One of those unexpected things that popped and lacked an easy answer at the table.
Scary monster is grappling a PC, it's on one side of an open door, players are on another. Players decide they want to run away, so they're discussing closing the door on it.
Especially given it's somewhat tentacley, so it's not just a single hand, but also because it is 'crossing' that space into the the grappled PC's space, and "Move action, I irresistibly break the grapple!" seems a bit easy.
When I said "That'll take some sort of resisted roll!" they decided not to do it, and went for the forever favourite, the Wand of Grease, and did manage to get out.
Doors are a bit 'weird' in general, in that unless you go to some effort, they don't 'take up space' when open so they open all the way, unless you pick which way they open, then you (or I at least) end up treating them all as swinging both ways, so it's not harder to shut some in combat because they're 'in' the other space. But that seems relatively balanced against the 'always a move action to open or close', and thus being unable to move-open-move or ditto shut.
How would you have ruled? What sort of resisted roll would it have been, if that? I was originally thinking straight opposed strength, but I'm now thinking either opposed CMB vs CMB, or 'normal' CMB versus CMD.
Between the players and the monster, I think the door is the most likely thing to give. Have the monster take a crack at the break DC of the door when the players try to close it.
The players are attacking the creature with an improvised weapon, and doing so is introducing improved cover. I suppose I'd resolve the door attack, if it hits, it deals 1d4+str damage and creates improved cover making it harder for the creature to maintain the grapple on its next turn.
I go with opposed Strength, simply because all your combat technique means squat when trying to move (or stop from moving) a fixed object like a door.
Mmm, I think I was also thinking that it wasn't that high on technique.
Between the players and the monster, I think the door is the most likely thing to give. Have the monster take a crack at the break DC of the door when the players try to close it.
It wasn't a super-strong or 'built' monster, so I don't think the door would just come apart. And yet it doesn't feel like "Yeah, you close the door unless the monster is strong enough to BREAK THROUGH IT IN ONE GO!" is really fitting, when actually all the monster is resisting is the door closing across its outstretched limbs.
The players are attacking the creature with an improvised weapon, and doing so is introducing improved cover. I suppose I'd resolve the door attack, if it hits, it deals 1d4+str damage and creates improved cover making it harder for the creature to maintain the grapple on its next turn.
Can see with 'attacking with an improvised weapon' but I'd say more that you're attempting to introduce improved cover. Not necessarily succeeding.
Reading these, and thinking about it some more, I think what I'll probably go for is that it's effectively a form of Aid Another on breaking the grapple, but one I might well allow from someone who could get at the door to move it, but who might not be positioned to normally Aid Another (should that be the layout somehow).
It's the sort of thing that happens in movies fairly often, so it makes sense it'd come up. Not sure how to rule it. Technically, I guess the door just closes unopposed, since there's no rule to stop that from happening, but that obviously isn't the "intent" as much as a deficiency in the rules we have.
I think the scenario is making an invalid assumption because the door cannot be closed between the two grapplers. Doors open and close in an arc. So assuming the door is on the party's side of the wall (and therefore reachable), closing it will push the character into another square, either along the corridor or into the room with the monster.
I would model it as a series of opposed grapple checks with the door pushers aiding another. The end result will either be a broken grapple and the door closed or the door closed with the character inside the room grappling the monster.
I think the scenario is making an invalid assumption because the door cannot be closed between the two grapplers. Doors open and close in an arc. So assuming the door is on the party's side of the wall (and therefore reachable), closing it will push the character into another square, either along the corridor or into the room with the monster.
But do I keep track of which side all the doors open? Not even slightly!
And the characters don't take up the full five foot square; neither does the monster. So there's 'room'
I would model it as a series of opposed grapple checks with the door pushers aiding another. The end result will either be a broken grapple and the door closed or the door closed with the character inside the room grappling the monster.
Hmm, it feels like "Things stay where they are" should be an option as well as breaking the grapple or pushing them in.
It's the sort of thing that happens in movies fairly often, so it makes sense it'd come up. Not sure how to rule it. Technically, I guess the door just closes unopposed, since there's no rule to stop that from happening, but that obviously isn't the "intent" as much as a deficiency in the rules we have.
Aye. I think it was the combination off what the monster was (a Tekenu, grabbing onto one of them with its intestines...) meaning that it felt like the part doing the grappling was less imposing than something's arm in the way.
And as you say, the fact that the rules don't say you can't close the door, so one of them went "Can we close the door?"
Fortunately the way I'd been rolling for it made them thing it was pretty nasty, so when I said "Uhh... that'd be some kind of opposed roll?" they just greased the paladin instead.
Yeah, I would go with an Aid Another to break the grapple or an improvised weapon attack.
Re: Door opening direction.
Doors tend to open into a room. If it is unclear which side would be in, say because the door is between two rooms, then roll for it with 50/50 odds for direction. Same for the side that the door is hung.
I certainly wouldn't let them just close the door and break the grapple.
But opposed strength checks to force it close could work, but that would also just put the the monster and the grappled character on the same side without some other action.
you could let them attack with the door as an improvised weapon and then give the tentacly horror a penalty on the grapple check equal to said damage done with said door, kind of like if they were hit while attempting a grapple that they didn't not have the appropriate feats/abilities for. Seems like a fun way to do that.
Would probably just have them make a Combat Maneuver check against the monster's CMD. The recommended strength check makes sense, but monster and characters are more balanced around their CMBs.
Another way to treat this would be to treat this as an aid another action to help with escaping the creature's limbs and add in some circumstance bonus due to a door slamming into the creature's limbs.
This is definitely an irregular situation.
There aren't any specific rules that govern grappling through a door, so I think you would treat it as if it was a normal grapple 5ft away and that the door isn't even there. I would probably tell the PC that they can attempt to break free as a Standard Action per a normal Grapple check , and if they describe the "breaking free" portion of what they're doing as "I use the door to pry myself free", I would probably just do a standard CMB vs. CMD to break free as a standard action, but with a +2 Circumstance Bonus for using a door as a pry bar, and give a +2 for each ally who joins in for Aid Another. After that, if Mr. TentacleHugOfDanger tries to push through the door to re-grapple, definitely do an Opposed Str Check to shove the door open or closed.
Hydras and ropers, for two.
I just don't think most d20 systems are geared for the whole "called shot" stuff. HP is a wonderful abstraction, but it's still an abstraction. So you lose some of the finer details. When a guy loses a leg in combat, you can pretty easily say he's down for the count, even if he's not actually dead. But a kraken? Tentacular horrors never seem to care about one of their dozen+ limbs being lopped off.
I think running it as an aid another check would be solid, or something similar to the penalty levied from an AoO when a Combat Maneuver is attempted. Still get the dramatic feel without any tedious number-crunching.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I may have missed it in all the various posts, but has anyone found a way to account for the idea of the grappling appendages being damaged/severed? I'm thinking movie situations where the tentacle gets chopped by the closing door/dropping gate. The victim is still temporarily wrapped up/grappled, but there's no life left in the limb. Obviously this would need to be a harder check or task, but how would you handle it? Called shots? Combat trick? Some kind of limb hit points? I think I've seen one or two creatures with spare appendages that say something along the lines of "if X points of damage are done to the limb, it is severed/lost", but I can't find any examples at the moment.
Per RAW, if you want to attack the creature that is grappling you, you can make an attack or a full attack with a one handed or light weapon but with a -2 to hit.
I addressed using the door as a "pry bar" and gave a +2 Circumstance bonus to the CMB check to break free of the Grapple <---- that's not RAW, just what I'd do in that situation.
But if you want to use the door to sever the tentacle, you can try using Sever Combat Maneuver as a guideline.
I think the default would simply be that the creature pulls its tentacle back without getting severed. But as we said, the default in this case isn't really what's expected. This whole thing should probably be in the house rules section, as there are no rules that directly account for this.