have the needed actions you can take any action that doesn't require two hands.

BTW, somatic only, or S and M spells if you have Eschew materials, don't require any hand.


Diego Rossi wrote:
And the rules are very clear: "when you are grappled you can take any action that doesn't require both hands". As the rules say that you are grappled when grappling, if you have the needed actions you can take any action that doesn't require two hands.

I've pretty much said everything I wanted to at this point, but I'd like to direct attention to one fairly important detail:

"Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that doesn’t require two hands to perform, ..."

The person that initiated the grapple or is maintaining the grapple is not the one attempting to break or reverse the grapple, therefor the "you can take any action..." part is not applicable to them, only to the one on the receiving end of the grapple. Yes, both have the 'grappled' condition, but under normal circumstances, the grappler does not have the option for any additional actions aside from 'maintain and do one of four other actions' until they release the hold.

I support Greater Grapple allowing the controller such additional activities, and would immediately house rule such a thing. I just want to be clear on how the mechanics actually play out beforehand. I play a fairly competent grapple-based character in a giant slayer campaign, and such a ruling would be greatly in my favor.

Liberty's Edge

DeathlessOne wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
And the rules are very clear: "when you are grappled you can take any action that doesn't require both hands". As the rules say that you are grappled when grappling, if you have the needed actions you can take any action that doesn't require two hands.

I've pretty much said everything I wanted to at this point, but I'd like to direct attention to one fairly important detail:

"Instead of attempting to break or reverse the grapple, you can take any action that doesn’t require two hands to perform, ..."

The person that initiated the grapple or is maintaining the grapple is not the one attempting to break or reverse the grapple, therefor the "you can take any action..." part is not applicable to them, only to the one on the receiving end of the grapple. Yes, both have the 'grappled' condition, but under normal circumstances, the grappler does not have the option for any additional actions aside from 'maintain and do one of four other actions' until they release the hold.

I support Greater Grapple allowing the controller such additional activities, and would immediately house rule such a thing. I just want to be clear on how the mechanics actually play out beforehand. I play a fairly competent grapple-based character in a giant slayer campaign, and such a ruling would be greatly in my favor.

So you are saying that the parts of Greater Grapple and Rapid Grappler that make the grappling attempt a move and swift action actually do nothing, as the grappler can't use the standard action?


Diego Rossi wrote:
So you are saying that the parts of Greater Grapple and Rapid Grappler that make the grappling attempt a move and swift action actually do nothing, as the grappler can't use the standard action?

No. I am saying that you are 'fundamentally misunderstanding what those feats do'. They don't actually 'free up your standard action'. Greater Grappler makes the maintaining grapple action a 'move action' and 'lets you make two grapple checks a turn'. Rapid Grappler merely allows you to make an additional grapple attempt as a swift action, with a penalty to the attempt.

Greater Grapple wrote:

...This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), but you are not required to make two checks...

Normal: Maintaining a grapple is a standard action.

The feats merely make up the difference between having full iterative attacks when you aren't grappling to having more [grapple] actions when you ARE grappling.

As said before, I support freeing up the standard action for something other than grappling. It is a common house rule in my games.

Now, if you are able to grapple without having the grappled condition yourself, such as with some monster abilities (typically taking a -20 to their attempt) or the grapple ability of a white-haired witch (other's exist, I am sure)... Then you are free to use whatever standard action you have available to you since you are not interacting with the grapple rules as normal beyond that move-action maintain grapple action. Those are the instances where those feats work the way you seem to think they do.


You're missing the bigger concept with the second half of that sentence "but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple." The part of that sentence you quotes is specifically in reference to the following sentence, which was just broken up that way for conciseness. You are not limited to what your action is, as they use the work "make" to mean attempt the check, and then "succeed" in the following sentence as in you would need to maintain successfully twice to maintain with GG.


No. It meas exactly what it says. You only need to succeed at one grapple check to maintain the grapple. The following sentence is just a clarification of the normal rules, since you DO have to make a check to maintain at the beginning of the NORMAL action it takes to continue grappling someone. With this feat, you do NOT have to do so, only needing ONE to maintain your grip. This means that you have TWO chances each round to keep your grip, such as if you fail on one of the checks.

What does maintaining the grapple mean? It means you are able to continuing keeping the grappled condition on the target, and thus limiting its actions for the turn. Nothing else states you are released from the grapple condition, that your actions are freed up for something else, nothing except that you are able to make more than one grapple check per turn. The rules tell you what you CAN do, not what you cannot. The feat does NOT say you may take a standard action as normal (or any language similar). It must operate under the normal grapple rules PLUS the addition of being able to make another grapple check per turn.

Now, if you choose to LET GO of the grapple after your initial check and use you action normally, that is fine. You still have a standard action left, outside of the grappled condition.

I have nothing else to add to this discussion. Anymore is just going to be a back and forth between "Uh-huh!" and "Nuh-uh!". Hope it helped, at least.


Except in a previous post you were using the first sentence to indicate that both standard and move actions must be used on the maintain by RAW, which isn't the purpose of that sentence, as clarified by the second sentence.


AwesomenessDog wrote:
Except in a previous post you were using the first sentence to indicate that both standard and move actions must be used on the maintain by RAW, which isn't the purpose of that sentence, as clarified by the second sentence.

Feel free to quote the exact text in question. I am fairly certain I know EXACTLY which sentence you are referring to and exactly how you are going to take it out of context. So, be sure to include the ENTIRE paragraph it is contained within.


DeathlessOne wrote:

The person that initiated the grapple or is maintaining the grapple is not the one attempting to break or reverse the grapple, therefor the "you can take any action..." part is not applicable to them, only to the one on the receiving end of the grapple. Yes, both have the 'grappled' condition, but under normal circumstances, the grappler does not have the option for any additional actions aside from 'maintain and do one of four other actions' until they release the hold.

...

Diego Rossi wrote:
So you are saying that the parts of Greater Grapple and Rapid Grappler that make the grappling attempt a move and swift action actually do nothing, as the grappler can't use the standard action?

No. I am saying that you are 'fundamentally misunderstanding what those feats do'. They don't actually 'free up your standard action'. Greater Grappler makes the maintaining grapple action a 'move action' and 'lets you make two grapple checks a turn'. Rapid Grappler merely allows you to make an additional grapple attempt as a swift action, with a penalty to the attempt.

The feats merely make up the difference between having full iterative attacks when you aren't grappling to having more [grapple] actions when you ARE grappling.

Greater Grapple wrote:
You receive a +2 bonus on checks made to grapple a foe. This bonus stacks with the bonus granted by Improved Grapple. Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action. This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round (to move, harm, or pin your opponent), [/b]but you are not required to make two checks. You only need to succeed at one of these checks to maintain the grapple[/b].

Nothing says anything about how you have to use your actions in maintaining a grapple, just that now with the action being downgraded to a move action, it is possible to make 2 grapple checks to maintain in a round, but it immediately follows up with two clarifications:

1) That you are not required to spend both actions to maintain
2) That even if you do spend both actions to maintain, you only need to succeed at one of them to maintain the grapple

Therefore nothing occludes you from how you spend your standard action if you want to maintain and have already successfully maintained with a move action, by RAW or otherwise.

Liberty's Edge

Just to be clear, let's say that the grappler has a poison sting and Greater Grapple. He maintains the grapple with a move action. He can make a standard attack with the sting or not?


My answer would be that RAW does not say anywhere that you are limited to only making maintain actions/checks while you are wanting to maintain the grapple round over round, so it absolutely could spend its standard to make a sting attack.


AwesomenessDog wrote:
Nothing says anything about how you have to use your actions in maintaining a grapple, just that now with the action being downgraded to a move action, it is possible to make 2 grapple checks to maintain in a round...

We are getting into the realm of "the rules don't say I can't". This is a permissive system. Regardless, let's continue.

Quote:

... but it immediately follows up with two clarifications:

1) That you are not required to spend both actions to maintain
2) That even if you do spend both actions to maintain, you only need to succeed at one of them to maintain the grapple

I disagree with none of this.

Quote:
Therefore nothing occludes you from how you spend your standard action if you want to maintain and have already successfully maintained with a move action, by RAW or otherwise.

I do not disagree with this at all. But, this is where you are overlooking an important fact, you are STILL IN A GRAPPLE. You have the freedom to drop the grapple at any time if you want to make full use of your standard action at the time, being the controller of the grapple. If you do not, you must still operate under the very restrictive rules of being in said grapple, that limits you to very specific actions (Move, Damage, Pin, Tie Up). Why? Because nothing in the rules state you are no longer grappled. The existence of specific monster abilities (and abilities available to certain classes) that allow you grapple without being treated as grappled add weight to this argument.

Deigo wrote:
Just to be clear, let's say that the grappler has a poison sting and Greater Grapple. He maintains the grapple with a move action. He can make a standard attack with the sting or not?

You could do so as 'Damage' is an option under the normal actions available to a grappler as part of their maintain action (unarmed and natural attacks are specifically called out there). You could do so TWICE, since you can spend your standard action in addition to the move action that greater grapple allows. Note, that if you make an attack against anyone other than your grappled target, you get a penalty to it, as is normal for the grappled condition.


Quote:
If you do not release the grapple, you must continue to make a check each round, as a standard action, to maintain the hold. If your target does not break the grapple, you get a +5 circumstance bonus on grapple checks made against the same target in subsequent rounds. 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).

That merely sets the default action for maintaining a grapple to a standard action. Nothing in there restricts you to using other standard actions if you have a way to change your maintain to another action via greater grapple or something similar. In fact, things like throat slicer imply the lack of such restrictions.


The rules say you can use your actions however you want so long as you have them remaining to be spent and the action exists(/you qualify). Nothing in grapple or Greater Grapple changes that. What regular grapple rules say is that if you don't successfully maintain by the end of the round, the grapple ends, which has nothing to do with how you can spend your actions.

It's a much bigger reach of RAI to assume that because normally you can only grapple with a standard action that "you must only grapple with your actions if you want to maintain the grapple".

Liberty's Edge

DeathlessOne wrote:
Deigo wrote:
Just to be clear, let's say that the grappler has a poison sting and Greater Grapple. He maintains the grapple with a move action. He can make a standard attack with the sting or not?
You could do so as 'Damage' is an option under the normal actions available to a grappler as part of their maintain action (unarmed and natural attacks are specifically called out there). You could do so TWICE, since you can spend your standard action in addition to the move action that greater grapple allows. Note, that if you make an attack against anyone other than your grappled target, you get a penalty to it, as is normal for the grappled condition.

You are replying to something different from what I asked. I didn't ask about making another grapple check to apply damage, I asked about making a standard attack.

It doesn't matter why I want to make a standard attack. Maybe my stinger attack bonus has a better chance to hit, a high critical range or critical multiplier, or any other reason.
I have maintained the grapple.
A grappled creature can use a standard action to make an attack.
As a grappler that has maintained the grapple, I can use a standard action to attack?
Or you are arguing that, as I am the one that controls the grapple, I have fewer options than the guy that is grappled?


Diego Rossi wrote:
Or you are arguing that, as I am the one that controls the grapple, I have fewer options than the guy that is grappled?

Yes, that is what I am saying. You are the one attempting to constrict the actions of another creature. The only exception being that you have the option to drop the grappling as a free action and then go about your turn as normal afterwards.

Greater Grapple does not make grappling more convenient. It makes it more effective by allowing you to perform the actions faster.

As for your question about using your standard action to attack someone outside of the grapple, my answer remains the same. You suffer the penalties that are listed in the grappled condition if your attack is not against the grappled creature (normally this isn't possible because your standard action is already used). I assume the stinger is not part of the appendages that are used to grapple, and as such, should be free to make that attack without compromising the grapple result (ie, having to take a -4 because you aren't using two arms).

AwesomenessDog wrote:
It's a much bigger reach of RAI to assume that because normally you can only grapple with a standard action that "you must only grapple with your actions if you want to maintain the grapple".

As I said, it is going to devolve into a "Nuh-Uh and Uh-huh" situation. I maintain my stance on the issue, even though I have already said that I houserule it differently. Greater Grapple does not exempt you from the grappled condition, so you must abide by your role in said grapple.


We're just pointing out it's not even necessary to call it a house rule. And again, if you're saying ones actions as a whole aren't locked in to maintaining the grapple because they can fight outside the grapple, then there is still nothing saying specifically that all your actions inside the grapple have to be to maintain. So nothing supports your impression of what would be RAW.


AwesomenessDog wrote:
And again, if you're saying ones actions as a whole aren't locked in to maintaining the grapple because they can fight outside the grapple, then there is still nothing saying specifically that all your actions inside the grapple have to be to maintain.

So long as the actions you take AFTER you maintain the grapple are allowable within the rules listed with the grappled condition, you are allowed to to perform whatever those action are. Different penalties or modifier will apply as normal, so long as you do not release the hold and are still considered grappled.

Fighting outside of the grapple is something that normally isn't possible as the controller unless you have a specific ability that allows it (as I've stated before). An extra appendage (stinger), a free standard action (greater grapple), etc, etc, can and do allow for a controller to make attacks/actions while still grappling. All penalties still apply.

Now, I am officially done with this thread. I've stated my peace and will not concede on the matter. Have fun at your tables, all!

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Grappled, Grappling, & Casting Spells with somatic or material components All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.