Grappling Revision

[RangerWickett]

The main changes here are that you can move people as a move action, not standard, and that in a grapple you can make basic attacks with off-hand weapons as minor actions. This encourages people who are brawling to grab and pummel, and sneaky guys can go in close and stab a lot faster.


Grappling
You grab as a standard action, and if you succeed, you're in a grapple. Every round, you can sustain the grapple with one person as a minor action. It is potentially possible to grab 2 people at once by spending two minor actions each round to maintain the grapple.

Anyone in the grapple can spend a minor action to sustain his connection with another person in the grapple. This can get a little complicated, but it's useful if someone grabs you, then tries to let you go but you don't want them to.

Example
Turn 1 (Drizzt's action): Drizzt grabs Wulfgar.
(Wulfgar's action): Wulfgar takes the opportunity to pound Drizzt. Since he suspects Drizzt will realize it was stupid for a swordsman to grapple a barbarian, Wulfgar spends a minor action to maintain the grab.

Turn 2 (Drizzt): Drizzt doesn't sustain the grab, but can't automatically get away, because Wulfgar has him, so he has to spend a move action to try to escape. He fails.
(Regis): Regis shows up and jumps on Wulfgar, trying to help. He succeeds his attack and grabs Wulfgar.
(Wulfgar): Wulfgar uses some barbarian power to smash both of them at once, then maintains the grab on each of them with two minor actions.


Effects of Being in a Grapple
If you are grabbed, you are immobilized. If forced movement takes you beyond the reach of the person grabbing you, you're no longer grabbed. If you are grabbing and you move so the target is beyond your reach, you're no longer grabbing them.

Ranged attacks targeting anyone in a grapple take a -2 penalty from cover. You can choose to ignore this penalty, but if you do, you roll to randomly determine who you hit among the chosen target and everyone he is grabbing or grabbed by.

While you're grabbed, you take a -2 penalty to attack rolls with two-handed weapons. (And unless you've got extra limbs, you won't be able to attack with a two-handed weapon if you're the one maintaining the grab.)


Options in a Grapple
Minor action - Maintain grab. This counts as occupying one of your hands or other grasping limbs.

Minor action - Basic attack with an off-hand against someone you're grappling with.

Move action - Attempt to escape grab. Make Athletics vs. Fort or Acrobatics vs. Reflex to escape, and if you succeed, shift 1 square.

Move action - Move people you have grabbed. Make a Str. vs. Fort attack against each person you have grabbed and who has you grabbed. If you succeed on all the attacks, you move half your speed, dragging along everyone with you. If you failed even one, you don't move. (Often in these situations it's best for you to escape or release any unwanted grabs before trying to move the rest of the group). For the purpose of this action, you can ignore the normal immobilizing effect of being grabbed.

Standard action - Take any normal standard action. If you make any melee, ranged, or area attack against a target who isn't in the grapple, you provoke opportunity attacks from everyone you're grappling with.

Standard action - Disarm. Str vs. the higher of the target's Fort or Reflex. If you succeed, you pull the weapon from their grasp and can either keep it (if you have a free hand), or drop it in any space that is adjacent to both yours and the target's.

Standard action - Trip. Str vs. the higher of the target's Fort or Reflex. If you succeed, the target is prone. You cannot maintain the grab unless you fall prone.

Special Note - Flails (including whips) have the ability to be used to grab, allowing you to grab someone with a weapon, instead of needing an empty hand. Some types of weapons like jitte and main gauches could provide a bonus to disarm checks.


What do you think?

 

[the Jester]

Why?

Seems like a lot of added complexity for... what?

 

[CapnZapp]

My thoughts are these:

"Free" combat actions (as in "not requiring an encounter or daily power") must suck for the average combatant. If they are useful once, they are useful all the time - especially as it allows a player to heavily optimize towards continous use.

Therefore I'm okay with grappling (grabbing, really) as it is. It is only really useful for monsters that break the ordinary rules (by getting to do things cheaper or with extra bonuses).

As long as there are no rules in D&D that discourage using the same stunt over and over I see no other solution.

And by this I don't mean encounter powers, but the "reverse": once you have used a certain power you get significant penalties for a while. (In short, a cool down power)

 

[RangerWickett]

Why?

Seems like a lot of added complexity for... what?

To encourage more grappling. Having seen how effective grappling is in real martial arts, I wanted it represented a bit more. I see players tend to stick to what their powers tell them they can do, so I wanted to provide more useful options that don't require powers.

Also, I wanted mechanics for disarming and tripping. Now you can disarm or trip anyone, but you have to devote two standard actions to it, and you might fail anyway, so I still think it's a niche option.

 

[the Jester]

Well, one of the worst things in 3e was overcomplicated grappling. This is one of those things that 4e really and truly fixed. You seem like you're kinda going backwards here. If anything, I'd make feats or powers that trigger off of grabbing a target; but I really wouldn't be interested in using a system that seems to add complexity to a very simple and elegant 4e mechanic without a real payoff, and I'm just not seeing it here.

Using "realism" as an argument for dnd design is tricky at best. Have you seen a grappler try to deal with someone with a collection of swords and daggers? How about a big monster with claws and horns that can light itself on fire?

As far as encouraging more grappling- ugh. I don't think adding complexity to the system is going to accomplish that; instead, players are more likely to have their eyes glaze over when they see a page worth of rules on it, and say, "Never mind, I'll tide of iron instead."

As to tripping and disarming rules, I'd just stick to pg. 42 for that kind of stuff.

 

[CapnZapp]

As to tripping and disarming rules, I'd just stick to pg. 42 for that kind of stuff.

You have a good point, but how does page 42 help here?

Page 42 allows you to judge an appropriate amount of damage for a stunt-like action. It does not cover assigning conditions.

The purpose of a trip is to render the opponent prone. The purpose of a disarm is to separate an opponent from his weapon.

How does page 42 enter the picture here?

The reality is that disarming someone is potentially very powerful (like a player character with a +6 weapon, for example), and so balance can only be achieved by factoring in this ability into the disarmer's general power level.

For a monster this is easy, so just let it break the normally harsh rules on the stunt and you're done.

For a player character, it isn't nearly as simple. Just adding tricks to the repertoire can be fatally unbalancing (some characters simply will gain much more benefit than others). The best bet is a thing like a paragon path or epic destiny, where you can ensure that getting access to neat stunt stuff is appropriately payed for by giving up other neat stuff.

But page 42? If there was a trip option that actually allowed me to render my opponent prone, then yes. But otherwise?

 

[CapnZapp]

I would say that any attempt at solving the core issue (allowing general access to basic stunts) needs first to redesign the game in crucial ways.

Let's take disarm as an example.

What you would need to do is to implement what some DMs have done already: separate a character's power from his gear.

If PCs get an inherent bonus to attacks and damage ranging from +1 at low levels to +6 at level 30 we can remove the enchantment bonuses from weapons and implements.

Or at least limit the bonuses to +0 for run-of-the-mill magic weapons, +1 for extraordinary weapons, and +2 for epic story items and artefacts.

Then (and only then) disarm can enter the picture like the OP envisions (for grapple, but hopefully my point remains clear).

You can do cool stuff like disarming your opponent, but this does not completely cripple them (at most it will deny them +2 to hit, +2 to damage, a cool property, perhaps a daily, and some bonus critical damage).

Just slapping "realism" onto a fine-tuned game (not simulator) like D&D will only wreck things, I'm afraid. (RW: It might not wreck the fun for your players, but it will wreck the game in general, and thus the fun for lots of players. This is why you're not seeing more support for your idea - not because it can't work for you, but because it's not right for the game in general. That is, the difference between scribbling down in your personal notes and posting it here)

 

[Stalker0]

I like the ability to add a trip in once you've grabbed someone, but I think you can drop some of your other rules.

-2 to ranged attacks, drop.
-2 to two handed weapons, drop.
Disarm action, drop simply because disarm gets much more sticky in 4e imo.

But I think you can keep the moving people as a move action, your two person grabbing rule, and your trip addition without adding too much complication. The other rules add realism with no real playability benefit.

 

[Garthanos]

I would say that any attempt at solving the core issue (allowing general access to basic stunts) needs first to redesign the game in crucial ways.

Let's take disarm as an example.

What you would need to do is to implement what some DMs have done already: separate a character's power from his gear.

If PCs get an inherent bonus to attacks and damage ranging from +1 at low levels to +6 at level 30 we can remove the enchantment bonuses from weapons and implements.

Or at least limit the bonuses to +0 for run-of-the-mill magic weapons, +1 for extraordinary weapons, and +2 for epic story items and artefacts.

Then (and only then) disarm can enter the picture like the OP envisions (for grapple, but hopefully my point remains clear).

You can do cool stuff like disarming your opponent, but this does not completely cripple them (at most it will deny them +2 to hit, +2 to damage, a cool property, perhaps a daily, and some bonus critical damage).

Just slapping "realism" onto a fine-tuned game (not simulator) like D&D will only wreck things, I'm afraid. (RW: It might not wreck the fun for your players, but it will wreck the game in general, and thus the fun for lots of players. This is why you're not seeing more support for your idea - not because it can't work for you, but because it's not right for the game in general. That is, the difference between scribbling down in your personal notes and posting it here)

Yes there are side benefits to making the items to hit and damage bonus's subdued... it better fits some heroic story teling which emphasize the man over his gadgets... yes excalibur and stormbringer overshadow there bearers a lot (but only a couple of us can remember the name of lancelots sword and Beowulf did his best tricks by dropping the hunk of metal).

Are there any other elements that stand out in these rules? (I am one of the DM's who actively like subduing the dependence on weapons/implements.)

 

[Garthanos]

I like the ability to add a trip in once you've grabbed someone, but I think you can drop some of your other rules.

-2 to ranged attacks, drop.
-2 to two handed weapons, drop.
Disarm action, drop simply because disarm gets much more sticky in 4e imo.

But I think you can keep the moving people as a move action, your two person grabbing rule, and your trip addition without adding too much complication. The other rules add realism with no real playability benefit.

Some things sound like these rules might be assuming a judo skill or ability Ie a power for a form of martial arts In my opinion unless you have some specific training? then that enemy ought to be able to opt to take you down too, (they can grapple you in response) or stagger back instead of falling (they do a move to prevent the fall).

Capn is right you have to be careful not to step on the toes of something which should be a power...

I do think adding an extra or 2 at-will across the board, would free up the sense of tactical options available... If their were more unarmed specializing classes you might know who's toes and who's powers you were stepping on ;-)