It's weird that you can full-attack when you're grappled

[dnlas]

Grapple
As a standard action, you can attempt to grapple a foe, hindering his combat options.(Combat - Pathfinder_OGC)

When Grappling, Grappler must try to grab foe's head, limbs or body .

whatever the Grappler grab, foe's action must be limited even attack.

In reality, it's hard to imagine that human can full-attack the python when python is Grappling the human


The other question (not seriously)
Why constrictor snake's constrict dmg dice is small that lion's bite?
Constrictor snake can kill crocodile by constrict easily. but lion can't kill crocodile by bite even it has pounce

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

When you're grappled, you can't use a full-size weapon. If I'm being constricted by a python and I've got a knife, why wouldn't I be able to cut the snake as many times as I wanted in a round?

 

[frankthedm]

Pathfinder is meant to be a game of thrilling and fantastic combat in the vein of Dungeon & Dragons, not Grapplers & Grab-asses so grappling was made less efficient than in the 3E era. Yes, realistically grappling is a efficient means of disabling an opponent, but you'll notice even in RL combat sports where it is allowed, MMA ...etc, grappling is still often regulated so it doesn't become a crushing bore to watch.

 

[Anguish]

Pathfinder is meant to be a game of thrilling and fantastic combat in the vein of Dungeon & Dragons, not Grapplers & Grab-asses so grappling was made less efficient than in the 3E era. Yes, realistically grappling is a efficient means of disabling an opponent, but you'll notice even in RL combat sports where it is allowed, MMA ...etc, grappling is still often regulated so it doesn't become a crushing bore to watch.

I'd just like to point out that G&G 3.5e was actually really fun.

 

[KiloGex]

I'd just like to point out that G&G 3.5e was actually really fun.

I've always been a bigger fan of Ass Grabbing & Gropping, or AD&D, myself.

 

[Tayne]

Pathfinder is meant to be a game of thrilling and fantastic combat in the vein of Dungeon & Dragons, not Grapplers & Grab-asses so grappling was made less efficient than in the 3E era. Yes, realistically grappling is a efficient means of disabling an opponent, but you'll notice even in RL combat sports where it is allowed, MMA ...etc, grappling is still often regulated so it doesn't become a crushing bore to watch.

As an MMA fan who appreciates grappling and wishes stand-ups were abolished... ouch. Harsh but true, unfortunately - most (but increasingly fewer) people do not appreciate grappling.

Of course, this is an argument that, no matter what side you fall on, is easily resolved with houseruling. That seems to be the nature of most of the arguments present on this forum, i'm noticing...

EDIT:

based on a comment on this post, I should clarify my poorly-worded position on "stand-ups..." I didn't mean that I think standing striking should be abolished, I should have said "referee stand-ups," which is where the ref arbitrarily decides that the fight is too boring and restarts it.

It's totally necessary to sell tickets, but the purist in me wishes they'd just let them fight it out naturally.

 

[James Jacobs]

Anyone who's tried to pick up a frightened cat would not find it weird for a creature to make a full-attack action with all attacks available. ;-P

 

[frankthedm]

As an MMA fan who appreciates grappling and wishes stand-ups were abolished... ouch. Harsh but true, unfortunately - most (but increasingly fewer) people do not appreciate grappling.

When you have a huge list of maneuvers you are not allowed to do in a mixed skill tournament, there is something to be said for imposing restrictions on techniques that can take advantage of said rules. IMHO a hold that easily be broken if not for the various and ever growing attack restrictions hardly feels legitimate.

 

[tylermalan]

IMHO a hold that easily be broken if not for the various attack restrictions hardly feels legitimate.

If the implied statement here is that there are a lot of holds that would be rendered useless by "illegal" attacks, I would have to say that you are wrong. It is a common fallacy to think this is the case, usually made by people with little experience in grappling (I'm not trying to say that I think you, Frank, are one of these people).

As but one of many good examples as to this being the case, I submit the following 5-minute video:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxZKZsqWdFw]Draculino BJJ - Provoking a Giant - Part 2 : Ball Grabbers - YouTube[/ame]


Again, this is but one of many examples.

If the implied statement is that there are maybe a couple of "holds" that might be defeated by illegal attacks, then I would agree. Of course there are some combinations of hold/attack (in which the attack is illegal in competition) where the holder might release the hold under pressure of the attack, but this hardly says much, to be honest. And, on that note, there just aren't that many such combinations, as in the vast majority of combinations, a "legal" strike would also likely cause the hold to be released.

 

[Tayne]

When you have a huge list of maneuvers you are not allowed to do in a mixed skill tournament, there is something to be said for imposing restrictions on techniques that can take advantage of said rules. IMHO a hold that easily be broken if not for the various and ever growing attack restrictions hardly feels legitimate.

Like what?

The guy above me put this to bed pretty well, but I have this video to add - this is a full contact fight, no rules. The Hapkido guy goes for the balls here to no avail as well.

A lot of people forget or just don't know that the sport of vale tudo (free fighting - brazillian no rules combat) solved these arguments empyrically decades ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RawPYGzYOQ&feature=youtu.be