Improved Grab, Sneak Attacks, etc.

[Bill Muench]

One of the things I've always had trouble with in 3E is grappling (who hasn't, right?). With the release of Savage Species and the Multigrab and Improved Multigrab feats, I revisited one of my favorite NPCs, a Marilith Blackguard.

Now, if I'm reading this all correctly, the marilith could hit an opponent with her tail slam attack and immediately move into a grapple. If she takes -20 on her grapple check (or -10, or -0 depending on if she has the Multigrab feats) she isn't considered grappled and can use the rest of her attacks normally, while her opponent is considered grappled. So she could then unload all of her attacks on her grappled opponent, who is thus denied dexterity, and they would all be sneak attacks. Correct? And if she leads off with the tail slam in the round (because there isn't anything that says you have to start with your primary attack, is there?), she could do all this in one round. Right?

So the sequence would be:
1. Use full-attack action and start with the tail slam. Hits opponent, gets to immediately make a grapple check.
2. She takes a -20 penalty on it and beats her opponent. Opponent is pulled into her square.
3. Due to constrict ability, she gets to make a second grapple check and if she succeeds she does constrict damage. Opponent has to make a Fort save or fall unconscious. Assuming he succeeds...
3. She takes the rest of her attacks normally against her grappled opponent. Because he is grappled, she gets sneak attack damage.
4. If she wants, she still has a 5' step and can drag her opponent with her.
5. Next round she can make another grapple check to constrict, provoking another Fort save, and assuming she is still taking the -20 penalty, she can take a full attack and get sneak attack damage.

Does that sound right? Thanks!

 

[Bill Muench]

Flumph!

Er, bump.

 

[Bill Muench]

No one has any comments?

 

[X.plosion]

All i have to say is I feel sorry for your players .

 

[Berk]

I don't think anyone wants to comment because of the debate that it would spark.

Personally I say they are called primary for a purpose. I would have given them a different name like lead or something so this way the people that will take that arguement wouldn't have that arguement.

 

[Dash Dannigan]

First, p. 138 PHB, the person grappled retains dex bonus versus the opponent they are grappling with. So that's a definate no on sneak attacks.

I don't believe a roll needs to be made for the constrict ability. If the grapple is successful then the constrict damage is rolled immediately.

You'll have to check the FAQ or Sage for rules on movement while grappling, there was nothing the current set of rules for it but they came up with something, but I'd have to look it up.

 

[Bill Muench]

First, p. 138 PHB, the person grappled retains dex bonus versus the opponent they are grappling with. So that's a definate no on sneak attacks.

I don't believe a roll needs to be made for the constrict ability. If the grapple is successful then the constrict damage is rolled immediately.

You'll have to check the FAQ or Sage for rules on movement while grappling, there was nothing the current set of rules for it but they came up with something, but I'd have to look it up.

But what about the fact that when you take a -20 penalty you aren't considered grappled? I suppose that could mean while you aren't considered grappled, you are still grappling, so they'd keep their Dex bonus vs. you. I didn't consider that.

Monster Manual II actually talks about movement while grappling, saying that if you take a -20 you can move the person as long as you are capable of dragging their weight.

 

[Bill Muench]

All i have to say is I feel sorry for your players .

LOL... Don't worry, she isn't really an NPC that should be tangled with until epic levels, if ever. She's one of the generals of the Lower Realms and basically started out as an experiment in advancing a monster into epic levels.

(Two great feats for multi-armed creatures are definitely Improved Multiweapon Fighting and Unholy Strike )

 

[Dash Dannigan]

But what about the fact that when you take a -20 penalty you aren't considered grappled? I suppose that could mean while you aren't considered grappled, you are still grappling, so they'd keep their Dex bonus vs. you. I didn't consider that.

I'm afraid so, taking the -20 eliminates the penalties of being in a grapple allowing her to otherwise fight normally but she is still in a "grapple" with her target. By definition this means her target retains dex bonus from her attacks, now other opponents however would be able to target her with sneak attacks, though there's a 50% chance for them to hit either grappler.

Monster Manual II actually talks about movement while grappling, saying that if you take a -20 you can move the person as long as you are capable of dragging their weight.

Cool, I didn't know it clarified in the MMII, then movement would be fine only the penalties would stack so the total would be -40 to grapple checks.

 

[Bill Muench]

I'm afraid so, taking the -20 eliminates the penalties of being in a grapple allowing her to otherwise fight normally but she is still in a "grapple" with her target. By definition this means her target retains dex bonus from her attacks, now other opponents however would be able to target her with sneak attacks, though there's a 50% chance for them to hit either grappler.

Thanks for the input, that does make sense. I just had this great visual of a poor sap all tied up in her coils and getting shredded.

Actually, that 50% chance is only for shooting into a grapple. And it isn't technically 50% - the rule actually states to "roll randomly" to determine who you strike. A number of DMs adjust the randomness based on the sizes of the grapplers. For example, if a halfling is grappled by a dragon, you've got a much smaller chance of hitting the halfling than of hitting the dragon.