Grappling revisited... again (3-way action!)

[MarauderX]

Last game we had a situation where the sorceress had dropped to do a magic jar. Unbeknownst to her, a bad guy in the guise of a guard picked her up and started to carry her off. Someone else in the party saw this, and she popped back into her own body. I considered that she was automatically pinned and could use Escape Artist as a standard action to wriggle free. She failed, and the bad guy took his standard action to keep her pinned and then move the grapple. Is that correct?

Now along comes the PC monk to grapple the guard. He misses his first attack, then hits with his second to start the grapple, which fails, so uses another attack, hits, and wins the grapple check. Now the monk has several attacks left over, so he wants to take the grapple straight to a pin; I ruled that once the grapple is started it takes the rest of a standard action. Is that correct?

The guard wants to keep the sorceress grappled, yet free himself of the grapple with the monk. How? Does he have to choose to let go of the sorceress to get away from the monk? Can the guard use Escape Artist to get away from the monk, still grapple the sorceress, and then move the grapple he has with her? Does the Escape Artist check count as the standard action so that the guard can't possibly move with the pinned sorceress in tow? Or could the guard use his own grapple check to escape the monk instead? According to the RAW it seems that he couldn't possibly. However, if he does escape the monk, the monk gets the number of chances equal to his attack to start the grapple again, correct?

 

[Infiniti2000]

I considered that she was automatically pinned and could use Escape Artist as a standard action to wriggle free. She failed, and the bad guy took his standard action to keep her pinned and then move the grapple. Is that correct?

He was carrying her, not pinning/grappling her. If he was considered grappling, then he would (for example) move a lot more slowly. So, considering them grappled is not really the right mechanic for when she is not there. Once present, there are no exact rules to handle carrying an unwilling opponent sans a grapple check. I would merely allow her to act on her turn and require a move action to 'escape'. If you really want to be nice to the guard, grant him a reflex save (DC 20) to react fast enough to 'grab' the sorcerer and require a grapple check to escape.

Now along comes the PC monk to grapple the guard. He misses his first attack, then hits with his second to start the grapple, which fails, so uses another attack, hits, and wins the grapple check. Now the monk has several attacks left over, so he wants to take the grapple straight to a pin; I ruled that once the grapple is started it takes the rest of a standard action. Is that correct?

Several attacks left over? If he's that high level, how'd he miss on the first attack? Anyway, you're not correct here. The monk can continue his iterative attacks however he likes, assuming they are attacks and not standard actions or whatever (and I strongly suggest starting a different thread if you want to get into the whole flurry + grapple argument).

The guard wants to keep the sorceress grappled, yet free himself of the grapple with the monk. How? Does he have to choose to let go of the sorceress to get away from the monk?

It's not strictly possible given the current rules.

Can the guard use Escape Artist to get away from the monk, still grapple the sorceress, and then move the grapple he has with her?

No.

Or could the guard use his own grapple check to escape the monk instead? According to the RAW it seems that he couldn't possibly. However, if he does escape the monk, the monk gets the number of chances equal to his attack to start the grapple again, correct?

Per the rules, the only option I see is for the guard to escape the grapple (using an opposed grapple check vs. both the sorceress and the monk), move into an adjacent square, and then try to grapple just the sorceress again. All this is likely a meaningless effort, though, really. If the guard is so easily successful in all this, he should just batter the monk.

As for suggestions, Rules of the Game had a few additional grapple-type options, such as throwing an opponent. That might be a good one for this case -- have the guard throw the monk out of the grapple.

 

[MarauderX]

He was carrying her, not pinning/grappling her. If he was considered grappling, then he would (for example) move a lot more slowly. So, considering them grappled is not really the right mechanic for when she is not there. Once present, there are no exact rules to handle carrying an unwilling opponent sans a grapple check. I would merely allow her to act on her turn and require a move action to 'escape'. If you really want to be nice to the guard, grant him a reflex save (DC 20) to react fast enough to 'grab' the sorcerer and require a grapple check to escape.

Um, he had her limp body in his arms. He moves at normal rates according to his weight limit until she wakes up. The guard feels her wake up, he squeezes to keep her grappled in the automatic pin he had established. I followed the 'moving a grapple' rules from there.

Several attacks left over? If he's that high level, how'd he miss on the first attack? Anyway, you're not correct here. The monk can continue his iterative attacks however he likes, assuming they are attacks and not standard actions or whatever.

Yes, the party is 19th and 20th level. So you're saying that the monk could go straight from standing up to pinning the guard using his iterative attacks? I suppose I'm asking if the grapple itself is a standard action or an attack. If that's the case, then Escape Artist is next to useless.

It's not strictly possible given the current rules.

Ok, then the guard MUST ungrapple himself from the monk before regrappling the sorceress? I guess his best course of action would be not to let her go.

No..

Ok, so Escape Artist truly is useless.

Per the rules, the only option I see is for the guard to escape the grapple (using an opposed grapple check vs. both the sorceress and the monk), move into an adjacent square, and then try to grapple just the sorceress again. All this is likely a meaningless effort, though, really. If the guard is so easily successful in all this, he should just batter the monk.

Opposed grapple versus the sorceress AND the monk? Why? He's only being opposed by the monk, and he faces an AoO by standing and moving. And I'm not asking for strategy on what the guard should do. He would need to make an opposed grapple check to make attacks in the grapple anyway.

As for suggestions, Rules of the Game had a few additional grapple-type options, such as throwing an opponent. That might be a good one for this case -- have the guard throw the monk out of the grapple.

Are these feat driven, such as Great Throw from Oriental Adventures?

 

[darthkilmor]

Um, he had her limp body in his arms. He moves at normal rates according to his weight limit until she wakes up. The guard feels her wake up, he squeezes to keep her grappled in the automatic pin he had established. I followed the 'moving a grapple' rules from there.

Trimmed a little for the relevant parts:

If You’re Pinning an Opponent

You can attempt to damage your opponent with an opposed grapple check, you can attempt to use your opponent’s weapon against him, or you can attempt to move the grapple (all described above). At your option, you can prevent a pinned opponent from speaking.

You may voluntarily release a pinned character as a free action; if you do so, you are no longer considered to be grappling that character (and vice versa).

You can’t draw or use a weapon (against the pinned character or any other character), escape another’s grapple, retrieve a spell component, pin another character, or break another’s pin while you are pinning an opponent.

I don't think "carrying limp body" == pinned, but if thats the way you want to use it sure. I would say the sorc is simply grappling the guard when she wakes up.

Once the guard is grappled by the monk, he could release the pinned sorc as a free action, but he can't escape the monk's grapple and repin the sorc and move her, because moving the grapple req's a standard action. Or he could just move with the both of them, assuming he can beat the monk and sorc's grapple check.

Also note:

Joining a Grapple

If your target is already grappling someone else, you can use an attack to start a grapple, as above, except that the target doesn’t get an attack of opportunity against you, and your grab automatically succeeds.

Grappling == pain in the rear

 

[MarauderX]

Grappling == pain in the rear

Yeah, no kidding. Thanks for the input, and I guess according the SRD the guard had little choice in the matter. Let the sorceress go, get toasted. Grapple the monk, get twisted into a pretzel.

 

[Elethiomel]

Yeah, no kidding. Thanks for the input, and I guess according the SRD the guard had little choice in the matter. Let the sorceress go, get toasted. Grapple the monk, get twisted into a pretzel.

Quite. And look at it this way: The monk isn't only holding onto the guard. He's also holding on to the sorceress. And she's holding on to the monk. Without being massively good at grappling, how would you expect someone to wrest an unwilling target from a master at unarmed combat?

 

[Elemmakil]

He was carrying her, not pinning/grappling her. If he was considered grappling, then he would (for example) move a lot more slowly. So, considering them grappled is not really the right mechanic for when she is not there. Once present, there are no exact rules to handle carrying an unwilling opponent sans a grapple check. I would merely allow her to act on her turn and require a move action to 'escape'. If you really want to be nice to the guard, grant him a reflex save (DC 20) to react fast enough to 'grab' the sorcerer and require a grapple check to escape.

I disagree here. The guard starts out carrying her while she is helpless: the rules are OK with this, AFAIK. When she wakes up, the rules are suddenly no longer OK with the "being carried" state; there are no rules about what happens next. I would have rules that they are grappling but that she is not pinned, however I think that his ruling is reasonable.

I concur with (almost) the rest of your post. See below my little rant.

Three-way grappling rules are very poorly written. Numerous examples abound:

• "Several combatants can be in a single grapple. Up to four combatants can grapple a single opponent in a given round. Creatures that are one or more size categories smaller than you count for half, creatures that are one size category larger than you count double, and creatures two or more size categories larger count quadruple." OK, that's nice. This supposes that there are exactly two sides, and that one side only contains one person. So, we can have a fight with two giants and a human, but only if the giants are on opposite sides. Does this make sense to anyone else? The term "side" can get really fuzzy anyway. This is more inelegant than it is a real problem.
• "When you are grappling with multiple opponents, you choose one opponent to make an opposed check against." So, let's say that a human is grappling the giant. The human is not a good grappler, so the human will not succeed on any check. However, now the human is grappling a giant and a goblin. Now all checks - even checks directly damaging or effecting the giant - become trivially easy. The sole exception is that the human cannot escape easily. Likewise, if the human is a spellcaster, it suddenly becomes very easy to pull out spell components, fighters can draw a light (and hence more suitable) weapon with ease, and so on.
• Moving really fast: say that eight humans in heavy armor are grappling a giant, and each of them takes the move the grapple action. Then the entire grapple moves at four times the speed of one human. The issue? They can each only move at three times their speed (if running). Hence, grappling can actually be an effective way of moving around the battlefield faster than normally permitted.

Now, a little known rule of grappling: "[If you're pinning you] may voluntarily release a pinned character as a free action; if you do so, you are no longer considered to be grappling that character (and vice versa)."

This doesn't work well in a group. You know have two characters that are no longer grappling each other. So what happens in a group? I would rule that the pinned character is ejected from the grapple, or that you can't take this action while grappling in a group.

I realize that this is overly technical. My point is that the grappling rules do not, as written, make any sense with multiple grapplers.