D&D 5E OotA campaign: should black puddings be immune to grappling?

[LarryD]

I'm running Out of the Abyss tonight, and might have the PC's go thru The Oozing Temple sidequest. Black puddings, according to MM, are immune to acid, cold, lightning & slashing damage; and immune to blinded, charmed, deafened, exhausted, frightened and prone conditions. Shouldn't they also be immune to grappling?*

I ask this because one of the characters has a Staff of the Python, which once it's turned into a giant constrictor, can grapple its target. The player might choose to not risk losing his staff against a creature that can corrode flesh, but in case he does...seems to me grappling an ooze is impossible to do, especially since it can freely move through 1" spaces - so I'm planning to houserule oozes can't be grappled.

Anybody here rule that way for oozes, and any ideas as to why that condition shouldn't have been included? Or am I missing something?

*Of course, avoiding contact with a black pudding is the advised course of action, given its corrosive nature. I get that. This is a general question.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I don't know if it's a rule, but I would not allow grappling with anything that is amorphous. There's really nothing to grapple with.

 

[Tony Vargas]

*Of course, avoiding contact with a black pudding is the advised course of action, given its corrosive nature. I get that. This is a general question.

Heh, yeah, that kinda has to go into the 'don't worry about it' pile.

But, if it does come up, you can rule on the merits of the action declared, rather than making a rule change ahead of time. If the player just says he tries to grab it, let the pudding eat his hand as a reaction. If the player actually comes up with some creative way to keep it from moving away from him, though, you might resolve it as a grapple.

Or you might let a cold attack, though doing no damage, slow or solidify it enough to be grabbed temporarily - if two players stymied by its immensities come up with a trick like that.

 

[MonkeezOnFire]

They're also not immune to the restrained condition so when I had my wizard put down a web to create difficult terrain in order to better outmaneuver the oozes I was surprised to learn that I had actually managed to stop a couple given their poor dex modifier. That's a bit easier to accept because it's magic, but it was still weird.

So if you think the experience could be enhanced by giving them immunity to conditions you think they should be immune to then you have every right to make such a ruling as the DM.

I also seem to recall that the MM errata sometimes has condition immunities that were not originally included. One case I remember is that swarms are immune to being grappled, oozes might have gotten a similar treatment.

 

[Henry]

I could see it three ways:

1) Rules as Written - they don't specify, so no, they are not immune. Given we're defining the properties of an imaginary thing, the Black Pudding might be more like a sack of flour, or a Stretch Armstrong (look it up), than a puddle of goo - possessing a hard cell wall or the like, and allowing someone to get a hand-hold (even if they're holding something hideously lethal).

2) Rules as intended - to me, common sense says that you shouldn't be able to grapple an ooze-creature, full stop.

3) Rules as Fun - is it more awesome to let the player who wants to risk certain death to grapple the ooze-beast in order to save the party or pull off some memorable maneuver? Hell, Yeah!

 

[MarkB]

Let them go for it, but have the black pudding automatically deal its 4d8 acid damage if they succeed. I'd simply rule that, so long as something fleshy is cuddling it, the black pudding does not choose to move away.

I'll just note that those things are nasty - I actually ran the Oozing Temple tonight, and the black pudding only got one hit in, but with high rolls that one hit dealt 35 points of damage, reducing the 4th-level dwarven cleric from full health to 3 hp (and from ragged clothes to acid-scarred nudity). If the party arrive with some damage from gray oozes, a hit like that could easily be lethal.

It did amuse me that, after taking the time to carefully mark out the trapped tile so they could jump over it, they then decided that the safest option was to just knock it down so they could see the hole. If not for that, they and Glabbagool would have remained blissfully ignorant of the puddings, and the cleric would still have pants.

 

[LarryD]

Let them go for it, but have the black pudding automatically deal its 4d8 acid damage if they succeed. I'd simply rule that, so long as something fleshy is cuddling it, the black pudding does not choose to move away.

I like that idea. The ooze has no incentive to break a grapple.