D&D 5E so a crocodile and a pc fighter go into a grapple ...

[Flamestrike]

Right!

Last questions ... when the restrained status says 'you don't benefit from bonuses to speed' does this mean 'bye bye dex bonus'?

Also, if the croc's victim was grappled and not restrained, couldn't the croc still be able to move him against his will?

The restrained creature retains its dex bonus to AC (although creatures get advantage to hit it). 'Speed' in 5e means 'movement rate in feet per round'.

And yes. The restrained creature is also grappled so if the croc moves, the creature moves with it (at half speed).

If you had a friendly warlock nearby he could shoot you out of the crocs mouth with a repelling blast

 

[Nickolaidas]

Thanks! Man, I LOVE 5th edition!!

 

[spectacle]

If you had a friendly warlock nearby he could shoot you out of the crocs mouth with a repelling blast

Or the fighter could kick the croc away himself. Being Grappled or Restrained doesn't impose any penalty on ability checks, so the fighter can use an attack to Shove the crocodile, moving it out of reach and breaking the grapple. Since fighters usually have athletics proficiency and crocodiles don't, his odds are pretty good, and if he has extra attack he gets to try twice.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

You have to break the grapple before you can shove, surely?

 

[delericho]

Or the fighter could kick the croc away himself. Being Grappled or Restrained doesn't impose any penalty on ability checks, so the fighter can use an attack to Shove the crocodile, moving it out of reach and breaking the grapple. Since fighters usually have athletics proficiency and crocodiles don't, his odds are pretty good, and if he has extra attack he gets to try twice.

I don't think this is correct. The Grappled condition is ended if something moves the grappled creature out of reach of the one doing the grappling, but it doesn't say anything about the other way around.

Which makes sense - if the fighter is held in the crocodile's jaws and something caused the croc to move, you would indeed expect the fighter to be moved right along with it. If the fighter wants to break the grapple, then there's a mechanism for that.

 

[Nickolaidas]

I think the shove is valid. Since the shove replaces an attack action and the grapple escape is *not* an attack action, the restrained grappler has two choices:

Choice A) Use ONE ability roll to escape the grapple as his action or
Choice B) Use MULTIPLE attack rolls *with disadvantage because of the restrained status* in order to 'escape' from the grapple.

Both choices have their up and downs: A single roll vs multiple rolls with disadvantage.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

Thing is, while grappled you can choose not to break free but to attack (in a normal humanoid-on-humanoid encounter, a dagger to the guts of your opponent as they grapple you and move you to the cliff edge).

But you couldn't realistically use your longsword terribly effectively in this scenario, so your attack options are limited. Also, despite that knife in the guts, your opponent is still grappling you. You're banking on killing him before he drops you to your doom.

A shove is an alternative to a normal, damage-inducing attack. It presupposes two combatants squaring off against one another, where A chooses to shove B further away from him. It implies distance (melee range) which is widened. Neither A not B is grappled.

If A is grappled, a shove won't break a grapple. It will push B a certain distance away, but B, having not relinquished his grip, will just take A with him. Useful to stave off that cliff drop, sure, but not breaking the grapple.

Now, if the fighter breaks the grapple (twist that hand, sink that elbow in), then action surges to shove, sure. But a shove on its own wouldn't break the grapple.

Especially if you're not fighting mano a mano, but instead a croc has your leg. How would a shove even work? Meanwhile the croc could be ripping at your leg like a dog with a toy, knocking you onto your back and dragging your supine ass backwards into the water where it will then hold you under by its own weight, lying on top of you until you drown. In the dragging to the water part, you have nothing to shove at, the best you could do is kick it with your free leg to either damage it (normal attack) or dislodge its jaws (attempt to break grapple).

edit: video here showing how you end up prone (arm not leg to be fair), but a shove ain't gonna cut it either way http://youtu.be/6ZhHHVsAnI4

 

[delericho]

A shove is an alternative to a normal, damage-inducing attack. It presupposes two combatants squaring off against one another, where A chooses to shove B further away from him. It implies distance (melee range) which is widened. Neither A not B is grappled.

If A is grappled, a shove won't break a grapple. It will push B a certain distance away, but B, having not relinquished his grip, will just take A with him. Useful to stave off that cliff drop, sure, but not breaking the grapple.

Yep, that would be my take also.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

Last questions ... when the restrained status says 'you don't benefit from bonuses to speed' does this mean 'bye bye dex bonus'?

Just as a general note, you don't ever lose your Dex bonus in 5E*. For sake of ease of play, the rules avoid altering your stats in combat as much as possible. Advantageous and disadvantageous situations are instead handled through, well, advantage and disadvantage.

*Unless there's some obscure monster or magic item that does it for some reason. I'm not aware of any.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Especially if you're not fighting mano a mano, but instead a croc has your leg. How would a shove even work? Meanwhile the croc could be ripping at your leg like a dog with a toy, knocking you onto your back and dragging your supine ass backwards into the water where it will then hold you under by its own weight, lying on top of you until you drown. In the dragging to the water part, you have nothing to shove at, the best you could do is kick it with your free leg to either damage it (normal attack) or dislodge its jaws (attempt to break grapple).

I basically imagined the 'shove' action being a kick to the crocodile's leg which would cause the animal to open its jaws and -- ah, forget it, you're right. It makes little sense in realism. What you say makes sense - if I'm grabbing on to you, shoving me will just move you with me (unless your strength surpasses mine and your shove basically breaks my grip - imagine a small child holding on to a boxer and the boxer shoving it away. I don't think the boxer would be thrown HIMSELF along with the child)

But some clarification on WotC's end wouldn't hurt in this case. I'd really love to hear their two cents - pity their FAQ rules forum got shut down.

Anyhoo, if I understood you correctly, did you imply that a PC shouldn't be able to use a medium-sized weapon for an attack when grappled? And only be able to use daggers?