D&D 5E So...Multiattack

[Celtavian]

I'm going to let Crawford decide this one. I can see it either way. You give up damage and one hand when you grapple and restrain yourself. It is a nice maneuver to set up the party. When used by someone with Expertise, it can be ridiculous.

Creatures I would allow to grapple with claws, but probably not a bite unless it is part of the bite or more appropriate for the creature if their claws aren't capable of grasping, like a dog.

 

[the Jester]

I'm not seeing the reasoning in you differentiation here... by general definition, claws and bites are melee attacks... or are you saying only weapon users are capable of choosing to do a grappling or shoving attack without sacrificing all of their attacks irregardless of intellect, size, speed, etc.? If so why?

The difference is, when Multiattack specifies attack with your claws twice, you have to use those two claw attacks as claws. When it says make two melee attacks, you can substitute a grapple attempt for one of them (a grapple is a melee attack, but it isn't a claw attack). At least, that's how I've been ruling so far.

 

[Imaro]

The difference is, when Multiattack specifies attack with your claws twice, you have to use those two claw attacks as claws. When it says make two melee attacks, you can substitute a grapple attempt for one of them (a grapple is a melee attack, but it isn't a claw attack). At least, that's how I've been ruling so far.

But most of the make 2 melee attacks... state the exact combination of weapons that must be used... IMO, that's the same as stating claw/claw/bite... it's a type of melee attack but still a melee attack. In fact the only generic "makes 2 melee attacks" I could find at a glance in the MM were the gladiator, scout, spy and knight... why do you feel these are the only monsters/npc's that should use grappling and shove without sacrificing all of their attacks? Or am I interpreting your answer incorrectly?

 

[the Jester]

But most of the make 2 melee attacks... state the exact combination of weapons that must be used... IMO, that's the same as stating claw/claw/bite... it's a type of melee attack but still a melee attack. In fact the only generic "makes 2 melee attacks" I could find at a glance in the MM were the gladiator, scout, spy and knight... why do you feel these are the only monsters/npc's that should use grappling and shove without sacrificing all of their attacks?

Because that's how I read the rules.

Also, generally, a monster whose shtick is grappling does so as part of an attack that also deals damage. So that ensures that 'grappler' type monsters are effective at doing what they do.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Like I tried to say "replaces one of them" rather than "replaces all of them" is why it's there.

Right, it says a grapple replaces one attack. It never says you can only do one replacement per turn.

 

[77IM]

Riddle: I have two coins that add up to 30 cents. One of them is not a nickel. What are they?

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

Riddle: I have two coins that add up to 30 cents. One of them is not a nickel. What are they?

That's clever! And on point.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Two things I'll bring up...

(1) PHB != MM, and MM != PHB. In non-programmer speak, they are two different books, and have some significantly different purposes and "rules". Look at, say, the "Evil Mage" for an example; the Evil Mage simply does not follow the same rules as the PHB lays out for wizards. Why would anyone in their right mind assume that everything else found in the MM wouldn't likewise follow those same "...it's a monster and doesn't have to play by the same rules as the PC's"?

(2) "Multiattack" is not quite the same as "Multi-Attack", nor is it the same as "Multiple Attacks". At least not any more than "Great Weapon Fighter" is the same as "Greatweapon Fighter".

Under "Multiattack" description in the beginning of the MM, it says it is "multiple attacks", and this does seem to indicate that it's the 'same' as in the PHB. Looking at the monsters description of "Multiattack", however, it specifically states what constitutes the monsters "choice" of choosing Multiattack...just like a PC fighter can choose Push as one of his Attacks...but only one. Why can the PC do it and not a monster? Because "push" is an option for a PC to be uses as any ONE of his attacks. If a monster was to use a "Push" attack option, that's what he's doing as his action; in other words, he isn't using his Multiattack option.

So, how I'd read it, is much like Mr.Mearls has; monsters "multiattack" is not the same as a PC with multiple attacks. That said, I'd have no problem what so ever completely ignoring his way of running his game....as I run my game the way I want. Meaning that my rulings supersede him every time.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Celtavian]

Crawford has decided. I will use his ruling on this particular matter. He did not say melee weapon attack. He said each regular attack. That includes monsters as far as I'm concerned. I'm going with that.

Here is what he said. I'm sure it will show up on Sage Advice soon.

"You can make a grapple check for each regular attack you forego with the Attack action, but you need a free hand for each."

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Crawford has decided. I will use his ruling on this particular matter. He did not say melee weapon attack. He said each regular attack. That includes monsters as far as I'm concerned. I'm going with that.

Here is what he said. I'm sure it will show up on Sage Advice soon.

"You can make a grapple check for each regular attack you forego with the Attack action, but you need a free hand for each."

Technically, monsters don't use the Attack action, they use the Multiattack action, so his ruling wouldn't apply in those cases.

But I don't need a Crawford ruling on this issue, so for me the fact that he didn't rule for that case doesn't matter to me. I say dragons can grapple with each claw while biting with their mouth, so they can.