Moving a grabbed creature

I see the rules for moving while you have a creature grabbed and it seems to dictate you can move half your speed and pull the target with you if you succeed on a Str vs. Fort check. What if I don't want to move, I just want to move the creature I have grabbed to another square adjacent to me? Or perhaps move a few squares, and move the creature i have grabbed to another square adjacent to me?
 

MarkB

Legend
It would seem sensible to allow such actions using the same requirement as moving a grapple normally.
 
I would agree, was just wondering if there was anything in writing on the topic. That sounds like a perfectly reasonable house rule to me in the absence of anything more official.
 
My general rule on moving grabbed targets is that, if they succeed on the check required to do the move, the grabber gets to move himself and/or the target up to half his speed (and be able to maintain the grab only if they're still in reach).
 

Azarin

Visitor
This just happened in a game this week. One player wanted to grab an unconcious player from a mezzodemon's grab. The player rolls a strength attack against the unconcious player's reflex( -5 def) and is sucessful. The mezzodemon is trying to run off with the unconcious PC, while the other player trys to stop it. I tried to find a rule for this, but no luck. What would you do?
 

MarkB

Legend
This just happened in a game this week. One player wanted to grab an unconcious player from a mezzodemon's grab. The player rolls a strength attack against the unconcious player's reflex( -5 def) and is sucessful. The mezzodemon is trying to run off with the unconcious PC, while the other player trys to stop it. I tried to find a rule for this, but no luck. What would you do?
Let the player grab the demon instead. If the demon's grabbed, it can't run off until it escapes.
 

Ferghis

Visitor
I'd do the initial grab roll against the ally's defenses, but I'd force an athletics roll against the enemy's fort to move the ally.
 

Azarin

Visitor
What if you want to grab the character out of the mezzodemon's grasp? Would you suggest a strength check against its Fort or Reflex? Or would you suggest opposed strength checks?
 
I'd do opposed Strength checks. But I'd make the grabbing PC attack versus the Mezzodemon's Reflex to grab his buddy, because the demon is presumably attempting to avoid letting him grab the target.
 

Ferghis

Visitor
I'd do opposed Strength checks. But I'd make the grabbing PC attack versus the Mezzodemon's Reflex to grab his buddy, because the demon is presumably attempting to avoid letting him grab the target.
I still think it should be easier to grab a grabbed body than to grab the grabber, if you know what I mean. I'm not wholly opposed to resolving it against the Mezzodemon's defenses, but I'd make it a tad easier. I wish there were load penalties to defenses. Maybe I'd draw inspiration from those of prior editions.
 

Nikosandros

Golden Procrastinator
I still think it should be easier to grab a grabbed body than to grab the grabber, if you know what I mean. I'm not wholly opposed to resolving it against the Mezzodemon's defenses, but I'd make it a tad easier. I wish there were load penalties to defenses. Maybe I'd draw inspiration from those of prior editions.
From the point of view of realism, it ought indeed to be easier, but that's not 4e philosophy. I think that using the enemy defenses better preserves the balance.
 

Ferghis

Visitor
From the point of view of realism, it ought indeed to be easier, but that's not 4e philosophy. I think that using the enemy defenses better preserves the balance.
But grabbing the grabbed ally's body is less of an advantage than grabbing an enemy. The enemy has the additional option of letting go. So yielding that advantage to the enemy would be nicely balanced out by a small advantage in the grab attack.
 

Infiniti2000

Visitor
Otterscrubber said:
I see the rules for moving while you have a creature grabbed and it seems to dictate you can move half your speed and pull the target with you if you succeed on a Str vs. Fort check. What if I don't want to move, I just want to move the creature I have grabbed to another square adjacent to me? Or perhaps move a few squares, and move the creature i have grabbed to another square adjacent to me?
There should be some significant but reasonable penalty for this because the obvious case is to drop the opponent into a pit or some such. With the current rules you can't do that. It also you to force flanking. And it allows you to end the hold. So at a minimum you need to break the hold by normal means and then maybe another check to choose the opponents square. And they get a save or go prone in a square of their choosing (including yours).

Dunno. Just some thoughts.
 

Infiniti2000

Visitor
Ferghis said:
I still think it should be easier to grab a grabbed body than to grab the grabber, if you know what I mean. I'm not wholly opposed to resolving it against the Mezzodemon's defenses, but I'd make it a tad easier.
I don't think it'd be any easier than trying to escape; in fact, it'd probably be more difficult. Not only is the demon holding tight but you aren't controlling all your buddies limbs. It's certainly not just a strength check either unless you want to kill your buddy by ripping out his arms. So maybe a normal grapple escape with a penalty or you have to join and then escape the grapple without a penalty.
 
I've been away from the boards for about a year so I could be wrong on this. We have been playing that if you force a grappler to move that breaks the grapple.
1) Should the grappler be able to make a Str vs. Fort check to keep hold of the grappled?
2) To Otterscrubber, If you have the movement, move into the square you want the grappled opponent, then move back to your first square and drag the opponent. Depending on where they are and you want to move them, it may take three squares of movement and two drags.
3) In Ferghis's example, grappling and dragging the Mezzodemon would break the grapple (or some other push/pull/shift). Your unconcious ally is still vulnerable there though.
 
I've been away from the boards for about a year so I could be wrong on this. We have been playing that if you force a grappler to move that breaks the grapple.
1) Should the grappler be able to make a Str vs. Fort check to keep hold of the grappled?
2) To Otterscrubber, If you have the movement, move into the square you want the grappled opponent, then move back to your first square and drag the opponent. Depending on where they are and you want to move them, it may take three squares of movement and two drags.
3) In Ferghis's example, grappling and dragging the Mezzodemon would break the grapple (or some other push/pull/shift). Your unconcious ally is still vulnerable there though.
I think in the case of an unconscious person the process might reasonably be a bit different though. Breaking the grab by force moving the grabber works OK for the case of an actively resisting target but a helpless target is no different than any other object and it wouldn't be a good precedent to have objects fall out of people's hands because they are force moved.

There really are a LOT of ways to handle it. Personally I'd have the other character succeed in a grab attempt vs the mezzodaemon. At that point both of them have hold of the helpless character and the issue can be resolved by the normal rules for escaping a grab. Once this situation is established then forced movement presumably would work normally. This is probably the quickest and closest to RAW method.
 

Azarin

Visitor
I have read that if any condition occurs that prevents one from taking an opportunity attack, their grab immediately ends. So daze, stun and blind come to mind. But if the PCs don't have any of these conditions to inflict, the rules as written give no other option for breaking a grab on an unconcious ally. I think my preference after reading all the great responses would be to make a grab on the mezzodemon with a bonus, since you are actually grabbing an unconcious ally. Then if the mezzodemon fails to break the grab, it releases your ally. This would keep 4e mechanics but with a slight twist. It would be nice to get an opinion from a wotc game developer or designer.
 
Last edited:

Dr_Ruminahui

Visitor
I would do something very similar.

I would give a +2 bonus to grab the demon, with a successful grab actually grabbing the unconsicous buddy.

The buddy would then be grabbed by both the demon and the PC.

On their respective turns, the PC and the demon can engage in a tug-of-war to break the other's grab. To do so, its an opposed strength test. If the initiator of the test wins, he breaks the other's grab; if he loses, things remain the same (still grabbed by both). I might also apply the low damage expression to the poor buddy who is being tugged.

Now, should the buddy regain consciousness, the PC's tuggings would be an aid other to the buddy's own escape tests.

And during this, anything that breaks a grab (forced movement, etc.) could potentially break the grab of one (or both) of the parties. As well, while double-grabbed, neither party could use the grab movement rules to move the poor buddy.
 
Last edited:
There should be some significant but reasonable penalty for this because the obvious case is to drop the opponent into a pit or some such. With the current rules you can't do that. It also you to force flanking. And it allows you to end the hold. So at a minimum you need to break the hold by normal means and then maybe another check to choose the opponents square. And they get a save or go prone in a square of their choosing (including yours).

Dunno. Just some thoughts.
This is the scenario I was envisioning, basically grabbing someone next to a ledge and then throwing them off. But using grab rather than a bull rush to do it. Or just changing an enemies position to one that might be more advantageous for me, without me moving. As long as I have the grabbiness to do it. But as written there is nothing in the RAW that allows me to basically slide an opponent I have grabbed to an adjacent square, I can only move and pull them with me. Seems like this is something that should be possible, just no rules to cover it.
 
Last edited:

Dr_Ruminahui

Visitor
Personally, I have no problem with a grab throwing someone off the cliff... its kind of like a dun-dun-dun first generation star trek battle.

<kirk wipes his mouth>
 

Advertisement

Top