D&D (2024) The Great Nerf to High Level Martials: The New Grapple Rules

[Stalker0]

Actually for non specialized builds it is buffed.

An intriguing statement, is this in fact correct? So if we ignore specialized builds and just assume some old normal grappler, we can assume a big strength and just athletics proficiency. no expertise, no other athletics bonuses.

So we have at the high levels we are debating:

5 (str) + 6 (athletics prof) vs Monster Athletics or Acrobatics
against
Monster Str / Dex Save vs DC 19

So now let me look at some of the monsters my party has grappled in game, and see if this holds up. I'm going to use sims since I'm going to be lazy and not do proper math The % shown is the chance the player will grapple the target.

Note: A reminder that for this opposed roll, a tie actually favors the monster, because a tie in an opposed check "keeps the status quo" which is not grappled.

• Pit Fiend - Old
  • Old: d20 + 11 vs d20 + 8 - 62%
  • New: d20 + 8 vs DC 19 - 50%
• Lich - Old
  • Old: d20 + 11 vs d20 + 3: 80%
  • New: d20 + 3 vs DC 19: 75%
• Mummy Lord - Old
  • Old: d20 + 11 vs d20 + 4: 77%
  • New: d20 + 4 vs DC 19: 70%
• Iron Golem - Old
  • Old: d20 + 11 vs d20 + 9: 57%
  • New: d20 + 9 vs DC 19: 45%

So yeah just with my quick browse the old system was definitely easier for grappling in general. Its also notable that the harder it is to grapple a target in general (aka high strength or dex).... the more benefit the old system had. Its just the nature of opposed rolls vs a saving throw, when you have an advantage in an opposed roll it tends to magnify.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

An intriguing statement, is this in fact correct? So if we ignore specialized builds and just assume some old normal grappler, we can assume a big strength and just athletics proficiency. no expertise, no other athletics bonuses.

So you build your argumentation on only half of mine... so your whole math is redundand, as it leaves the most important part out.

I repeat the important part, you missed before:
It is buffed, because you can do it on reaction. So you can attack and just try to grapple if needed. This is especially nice when using versatile weapons and really makes leaving a hand free an actual option.

Edit: and if you don't have a free hand, you can at least try to pull a leg or tackle and try to trip the enemy.

 

[mellored]

Trying to grab someone is an active check, so it should be a roll. Further, opposed ability checks(see contests in the PHB), which a grapple is, involve rolls by both parties. None of grapple should involve saves.

All attacks and spells are active checks.

The wizard is aiming the fireball to hit.
The paladin is raising his shield to defend.

It's all 2 sides.

 

[fluffybunbunkittens]

Now the Martials get exact the same system as the casters: Saving Throw vs. DC.

Until the casters use one of the many spells without a save...

That said, the old grapple being skill-based (and monsters rarely having any skills) was just an ugly design decision. So it's weird that they did not clean it up all the way through, but still kept the skill rolls for escaping as an action... which you admittedly shouldn't ever have to use, because it's so easy to push people out of reach now, or for an ally to spend an attack on grappling you in passing and dragging you to safety.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Until the casters use one of the many spells without a save...

Which also have to go. What I said in at least 3 posts. Also, pointing at other failures does not make a bad system good.

That said, the old grapple being skill-based (and monsters rarely having any skills) was just an ugly design decision. So it's weird that they did not clean it up all the way through, but still kept the skill rolls for escaping as an action... which you admittedly shouldn't ever have to use, because it's so easy to push people out of reach now, or for an ally to spend an attack on grappling you in passing and dragging you to safety.

I liked the version of the first playtest more, where you had an automatic save to escape instead of using an action and your skill bonus. I was sad to see that go.
In the old version, I had a barbarian just shoving (throwing) the grappler away with an athletic check. So yes, STR based characters could always can still turn a grapple around or esacpe more easily than dex based characters. Which was always conveniently forgotten when optimizers compared DEX vs STR.

 

[CapnZapp]

The fundamental flaw with grappling and other alternative subsystems is that these target defenses that for many monsters are ridiculously low.

The game needs to be built from the ground up with the expectation that these defenses will actually be used; that the monster might get grappled, and that the attacking character is a properly minmaxed grappler. And D&D just ain't that game. A monster's Athletics check just is a piss poor choice for a defense mechanism. A skill bonus is never determined with nearly the same care as a monster's AC. The only set of numbers that provide even a passable alternative to AC are the saves (and Fort Ref Will saves were much better in this regard than the current set of six)

And a monster's resilience and "heft" will never feel right unless hit points are involved. Any system that lets a martial bypass a monster's hit points will be broken full stop.

As a very topical example of this, consider pushing monsters off cliffs in BG3. You don't want heroes to be able to do this in the pen and paper game, not in the general case. (If a DM prepares a combat with pushing in mind, that's okay; but the important distinction here is that the DM makes an active choice to make a strategy much much more effective than we normally assume it to be)

 

[James Gasik]

The fundamental flaw with grappling and other alternative subsystems is that these target defenses that for many monsters are ridiculously low.

The game needs to be built from the ground up with the expectation that these defenses will actually be used; that the monster might get grappled. And D&D just ain't that game. A monster's Athletics check just is a piss poor choice for a defense mechanism. A skill bonus is never determined with nearly the same care as a monster's AC. The only set of numbers that provide even a passable alternative to AC are the saves.

And a monster's resilience and "heft" will never feel right unless hit points are involved. Any system that lets a martial bypass a monster's hit points will be broken full stop.

As a very topical example of this, consider pushing monsters off cliffs in BG3. You don't want heroes to be able to do this in the pen and paper game, not in the general case. (If a DM prepares a combat with pushing in mind, that's okay; but the important distinction here is that the DM makes an active choice to make a strategy much much more effective than we normally assume it to be)

In all fairness, monsters are fairly bad at dealing with a lot of mechanics. They might have especially weak saves in one category, lack training in Perception making it easy for someone to sneak up on or surprise them, etc.. And WotC is well aware of this potential issue in monster design, since they decided to make the DC for social actions not based on monster skills, as an example.

As for grapple just being a saving throw, compare and contrast how many grappling monsters can grapple you without making a check. You get hit by the claw of a chuul, well, you're grappled, and that's that.

Monsters and PC's don't really play ball by the same rules. I'd rather they did, but that ship sailed after 3.5 and I don't see it changing now. Players will do things unfair to monsters, monsters will do things unfair to players. That's apparently fine for the developers (what's left of them) and the majority of consumers.

 

[CapnZapp]

In all fairness, monsters are fairly bad at dealing with a lot of mechanics. They might have especially weak saves in one category, lack training in Perception making it easy for someone to sneak up on or surprise them, etc.. And WotC is well aware of this potential issue in monster design, since they decided to make the DC for social actions not based on monster skills, as an example.

As for grapple just being a saving throw, compare and contrast how many grappling monsters can grapple you without making a check. You get hit by the claw of a chuul, well, you're grappled, and that's that.

Monsters and PC's don't really play ball by the same rules. I'd rather they did, but that ship sailed after 3.5 and I don't see it changing now. Players will do things unfair to monsters, monsters will do things unfair to players. That's apparently fine for the developers (what's left of them) and the majority of consumers.

Not disagreeing.

But to point out:
1) that monsters do unfair things to players is never a problem. Never. (If a monster is completely broken just don't use it or remove it from the game. 99.9% of the game remains just fine)
2) it is when you can consistently do "unfair" things to monsters, to a degree that it threatens to displace the mechanisms you assume players will normally be using, that devs and consumers cease to be "fine"

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Monsters and PC's don't really play ball by the same rules. I'd rather they did, but that ship sailed after 3.5 and I don't see it changing now. Players will do things unfair to monsters, monsters will do things unfair to players. That's apparently fine for the developers (what's left of them) and the majority of consumers.

I understand that sentiment, but no, it is not fine for developers. This is why they are changing that poor mechanic to something usable. Also I would not make statements about the majority.
I guess most people either don´t use grapple, because the rules are counterintuitive, or don´t like them, because they are not well though of. I think it is a minority that exploits this system. I don´t want the rules to be held hostage by "grapple lovers" any longer.
I will still have to bother with druid using beast stat blocks and warlock pact slots, because apparently those "druid and warlock lovers" were loud enough so the developers stepped back. At least the druid forms are nerfed and the warlock pact slots multiclass rule will hopefully be written to the sage advice variation that only allows those slots for cross casting, not spending them on class featues.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Not disagreeing.

But to point out:
1) that monsters do unfair things to players is never a problem. Never. (If a monster is completely broken just don't use it or remove it from the game. 99.9% of the game remains just fine)
2) it is when you can consistently do "unfair" things to monsters, to a degree that it threatens to displace the mechanisms you assume players will normally be using, that devs and consumers cease to be "fine"

Exactly. Because if players can always use the same abilities/spells/tactics, no matter against what enemy, the rules for those are a problem.
So: leave the new grapple rules alone, fix one time (or no) save spells and class features that invalidate parts of the game (wildshape hp swap, warlock multiclass madness).