Full attack and Improved Grapple

[FrankTrollman]

OK, let's take as our example a combat between a Brown Bear and 2 4th level Rogues. This is a much less controvertial example than a Dire Bear because it doesn't require us to answer the question of what - if anything - a bear gets out of having a high BAB.

Both Rogues have strengths of 16 (perhaps they are benefitting from Bull's Strength, or maybe they are combat Rogues - I don't care), and have BABs of +3. Their grapple bonus is +6. The Brown Bear has a Strength of 27 and a BAB of +4 - it is also Large, and has a grapple bonus of +16.

The rogues have 1 attack each at +7 with a +1 shortsword - which inflicts d6+4 damage unless they sneak attack - in which they will do 3d6+4. They each have armor classes of 17. The bear has an AC of 15 (14 when denied dexterity), and has 2 claws at +11 for d8+8 and 1 bite at +6 for 2d6+4. The Rogues have 24 hit points each - the bear has 51.

We would sort of expect the bear to tear the rogues to pieces, as it is inflicting an average of 23 points of damage per round - and even flanking the Rogues are only handing out 21.75 damage per round and have less hit points together.

But let's look at the result when the bear get's a hit in and attempts to grapple:

1> The bear hits with its first claw. It now has a choice to grapple with just one paw or with its whole body:

i) If the bear grapples with just one paw, roll an opposed grapple check (the bear suffers a -20 on this check). If the bear beats the rogue's d20 plus 6 with its own d20 minus four - the rogue is grappled and it is not.

Assuming success, the bear now can use its remaining attacks on any other creature - its attacks against the targetted rogue are now over. The rogue now suffers a -4 penalty when attacking the bear, but the bear can only attack the held rogue once per round with a claw or attempt to pin with a new grapple check at -20 (again it has to beat a d20+6 with its own d20-4). The rogue can attempt to turn the grapple around on the bear when his round comes around instead of attacking - but does so against the bear's entire grapple bonus of +16.

ii) If the bear grapples with its whole body, roll an opposed grapple check. If the bear beats the rogue's d20 plus six with its own d20 plus sixteen, the rogue is grappled.

Assuming success, the bear is now grappled, as is the rogue. On subsequent rounds, both the Rogue and the bear can attack each other with one attack at -4 to-hit or attempt a grapple check to pin or inflict unarmed damage. The bear is also denied dexterity against the other rogue and cannot attack him.

---

Yeah. That's how it works. The bear wants to lose when it uses its improved grab.

Now, the way it probably should work is just like combining manufactured weapon attacks with natural weapon attacks. That is, that you would get grapple checks based on your BAB which could be used to inflict unarmed damage or pin and use your natural weapons at penalties on top of that - which is how I assumed that it worked originally by reading the section on combining natural and manufactured weapons (keeping in mind that unarmed attacks/grapples are considered manufactured wepaons for these purposes).

However, the improved grab/rake sections are pretty clear on this: creatures with natural weapon attack routines get hosed in grapples.

-Frank

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I think you're absolutely wrong about the way it should work. Creatures with improved grab (try the Tendriculos or Remorhaz on for size) are nasty enough without doubling or tripling their attacks every time they grapple a PC. Your suggestion would essentially amount to writing front-line characters out of the game because they'd never survive more than two rounds against any creature with improved grab.

Furthermore, you're wrong about the brown bear's tactical situation in your example. The bear doesn't lose much by using improved grab on the one rogue--even at the -20. In fact, if he succeeds with the grapple, he pretty much neutralizes both rogues (since the bear doesn't count as grappled and the other rogue now has nobody to flank with). If he hits the second rogue with his other claw and successfully grapples him (certainly not out of the question--even with a -20 on his grapple check), he only has to hold on to them for one round and then he can grapple both of them without the -20. There's no way that either of them will escape or survive.

Granted, if the brown bear were up against four rogues, he would be in trouble but that's as it should be. The CR system tells us that a 4th level party should defeat a brown bear fairly handily. Make them second level rouges and the brown bear has a good shot at killing all of them--as the CR system says he should. (Plus you're really biasing the sample by pitting a single sneak-attackable improved grab creature against four rogues; he's do better against any other possible party composition).

In any event, I don't see why the bear's special attack should ALWAYS be advantageous for it to use. There is no PC ability that is always advantageous to use. Power attack? Not against high AC creatures. Spring Attack? Not against Hydras. Spells? Not against Golems. Arrows? Not against huge elementals or monks. Etc etc. The bear's improved grab is very useful in a fairly wide range of circumstances--a relatively even number of bears and PCs, a one-on-one fight with the party's greatsword wielding barbarian (without his greatsword he's not so tough), if he gets the party's only rogue (grappling the rogue shuts him down almost completely and is likely to eliminate him in two rounds or so and reduces the threat from any archers or ranged touch spells the party might have without making the bear particularly vulnearble to anyone without sneak attack) et al. There's no reason that there shouldn't be situations where the bear doesn't want to use Improved Grab.

Creatures with natural attack routines can get hosed in grapples. But lots of them (Tendriculos, Shambling Mound, Otyugh, giant scorpions, giant praying mantises, anything with rake, oozes, kraken, Remorhaz, et al) are very effective in grapples. And in many circumstances, even creatures like the brown bear are effective in grapples. For that matter, there's situations where it would be to the advantage of even a creature like a horse--which shouldn't usually grapple--to grapple (Imagine the warhorse of a paladin/rogue grappling a blackguard so the paladin could sneak attack him).

Yeah. That's how it works. The bear wants to lose when it uses its improved grab.

Now, the way it probably should work is just like combining manufactured weapon attacks with natural weapon attacks. That is, that you would get grapple checks based on your BAB which could be used to inflict unarmed damage or pin and use your natural weapons at penalties on top of that - which is how I assumed that it worked originally by reading the section on combining natural and manufactured weapons (keeping in mind that unarmed attacks/grapples are considered manufactured wepaons for these purposes).

However, the improved grab/rake sections are pretty clear on this: creatures with natural weapon attack routines get hosed in grapples.

-Frank

 

[Kershek]

Frank, thanks for listing out a combat. I have some questions about it.

OK, let's take as our example a combat between a Brown Bear and 2 4th level Rogues. This is a much less controvertial example than a Dire Bear because it doesn't require us to answer the question of what - if anything - a bear gets out of having a high BAB.

I thought natural weapons never got iterative attacks.

Assuming success, the bear now can use its remaining attacks on any other creature - its attacks against the targetted rogue are now over.

Why is that? Why can't the other claw and bite go on the rogue? Is it because they are now in a grapple? But the bear isn't grappled because it took a -20. It is allowed to finish its full attack. It doesn't make sense that it can finish its full attack on everyone but the rogue it grappled, does it?

The rogue now suffers a -4 penalty when attacking the bear, but the bear can only attack the held rogue once per round with a claw or attempt to pin with a new grapple check at -20 (again it has to beat a d20+6 with its own d20-4).

Could the bear use its grappled claw to pin the rogue at -20, and then use the other claw and bite on a different opponent? After all, those are the options it had last round when grappling the rogue in the first place.

The rogue can attempt to turn the grapple around on the bear when his round comes around instead of attacking - but does so against the bear's entire grapple bonus of +16.

What do you mean by "turn the grapple around"? I thought that when you were grappled, both grapplers were equal. And if the grapple was done by the bear at -20, why would it suddenly get its full +16 bonus?

Assuming success, the bear is now grappled, as is the rogue. On subsequent rounds, both the Rogue and the bear can attack each other with one attack at -4 to-hit or attempt a grapple check to pin or inflict unarmed damage. The bear is also denied dexterity against the other rogue and cannot attack him.

Isn't unarmed damage just regular damage for a bear that has natural weapons? I didn't think they could inflict non-lethal damage with them. If that is true, why would they do an attack at -4 when they could roll a grapple (which would be much better than an attack) and just do full damage with the claw anyways?

However, the improved grab/rake sections are pretty clear on this: creatures with natural weapon attack routines get hosed in grapples.

I'm also keen on hearing how a tiger with a rake would continue a grapple after its first pounce round.

 

[FrankTrollman]

a one-on-one fight with the party's greatsword wielding barbarian (without his greatsword he's not so tough)

The bear loses 2/3 of his offensive potential by grappling. The barbarian loses an average of 5 points of damage from the loss from the weapon, and only gets to use his strength bonus once instead of one and a half times.

Is that 2/3 of the Barbarian's offensive potential? If it isn't (and I don't believe it is), the bear is losing proportionately more by grappling than the barbarian is.

Which is the basic problem with this scenario: bears lose more by grappling than almost anything else can. Grappling is supposed to be their schtick - something is obviously wrong.

-Frank

 

[Kershek]

Furthermore, you're wrong about the brown bear's tactical situation in your example. The bear doesn't lose much by using improved grab on the one rogue--even at the -20. In fact, if he succeeds with the grapple, he pretty much neutralizes both rogues (since the bear doesn't count as grappled and the other rogue now has nobody to flank with). If he hits the second rogue with his other claw and successfully grapples him (certainly not out of the question--even with a -20 on his grapple check), he only has to hold on to them for one round and then he can grapple both of them without the -20. There's no way that either of them will escape or survive.

Why can he grapple them both without the -20 if he holds on to them for one round? Please cite.

 

["Jack" Reapersaurus]

I am pretty sure that what I've seen Caliban and Frank describe in this thread is NOT the way the grappling rules work.

I don't have time to quote much, but basically I think thy said that a bear effectively loses their natural attacks when in a grapple, right?
They only get a # of grapple checks = to their iterative BAB is what's being said, right?

Quote #1: It says right in the SRD that if you're grappled, you can : "Attack Your Opponent: You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another
character you are grappling. You take a –4 penalty on such attacks."
Looks pretty straightforward that they can use their natural weapons in grapple, with a slight pebalty. I don't see where the problem is here.
This is by far the most applicable quote in the entire rulebooks for this maneuver.

Quote #2: "Rake (Ex): A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can
attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe."
This extra description in the Rake text is not a rule regarding grapples - it is not precedent setting - in the long tradition of 3E rules, it is simply trying to (badly) clarify how this ability (Rake) is different than normal rules.
I believe what they are referring to here is the rule that if a natural weapon is used to grapple someone, than it is "used up" - i.e. not able to be used in subsequent attacks. I forget where it details that, but I've seen it. So the Rake text is referring to a normal 2 clawed animal when it says "normally, a creature can only use 1 natural weapon while grappling".

If I have time/interest, I'd walk thru an example, but I thought I already did, it this or other threads of how (I am pretty sure) it works.

If I'm missing something, I'm sure it'll be pointed out.

 

[Darklone]

Reaper, is it you????

 

[FrankTrollman]

I thought natural weapons never got iterative attacks.

They don't. But osme people on this thread were claiming that you could use the "attack with a weapon" grappling option with a natural weapon more than once per round if you had a high enough BAB. I disagree, but mostly I just didn't want to get into it.

Why is that? Why can't the other claw and bite go on the rogue? Is it because they are now in a grapple? But the bear isn't grappled because it took a -20. It is allowed to finish its full attack. It doesn't make sense that it can finish its full attack on everyone but the rogue it grappled, does it?

Well, the rules say that a grappling creature can only use one natural weapon on an enemy it is grappling. The rules for improved grab allow the creature to use its remaining attacks normally on other creatures - but don't actually specify anything about attacking the held creature.

I suspect this is an oversight - but that is what it says.

Could the bear use its grappled claw to pin the rogue at -20, and then use the other claw and bite on a different opponent? After all, those are the options it had last round when grappling the rogue in the first place.

Yes. Assuming, of course, that other opponents were in range.

What do you mean by "turn the grapple around"? I thought that when you were grappled, both grapplers were equal. And if the grapple was done by the bear at -20, why would it suddenly get its full +16 bonus?

The bear only suffers a -20 penalty on its own offensive grapple checks - any attempt by the rogue to inflict damage or pin the bear would not entail a -20 penalty on the part of the bear.

Isn't unarmed damage just regular damage for a bear that has natural weapons?

That depends upon who you believe. The best answer that I can give you is "maybe". In 3rd edition, the answer was "yes" (except that the bear could choose any of its natural wepaons and did full strength, so it would choose to do 2d6+8) - in 3.5 this is a point still up for debate, as a distinction between natural weapons and unarmed damage has been driven into some of the rules (but not all).

I'm also keen on hearing how a tiger with a rake would continue a grapple after its first pounce round.

It gets one natural weapon attack at -4 or a grapple check to inflict unarmed damage (whatever that is) or pin - and it gets 2 additional rake attacks at +9 to-hit and d8+3 damage.

-Frank

 

[Darklone]

Hmm... monks can use flurry of blows (their unarmed BAB) in a grapple, right?

 

[Kershek]

A flurry requires a full attack action and you can't do a full attack action in a grapple.