How would you like to see Grapple changed?

[Majoru Oakheart]

The problem you have is you want to fight against something that is actually realistic, namely, that grappling is a very effective technique in alot of situations.

True, however getting close enough to grapple someone is...very difficult at best. It's generally not a good idea to try when they have a sword. They hack you up and you die before you can get close enough to touch them.

But not only are you fighting realism, you are fighting against the heroic nature of D&D. D&D makes characters, even wizards, very durable. High level characters can take alot of punishment. Because of hit points, its very hard to stick a peice of steel in something and dismember it. This serves to heighten the normal realistic advantages of grappling compared to attacking with weapons. Grappling bypasses the hit point system, by imposing a condition on the opponent - something that D&D makes very difficult to do with a sword.

Yes, that's the main problem. D&D creates an atmosphere of heroic fantasy, the kind where powerful warriors are locked in mortal combat, their skill with a sword determining victory. Or they have to dodge fire blasts and move close enough to get that one good strike against the wizard in order to kill him when he has force fields up and is blocking with his staff.

Unfortunately, right now most battles against wizards aren't like that. They are often: "I'll hold him down so he can't cast spells while you beat him repeatedly, ok?" While the wizard who is capable of shifting the nature of reality, teleporting across the world in a second and summoning demons from the outer planes is reduced to "I attempt to get out of the grapple, if I make a natural 20 this round, I might succeed." It ruins the heroic feel of the game for me when it's done....in addition to being an overly obtuse mechanic.

I think the only way to fix it is to heavily deemphasis the advantages of grappling or make it so that the only way you can get this level of competency in grappling is to heavily invest your character in it.

 

[Sadrik]

Also, as many other posters have said elsewhere, give us decent rules for climbing on very large creatures.

[/humor]"You climbed, 5 feet- Attack od Opportunity!"[/end humor]

 

[Sadrik]

This would be my suggestion for grappling changes:
Right now, there are two size modifiers, one for attacking and one for grappling/sneaking. I would combine both into a single size modifier +/-2 per size period. Ditching the 1/2/4/8 and 4/8/12/16 for 2/4/6/8, and possibly even getting rid of the size names as well: small, large etc for size -2 or size +2 respectively. This way, you can have truly colossal creatures beyond the gargantuan limit. This is a critical piece of the grappling issue because then the creatures who are very large dont get nearly the bonus they currently do. Players will feel like they still have options while in a grapple (a +8 bonus is a lot more doable than a +16 bonus).

I would also go with a special type of attack called a Maneuver. A maneuver would encompass a lot of things, like disarm, grapple, trip, bull rush, everything. Its mechanics would be an opposed BAB roll with size (of course) instead of the normal BAB vs. AC. How characters get access to specific maneuvers I have no idea. But I am certain that they will have a good system in place that will grant them (martial powers for instance).

You can define every possible maneuver that someone will try and put them into two groups of effects. You catch everything and every rule mechanic within those maneuvers. Move can encompass: throw them, escape the grapple, drop to the ground, roll over with them. Attack can be: stick them with a dagger you both are struggling with, put them in a head lock squeeze, or whatever else. Using these two broad methods allows the actual description of what is happening to be left up to the DM and the player and not being left up to a flow chart out of the PHB.

I would run a grapple like this:
Your round 1
Grab them- maneuver check
Their round 1
They have two options: move (maneuver check) or attack (maneuver check)
Your round 2
You have two options: move (maneuver check) or attack (maneuver check)
Their round 2
They have two options: move (maneuver check) or attack (maneuver check)
Etc.

 

[JVisgaitis]

What happens to the attacker? Are they also "grabbed" or do they have a different state?

They have a -2 to attack rolls and they can't move until they break the grab. The rules in SWSE are definitely a lot better, but I don't know if I like requiring feats to be able to crush, trip, throw, or pin. It certainly makes the rules not come up as much, but I'm not sure I feel that it's the best solution. It seems like a way to try and "cleverly" avoid the problem instead of just fixing it.

I like the Iron Heroes grapple rules. They work for me. You can even lift people over your head and throw them!

Dear god why? Its the same rules from 3.5. They just added more options. Any type of combat action that has rules that span almost 3 pages is seriously a very bad idea.

 

[Victim]

Never seen an MMA match then have you?

Specifically, putting someone in a headlock or an arm bar does not, in fact, place them on the ground. But, why else would you grapple with someone unless you wanted to immobilize them, meaning take them to the ground?

No, I mean that the grappling mechanic doesn't knock people down. It doesn't reflect the reality of grappling.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I'd like to see reasonable rules on aid another with grappling.

With 3.x rules, it seems some of the helpers have to use aid another to help with the attack roll, then the grappler has to make a grapple check with yet others all rolling to hit AC 10 (might miss if they're kobolds) so they can aid another... so many rolls, and what if the initial touch attack misses? So many wasted rolls.

Maybe it's not that complicated, but the rules are so confusing in that area. IMO, aid another grapples should be more similar to the crowd/mob rules.

 

[Felon]

No, I mean that the grappling mechanic doesn't knock people down. It doesn't reflect the reality of grappling.

People grapple without being knocked down. They grab each others' arms and necks, they tug back and forth. You can even pin your opponents' arms behind him without dropping him to the floor. That's real enough. Now, should taking the oppoent down be an optional maneuver? Sure.

For that matter, so should choking and throwing your opponent. Yet, they're not, and I don't like that. The problem is there should be a multitude of grappling options, but people complain about drowning in options, so there probably won't be.

Now this is one of those areas where I hope Star Wars Saga isn't a preview of 4e. I don't want a system where it's "streamlined" to the point where you need a feat to do stuff that 5th-graders on the playground can do (Crush, Pin, Throw, and Trip).

 

[Branduil]

I prefer the 'Grappling for Begginners' rules... a PDF by our most esteemable Morrus here on the boards..

And based on the above, its much like was SW Sage does, but you can pin, etc.. without feats. Feats just let you do more cool things {like Throw}

Do you have a link to that pdf?

 

[Av3rnus]

Having looked at the SWSE grappling rules again, I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, it is very streamlined - which I like. A lot. On the other hand, it seems very limiting. Like others have said, it doesn't seem like feats should be required to pin, crush, throw, or trip.

I'd like a grappling system that makes sure the following sorts of scenarios are possible:

• A halfling leaps onto an orc's back and tries to strangle it with his arms
• The fighter picks up a kobold, carries it to a cliff edge, and then throws it over
• The dragon pins the cleric to the ground with one claw while it continues to fight the rest of the party
• The rogue clambers up the dragon's back and looks for a weak spot to stab

 

[Badkarmaboy]

I like the Iron Heroes grapple rules. They work for me. You can even lift people over your head and throw them!

That's hot...