D&D 5E Grappler Feat and Being Restrained Open Discussion

So, I think most people agree the Grappler Feat is sort of meh. I was looking at it again, and here it is for reference along with grappled and restrained conditions:




Now, first, you gain advantage on attack rolls against creatures you're grappling. Ok, that is pretty good really.
The second part about restraining a creature is also nice in theory, but fairly pointless unless your goal is to keep in captive or you have allies to beat it up.

Think of this:

1. X has grappler feat and grapples Y.
2. X then manages to "pin" Y using its entire action (not just an attack...).
3. Now, both are restrained.

The result:

• Both have speed 0.
• Attacks against both have advantage.
• Both attack with disadvantage.
• Both have disadvantage on DEX saves.

The advantage granted by the Grappler feat is lost, and the net benefit is the grappler makes attacks normally. Not bad I guess, but it costs you a feat and TWO actions to get there. If the restraining action was an attack and not the entire action, I think it would be more useful at higher levels.

So, here's my thinking. Is the advantage granted by the Grappler feat specific enough to override the disadvantage imposed by being Restrained. Could you argue this is a case of specific beating out general?

General: you have disadvantage on attack rolls when restrained.
Specific: when you pin an opponent and are also restrained, the Grappler feat grants advantage because you are (in fact) still grappling your target.

If you allow specific (in a sense) to override the general rule, it makes Grappler actually really useful. I am not for or against this for the most part, and I am curious on other people's points of view. Thoughts?

So I've changed to aspects of the grappler feat. The first change is in regards to the second bullet point. When trying to pin a creature, only the target is restrained, not the grappler. Still takes the whole action to attempt though.

The second change allows the grappler to attempt a grapple whenever they would be able to take an opportunity attack.

I feel like those two changes makes the Grappler feat more inline with what I think a grappling expert would be capable of.

EDIT: I forgot to mention. In my version the restrained condition only lasts until the start of the grappler's next turn. So the grappler must have consistent investment to maintain the restrained condition, since I see this bullet point as being intended for team work.

dnd4vr said:

So, here's my thinking. Is the advantage granted by the Grappler feat specific enough to override the disadvantage imposed by being Restrained. Could you argue this is a case of specific beating out general?

General: you have disadvantage on attack rolls when restrained.
Specific: when you pin an opponent and are also restrained, the Grappler feat grants advantage because you are (in fact) still grappling your target.

If you allow specific (in a sense) to override the general rule, it makes Grappler actually really useful. I am not for or against this for the most part, and I am curious on other people's points of view. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I don’t think it works that way. The rule, “you have advantage on attack rolls against a creature you are grappling” doesn’t override the rule that “the (restrained) creature’s attack rolls have disadvantage” because it doesn’t mention any specific alterations to the general rules of the restrained condition.

dnd4vr said:

General: you have disadvantage on attack rolls when restrained.
Specific: when you pin an opponent and are also restrained, the Grappler feat grants advantage because you are (in fact) still grappling your target.

Click to expand...

I don't read this as a question of specific beating out general. Both apply. In cases where both advantage and disadvantage apply, they cancel out. So in the case of the grappler, you get no bonus and no penalty, while the target suffers a penalty. This isn't half bad on its own, and is very powerful if you have friends nearby while the target does not.

The two people in the grapple are at regular rolls to attack each other but at disadvantage to attack others outside the grapple and those outside the grapple are at advantage to attack those in the grapple. That's how I read it.

The primary reason for grappling is preventing someone from escaping, IMO. You can do that with a regular grapple AND when they are grappled you can move them half your speed, so you control their movement. Once someone's movement is 0, it's easy to find other ways to get advantage on them.

Making their attacks at disadvantage is a nice bonus but not worth the feat, IMO. I'd rather take Tavern Brawler so you can grapple as part of an attack action.

It would be nice if pinning a person also allowed you to make sure they couldn't talk or cast spells with somatic/verbal components.

Yep. Grappler certainly can be useful. But think about this.

X grapples Y, so Y's speed is 0, but X can still move around taking Y with it.
Then, Y grapples X in return. Now, both of their speeds are 0.

I think the grappled condition needs to include more than just speed becoming 0.

dnd4vr said:

Yep. Grappler certainly can be useful. But think about this.

X grapples Y, so Y's speed is 0, but X can still move around taking Y with it.
Then, Y grapples X in return. Now, both of their speeds are 0.

I think the grappled condition needs to include more than just speed becoming 0.

Click to expand...

This is definitely a way to counter a grapple. That said, if you can beat a person's defense to grapple them, why not just use that roll to escape? That said, escaping nets you nothing, grappling them fixes them to a space.

I was a fan of the, overly complex and detailed, 3.5 grapple rules.

I think it would be interesting if pinning and/or grappling allowed you to do auto-damage. Maybe just your strength bonus in damage every round. To represent a sleeper hold or just wearing a person down until they tap out.

TaranTheWanderer said:

It would be nice if pinning a person also allowed you to make sure they couldn't talk or cast spells with somatic/verbal components.

Click to expand...

There is no reason why it cant.

Flamestrike said:

There is no reason why it cant.

Click to expand...

Does it mention that you can? I don't remember. You can still attack while grappling someone but I usually limit what weapons you can use. You need a free hand to maintain the grapple (I think?) but, as a DM, I only allow small or light weapons because it's probably pretty hard to swing a long sword while also holding someone in place.

I think grappling as written is pretty good as far as rules go. You essentially stop the opponent from moving at the cost of one attack.

The grappling feat gives you something else useful (advantage) as well as something occasionally useful (pin).

I don't think it is overpowering, but it can be useful - One use is a thief with athletics expertise - grapple the first round with a high likelihood of success then SA with advantage every round after that. Even more useful if you get multiple attacks ... meanwhile you drag him to the area on the battlefield that you want him. The opponent has to use his action to break the grapple.

The pin ability is the lesser of the two IMO