stopping and resuming a full attack


Rules Questions


Is the following OK:

1) A character with the grab and constrict special attacks begins to make a full attack action with TWF or ITWF

2) after the first attack (assuming all attacks hit) uses a free action to start a grapple, succeeds, deals its constrict damage, and uses another free action to let go.

3) continues making attacks, grappling, and releasing until it runs out of attacks.

The main focus of the question is whether such interruptions are allowed, not whether the GM should put a limit on the number of free actions the character is taking.


Yes.


You may take a free action before, DURING, or after your other actions in a round. The key part here of course being DURING.


Just be wary of the grappled condition. Grappled prevents any actions that requires two hands, so if you gain it while utilizing TWF your full-attack ends.


Not if you lose the Grappled condition before the end of your turn.


Del_Taco_Eater, how is someone using grab and constrict with a manufactured weapon (TWF/ITWF requires a manufactured weapon)?


15th lvl Tetori Monk with Final Embrace fighting with Unarmed Strikes?


Good point. :)


GM discretion - this is like the gunslinger free action issue and it's really up to the GM.

I've told my players if they try to use this cheese against me every monster that has grab will do this to them. And tentacled monsters come up enough in my game no one has ever wanted to chance it.


Samasboy1 wrote:
Not if you lose the Grappled condition before the end of your turn.

Wrong. If you gain a condition that prevents an action while making that action, it applies immediately and your action ends.


Calth wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:
Not if you lose the Grappled condition before the end of your turn.
Wrong. If you gain a condition that prevents an action while making that action, it applies immediately and your action ends.

It's a moot point in this thread - the attack in question is using the grab monster ability which doesn't give you the grappled condition when you use it


Ckorik wrote:
Calth wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:
Not if you lose the Grappled condition before the end of your turn.
Wrong. If you gain a condition that prevents an action while making that action, it applies immediately and your action ends.
It's a moot point in this thread - the attack in question is using the grab monster ability which doesn't give you the grappled condition when you use it

Again, wrong. Grab still gives the grappled condition if you don't take a -20 penalty to the grapple check.


Calth wrote:

Wrong. If you gain a condition that prevents an action while making that action, it applies immediately and your action ends.

And I think you are misapplying that FAQ.

The question was do the limitations apply immediately, the answer was yes, not yes and it ends your turn. The example they used resulted in the turn ending because the specific limitation in the example.

The example is gaining Staggered while moving, which restricts you to a single move or standard, thus allowing you to finish the move but then end the turn. Your turn ends because you have no further actions available due to being staggered.

Grapple is not the same. Grapple allows you to full attack while grappled, but you cannot take actions that require two hands. If you are full attacking (even if TWF) and become grappled, you can continue full attacking just not in a way that uses two hands, since grapple doesn't stop full attacks.

But if you are the grappler, you can release the grapple, meaning you lose the limitation, and since you are still full attacking you could then continue with attacks with your second hand as you are no longer subject to the limitation.


That's simply not how the rules work. Utilizing TWF is an action that requires two hands, so grapple prevents it. It doesn't matter that each individual attack only requires one hand. And I didn't say your turn ends, I said your action ends. The example you chose is not the relevant one, which is:

If you provoked as part of a full attack (as with the trip example), becoming staggered would end your full attack at that point and prevent you from taking a move action after the staggering attack. It doesn't matter if the AOO happened because of your first attack in your full attack or your last allowed one, being staggered ends your full attack at that point because you can't make a full attack if you're staggered.

So while TWFing, if you gain grappled, you can no longer TWF. Losing the condition doesn't matter, your action is interrupted.


I disagree, Full Attack is your action, TWF is not an action, it modifies your full attack. Your action doesn't end as you can still full attack in a grapple, you just can't use two hands (the limitation applies immediately). However if you lose the condition, and thus the limitation, before finishing the action you could then make the off hand attacks.

The OP's situation is still possible with your interpretation (say a Brawler 1/Tetori Monk 15 can TWF with just one hand). So the original question still needs to be addressed.


Calth wrote:

That's simply not how the rules work. Utilizing TWF is an action that requires two hands, so grapple prevents it. It doesn't matter that each individual attack only requires one hand. And I didn't say your turn ends, I said your action ends. The example you chose is not the relevant one, which is:

If you provoked as part of a full attack (as with the trip example), becoming staggered would end your full attack at that point and prevent you from taking a move action after the staggering attack. It doesn't matter if the AOO happened because of your first attack in your full attack or your last allowed one, being staggered ends your full attack at that point because you can't make a full attack if you're staggered.

So while TWFing, if you gain grappled, you can no longer TWF. Losing the condition doesn't matter, your action is interrupted.

Unless you are a monk or brawler and you can TWF with a single weapon.


Samasboy1 wrote:

I disagree, Full Attack is your action, TWF is not an action, it modifies your full attack. Your action doesn't end as you can still full attack in a grapple, you just can't use two hands (the limitation applies immediately). However if you lose the condition, and thus the limitation, before finishing the action you could then make the off hand attacks.

The OP's situation is still possible with your interpretation (say a Brawler 1/Tetori Monk 15 can TWF with just one hand). So the original question still needs to be addressed.

There is no "before finishing the action." You cannot TWF while having the grappled condition. Conditions interrupt actions and end them if incompatible. So if you gain grappled while TWFing, your action ends. It doesn't matter if each individual attack of the action requires 1 hand, the action as a whole requires two and is incompatible.

Just like if you gain staggered while full-attacking, it ends, even if you have a way to cure it as a free or swift action. The duration of the condition is immaterial.

As for Brawler's Flurry, FoB, and other things, that gets into a probably RAW, but most likely not RAI argument due to the slashing grace FAQ. If you can't gain the benefit of slashing grace due to action type, I would rule you cannot take that action while grappled. The FAQ indicates that actions that replicate TWF are still "two handed" actions. But the FAQ is not directly on point and isn't a RAW answer.

Basically, I wouldn't bet any money on a FAQ asking if you can Flurry of Blows or Brawler's Flurry while having the grappled condition being answered with yes, even if its technically allowed per RAW.


Calth wrote:
Samasboy1 wrote:

I disagree, Full Attack is your action, TWF is not an action, it modifies your full attack. Your action doesn't end as you can still full attack in a grapple, you just can't use two hands (the limitation applies immediately). However if you lose the condition, and thus the limitation, before finishing the action you could then make the off hand attacks.

The OP's situation is still possible with your interpretation (say a Brawler 1/Tetori Monk 15 can TWF with just one hand). So the original question still needs to be addressed.

There is no "before finishing the action." You cannot TWF while having the grappled condition. Conditions interrupt actions and end them if incompatible. So if you gain grappled while TWFing, your action ends. It doesn't matter if each individual attack of the action requires 1 hand, the action as a whole requires two and is incompatible.

Just like if you gain staggered while full-attacking, it ends, even if you have a way to cure it as a free or swift action. The duration of the condition is immaterial.

As for Brawler's Flurry, FoB, and other things, that gets into a probably RAW, but most likely not RAI argument due to the slashing grace FAQ. If you can't gain the benefit of slashing grace due to action type, I would rule you cannot take that action while grappled. The FAQ indicates that actions that replicate TWF are still "two handed" actions. But the FAQ is not directly on point and isn't a RAW answer.

Basically, I wouldn't bet any money on a FAQ asking if you can Flurry of Blows or Brawler's Flurry while having the grappled condition being answered with yes, even if its technically allowed per RAW.

I think you have a point actually on using the TWF - although Flurry got a FAQ that specifically calls out you can flurry with a single weapon for every attack, so I think you would loose the bet on that.

That being said the tetori specifically gives up flurry so I'm thinking the only way this would work by the rules is if they are making the free grapples with -20 on the attempts.


Yes, you can spam Constrict. Yes, it's cheesy as hell. Yes, it's easily ruled: "The number of Constrict free actions you can take on your turn is one".


I didn't say flurry requires two weapons. I said flurry probably is intended to count as a two hand action. Those are very different things.


Calth wrote:
I didn't say flurry requires two weapons. I said flurry probably is intended to count as a two hand action. Those are very different things.

It was originally - you are 100% correct - but it made the monk so weak (along with other design choices) they eventually changed it to be 'just a bunch of attacks' - and that the monk could use a single finger, weapon, body part, or whatever for every one of them. But you are very correct about intent - although if you search you can find 300 page arguments over it in the early days of the system.


Again that is irrelevant to my post and not being argued.


People are wondering what classes I have levels in. I'm brawler 6/monk 2. With the unarmed strike class feature I need no hands free to make my full attack.

"This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full"


Unarmed strikes may or may not help depending on whether or not the "cannot do something requiring both hands while grappled" thing refers to actual hands or metaphysical hands. It also depends on whether Two Weapon Fighting with no offhand counts as using one hand or both.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / stopping and resuming a full attack All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.