Can you initiate a grapple against people you threaten with a crook (reach)?
The "initiate a grapple against a creature you threaten" could be referring to the crook's reach, or your natural range for unarmed attacks. However you normally wouldn't threaten people whom you initiate a grapple against, unless you have improved unarmed strike or are wielding a non-hand weapon such as a blade boot. Though it is a reasonable assumption that someone doing grappling, either has improved unarmed strike or a natural attack.
If the answer is yes, it's worth noting that a successful grapple check pulls your target adjacent to you. So there isn't an issue of locking someone down where they can't threaten you.
Question B. Do you have to drop the crook before you can maintain the grapple?
Crook
Source Melee Tactics Toolbox pg. 19
Statistics
Cost 1 gp Weight 5 lbs.
Damage 1d4 (small), 1d6 (medium); Critical x2; Range —; Type B; Special reach, trip
Category Two-Handed; Proficiency Exotic
Weapon Groups Polearms
Description
This common herder’s tool is a wooden pole with a hooked end. When using a crook, you can ignore the penalty for not having two hands free when making a combat maneuver check to initiate a grapple against a creature you threaten.
The simple answer here is, the only thing the crook does is ignore the penalty to not having two hands free when you initiate a grapple.
If you were to ignore that text, it doesn't interact with grapple in any way. It also doesn't have the grapple special trait.
So, for whatever weird reason the crook doesn't give you a penalty for not having two hands free, but you're not actually using it as part of the grapple.
Covert Operator wrote: Can you initiate a grapple against people you threaten with a crook (reach)? ... you are talking about --> crook Special reach, trip. Category Two-Handed; Proficiency Exotic.
When using a crook, you can ignore the penalty for not having two hands free when making a combat maneuver check to initiate a grapple against a creature you threaten.
and grapple
As a standard action, you can attempt to grapple a foe, hindering his combat options.
If you do not have Improved Grapple, grab, or a similar ability, attempting to grapple a foe provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
Humanoid creatures without two free hands attempting to grapple a foe take a –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll. ...
It does not list grapple as a special.
The weapon only lets you ignore the penalty, not the restriction. But clearly "while using the crook" means it is "in hand" and wielded as a 2hnd wpn. It threatens at range, non-adjacent squares.
Problem is it only threatens at range so as soon as they're adjacent (via grapple) they are no longer threatened and that questions if you could maintain a grapple using the crook!
Who knew sheep herders used an exotic weapon that they probably don't have a proficiency in... lol
What a mess.
So it's going to need a GM to straighten this out. (thus Homebrew or Advice)
I've flipped both ways but honestly as written you could grapple with the crook in one or two hands within normal reach without taking the -4 penalty.
At range might take more rules finesse and there's the Impv'd Grapple issue along with losing threatened in adjacent squares. As an exotic I don't think it's too much Game balance wise to say okay.
I think it also begs for GMs to give it homebrew/homegame size limitations on what it can grapple at range, like your size or smaller (similar to the monster Grab issue).
It's one of those things like harpoons, where they made actual in game use so blatantly unintuitive and unrealistic that such things would never really get used, because no one that would use them could ever use them effectively.
If I had written it, it would basically be like, 'This otherwise functions as a staff for those without exotic weapon proficiency,' or something. Then at least it would make sense why thousands of people (who herd) would use them. At least then they would work as staffs, but with a small benefit to account for extra training (Reach, Tripping, and the ability to grapple without penalty). Otherwise, it's a staff (with reach) that you take a –4 penalty for.
I'm going to go with a pure RAW interpretation unless my GM says otherwise.
If you threaten an opponent, you don't take the normal -4 penalty for initiating a grapple against them. You still have to use your natural reach for initiating the grapple, so you can only benefit from this effect if you threaten the opponent within your natural reach (e.g. from Improved Unarmed Strike feat).
Pizza Lord wrote: If I had written it, it would basically be like, 'This otherwise functions as a staff for those without exotic weapon proficiency,' or something. Then at least it would make sense why thousands of people (who herd) would use them. At least then they would work as staffs, but with a small benefit to account for extra training (Reach, Tripping, and the ability to grapple without penalty). Otherwise, it's a staff (with reach) that you take a –4 penalty for. Yeah I agree. A commoner/artisan could wield a shepherd's crook as a Kumade, which is a quarterstaff that trades the double feature for the grapple-on-crit feature. The only problem is that it deals piercing damage.
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
