Full attack and Improved Grapple

["Jack" Reapersaurus]

Well, the rules say that a grappling creature can only use one natural weapon on an enemy it is grappling.

Where?
Yes, it's me reapersaurus, my cookies are screwed up (see Meta) and this one stays logged in better.

 

["Jack" Reapersaurus]

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

is that a 3.0 or a 3.5 question?
Sounds like 3.0.
In which case, I'd say yes.

 

[FrankTrollman]

Where?

While the grappling rules don't even come close to mentioning it on way or the other (they only preclude attacking with two weapons - which is in no way the same thing), the rules from the Monster Manual are a bit more explicit:

Creatures do not recieve addiitonal attacks from a high base attack bonus when using natural weapons.

Normally, a creature can only attack with one of its natural weapons

And the PHB backs this up:

You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling.

So, by the rules, you get to attack with one natural weapon and you may not attack with it again or with any other natural weapon you have bcause of your BAB.

-Frank

 

[Kershek]

I just reread "Improved Grab" in the glossary of the MM 3.5. It says "each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold."

This tells me that, if the bear is grappling normally, it can make a grapple check to do normal claw damage. Making an "attack" at -4 to hit would be silly. I think this is where the iterative attacks come in. They're iterative grapple attempts (which happen to be with natural weapons) and not iterative natural weapon attacks per se. I think this is why a dire bear can do two grapple attempts to do damage twice to someone.

If you're grappling at -20, a question comes into play from the wording in Improved Grab on the benefit of using part of its body: "it...can use the rest of its remaining attacks against other opponents." Does this mean that, after it's done with its BAB progression it gets its other claw and bite attack on someone else? Or does it only get one -20 grapple check when attacking with the other claw and bite on someone else? It doesn't really say.

 

[Kershek]

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.

I haven't been able to find in the rules where it states the -20 to the grapple is only for offensive rolls and not for grapple attempts initiated by the opponent. Can you find it?

 

[FrankTrollman]

I haven't been able to find in the rules where it states the -20 to the grapple is only for offensive rolls and not for grapple attempts initiated by the opponent. Can you find it?

No problem.

It's in "step 3: hold". As long as the creature with improved grab is taking the -20 he isn't even grappling and the other guy would have to make him be grappling before he could be pinned or damaged or anything.

So the rogue has to go through the normal steps to bring the bear into a grapple before the bear can be pinned. And to do that he goes up against the bear's whole grapple score as normal.


-Frank

 

[Kershek]

I wonder if they mean that the bear is not considered grappled against anyone else. Obviously, it's grappling with the rogue because it has a paw on him and they're in the same square. But for the purposes of everyone else, it's not considered grappling and doesn't get all the penaties of grappling against them.

But I think that since it's "hold"ing a grapple with the rogue, it still keeps its -20 on subsequent grapple checks, independent on who initiated the opposed grapple check.

 

[Dursk Starkfire]

Order of attacks is a sticky situation. It doesn't make sense that if I have a magicked up weapon in my offhand, with which I make attacks at a higher bonus than my onhand, I should suddenly switch handedness and fight hitting with the off first? Eeh, I don't like that idea. However, if you can flip flop everything around, you could attack from lowest to highest, or sideways, or in the most convienient way for you at the moment. Not sure I like that way, either.

I believe the reason behind enforcing the order of attacks, as Darklone pointed out, is to mitigate people abusing True Strike to muscle their lowest attack. Full attack is always carried out from highest through lowest BAB to ensure that certain bonuses do not become unbalancing.
To extrapolate my example:
Wizard A has two attacks (BAB 6,1)
Rnd 1: WizA casts True Strike
Rnd 2: WizA attacks twice at AB 26, 1

Dursk.

 

[FrankTrollman]

I wonder if they mean that the bear is not considered grappled against anyone else.

I don't think so.

1> That's not what it says.

2> As many have pointed out, if that is what they meant it would mean that it would become trivially easy for characters to put giant monsters that stepped on them into headlocks.

I'm pretty sure it means exactly what it says. If the creature takes the -20 penalty it is not considered grappled itself. So if the other creature wants to achieve a grapple result against it other than "escape" they must grapple normally - and go up against the creature's whole grapple bonus.

It is totally undesirable for creatures who take the -20 to be easily pinned in the upcoming round - remember that in 3.5 pinned creatures are helpless and other creatures can coup de grace them.

-Frank

 

[Kershek]

It is totally undesirable for creatures who take the -20 to be easily pinned in the upcoming round - remember that in 3.5 pinned creatures are helpless and other creatures can coup de grace them.

Actually, they aren't helpless as per the SRD 3.5:

If You’re Pinned by an Opponent: When an opponent has pinned you, you are held immobile (but not helpless) for 1 round.