Can a swarm be grabbed?

[Odhanan]

I'm sorry, DracoSuave, but your argument indeed makes no sense whatsoever to me as it pertains to the question at hand, i.e. whether a swarm can be "grabbed" or not.

It's not a question of "narrative", but a question of logic, to me. It is a question of whether as a GM you can make judgment calls on your own, or rely on the game system and the DDI updates to answer them all for you. Whether your game is about the Worlds of Your Imagination, or WotC's. And if by talking about a "narrative arc" for 4e you mean that words do not have meaning anymore, that the characters of this game are so far removed from common sense as to only make any in the context of the game rules, and the game rules only, with the make-believe being a consequence of the game system, and not the other way around, then by all means, I reject 4e's "narrative" reality and substitute my own.

 

[Festivus]

DM interpretation wins over the rules. So can the GM make a judgement call? You bet. I do it all the time, especially if there isn't a rule for it.

 

[Robtheman]

If we are going to focus on just the words then we need to ignore the title of the ability "grabbed" and look at the mechanics (hit with attack and restrain). This was mentioned above, of course.

Ex: Greek heroes can hit something and make it stop moving. How they do it is up to the specific hero and the gods that lord over the Realm of Possibilities. The same goes for players.

IMO, if a party can't come up with a way of hitting something and making it stop moving then the table needs an injection of creativity or collaborative spirit.

The point of playing a table top RPG is to entertain each other by creating and overcoming challenges. The player entertains the DM and his/her party members. The DM entertains all the players. That sometimes means the DM has to coach a bit with a description. Saying it's "not my job" just doesn't fit in a game that is essentially collaborative story telling.

Does the RAW say you can hit and restrain a swarm? There is no list of the stuff you are allowed to hit, therefore we look for exclusions. There is no exclusion of Swarms. It simply says you can hit creatures and restrain it.

Does RAI say you can hit and restrain a swarm? We can't know. RAI is typically invoked as a rhetorical tool in an attempt to validate an opinion.

 

[Gradine]

I'm of the mindset that the word used as part of a condition has absolutely nothing to do with what your character is actually doing to the monster. Conditions are merely terms created to give the player a general visualization and justification for detriments they create.

...

To summarize, your characters actions are in some way causing any given creature to act differently. How you are doing this is completely open to your interpretation and requires no justification.

This for the win. This is the exact mindset the game explicitly and implicitly encourages you to take.

To counter an above post, this is the reason it is in no way a problem with 4e. It is, rather, a problem with players and DMs being too literal-minded with a game that quite clearly doesn't care half a whit about what's literally happening.

The rules are quite simple. Can a swarm be grabbed? Yes. If this wasn't meant to be possible it would have been included in what defines a "swarm." This, of course, requires a bit of creative thinking by the player how about how to actually do it, but if the player has a plausible rationale, you obviously allow it, because the rules are on the side of the player on this one.

Hell, depending on the nature of the campaign I'd allow it even if the player's rationale were completely implausible. The only time I'd probably pull a "c'mon, you can do better than that..." is if the current point of the story is srs bznz and I don't want wacky implausible action ruining the narrative flow. Note that that's still not really a "no", but rather a gentle nudge to the player to be more creative, which is a hell of a lot better in my opinion.

Maybe it's because I'm almost more often a player than a DM, but my biggest pet peeve is when a DM just says flat-out "no, you can't" to anything that could be even a little bit feasible (and various ideas have been tossed around in this thread to make grabbing swarms feasible). There's a reason the DM is separate from the "players"; they're the ones "playing" the game, we're just running it for them. I get enough frustrating restrictions in video games and board games and the like, I don't need them in a game I'm playing specifically because it is a magical fantasy world where anything is (supposedly) possible. When I'm playing a badass dwarven brawler and I just wanna go "You know? F- bees! I will punch every bee in the face!" that's about the last possible time I wan't to hear "no, you can't."

And now that I've completely ruined whatever points of gravitas I once had by directly quoting Dane Cook, it's time to get off the soap box.

 

[Zerodime]

I think it's always funny how when one says "Swarm" we all assume "little insects buzzing around"
1. A swarm cann be anything...there's one in the MM "Swarm of people" or "swarm of drakes" hey just for the fun of it...imagien a "Swarm of Tarasques"!
2. The individual member of a swarm is less than a minion thats the cause why they are in a swarm to begin with.

Remember these two things when your out to argue "can or can't a swarm be grabbed?"

 

[Pickles JG]

They could have simply replaced Grab, Blind, and Stunned with Condition Red, White and Blue. If your power stated that your attack deals 1d10 damage and inflicts condition Red until end of next turn where Red was detailed as the same game mechanics described under 'grab'...you'd be less likely to question the logic of this power on any given foe and would simply accept the mechanics.

Calling something Condition Red, isn't exactly conducive to a smooth running game as you'd have to endlessly check the rules on what that means. By simply giving it a name like Grab, many people will grasp the general game mechanics without requiring a rules reference or memorization.

To summarize, your characters actions are in some way causing any given creature to act differently. How you are doing this is completely open to your interpretation and requires no justification.

This. I also get people objecting to pulls or pushes on diagonals that give lateral movement & can shove things into holes etc. I say the name is just a mnemonic for a slide effect with a restriction on the directions of movement.

Adding narrative as to how you achieved these status effects on odd creatures, prone oozes &c makes the game more fun but is not necessary.

 

[DracoSuave]

I'm sorry, DracoSuave, but your argument indeed makes no sense whatsoever to me as it pertains to the question at hand, i.e. whether a swarm can be "grabbed" or not.

Sure it does.

At a certain point, characters are expected, nay, HIRED, to do impossible things. You have Hercules who cleaned a stable by redirecting a river.... but the stable remained, of course. You have thor who drank from the ocean thinking it was a mere cup of water. You have Odin who attained godhood by... get this... sacrificing himself TO himself.

That is what is considered 'stuff the immortals do.' Epic tier is about nothing more than carving legends such as these into stone.

It's not a question of "narrative", but a question of logic, to me.

Then USE logic.

Immortals can do the impossible.
D&D is the persuit of immortality, at its core.
Ergo, D&D characters are on the persuit of impossible accomplishments.

It is a question of whether as a GM you can make judgment calls on your own, or rely on the game system and the DDI updates to answer them all for you. Whether your game is about the Worlds of Your Imagination, or WotC's.

Or, it's about the marriage of both.

And if by talking about a "narrative arc" for 4e you mean that words do not have meaning anymore, that the characters of this game are so far removed from common sense as to only make any in the context of the game rules, and the game rules only, with the make-believe being a consequence of the game system, and not the other way around, then by all means, I reject 4e's "narrative" reality and substitute my own.

Or... I consider that game terms are abstractions used to reflect a malleable narrative that can be molded by creative individuals, and that therefore saying that 'grabbed must always mean literally grabbed' isn't a logical, or even a cogent statement to make. Does the knight in chess have landed serfs dealing with it, and has it sworn an oath of fealty? Can the bishop perform sacriments? Of course not. They are simply game terms.

And even if you take 'grabbed' to mean literally, then you must hold it to the litmus test of what the narrative potential of the characters are. Are you playing a dark, gritty game where epic destinies such as Demigod or Eternal Defender are not appropriate? Then obviously such characters could not grab a swarm. Makes no sense.

But, if you're playing a game where characters literally have the power to become gods... then doing things associated with the legends of gods is WHOLEY appropriate to the tone of the game.

And for the record... that latter is baseline for D&D fourth edition.

 

[Jhaelen]

I'm sorry, DracoSuave, but your argument indeed makes no sense whatsoever to me as it pertains to the question at hand, i.e. whether a swarm can be "grabbed" or not.

That depends if the question at hand was a 4e rules question or a 'common sense' question.

[...]I reject 4e's "narrative" reality and substitute my own.

That's fine - if your players know about this beforehand and agree with it.

Question: Do you actually DM 4e?

 

[Dausuul]

My ruling on this would be, "You can grab the swarm as soon as you explain to me, in the context of the game world, how the heck you're doing it."

Contrary to popular belief among supporters and opponents alike, 4E does not mandate blind adherence to the rules in defiance of common sense.

 

[Subtlepanic]

I would certainly rule "yes".

As others have reasoned above, if you try to impose too much logic on 4E, you run the risk of nerfing out certain key powers in a way that just isn't fun for your players. The rules encourage devising interesting solutions: yes, a swarm can be grabbed; you make yourself a target so it swarms about you, throw your cloak over it, or whatever. If I can't think of one on the fly, just saying "With a heroic effort, you somehow manage to immobilise the swarm" usually works for my players.

A similar question is "Can a phasing creature be grabbed?".
What about an insubstantial one?

For a brawler fighter, saying "no" to these questions could result in a lot of frustration.