Unarmed Spring Attack?

[Hypersmurf]

1. The movement into the opponents square is not 5 feet. In order to cover 5 feet after the attack you would have to move out, through or fully occupy the opponents square, it is not possible to move 5 feet inside a square (unless I am losing my mind)

I don't understand.

I am in a square. My opponent is in an adjacent square. I move into his square. I have moved five feet.

2. I believe, but I am not positive, that your opponent can choose to maintain the grapple if you release. I'm not sure where I read this or if was 3.0 but I can't find it in the 3.5 SRD. In any event, I could see this maneuver working with Spring Attack - jump in, break the arm, jump out. Wouldn't help much in the situation with his buddy though.

"Step 4: Maintain Grapple. To maintain the grapple for later rounds, you must move into the target’s space."

If you don't move into the target's space, the grapple is not maintained.

-Hyp.

 

[Pielorinho]

I don't understand.

I am in a square. My opponent is in an adjacent square. I move into his square. I have moved five feet.



"Step 4: Maintain Grapple. To maintain the grapple for later rounds, you must move into the target’s space."

If you don't move into the target's space, the grapple is not maintained.

-Hyp.

Would anything prevent you from moving into your friend's square before grappling?

Daniel

 

[Hypersmurf]

Would anything prevent you from moving into your friend's square before grappling?

Now you've thrown me - which friend, and what am I trying to achieve by entering his square? Am I grappling the friend, or the opponent from the previous example?

-Hyp.

 

[Pielorinho]

Now you've thrown me - which friend, and what am I trying to achieve by entering his square? Am I grappling the friend, or the opponent from the previous example?

-Hyp.

One of the reasons this came up was that a PC with Spring Attack wanted to move up, grab a helpless PC (paralyzed by a Gel. Cube slam attack), and "spring" back out of the way. We ended up ruling that a successful Grapple (against a helpless foe) would allow him to get a good enough grip on the PC to pull him back. I guess, RAW, that wouldn't have worked then?

I presumed that the use of "foe" in the above was not accurate, unless there's some serious intraparty conflict going on in the scenario .

Daniel

 

[Infiniti2000]

Now you've thrown me - which friend, and what am I trying to achieve by entering his square? Am I grappling the friend, or the opponent from the previous example?

Yes, that's part of the error. The original idea was to grapple your buddy with a spring attack to pull him safely away from the gelatinous cube. Even if it provoked from the cube, you could still move, grapple, move again. It's wrong on a number of accounts IMO, but the idea is grappling a friend, not a foe.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I presumed that the use of "foe" in the above was not accurate, unless there's some serious intraparty conflict going on in the scenario .

Oh, gotcha! Sorry, I'd moved on to another example with a simple grapple-the-opponent situation, and I wasn't sure how the friend was involved... I forgot all about the original question!

-Hyp.

 

[Pielorinho]

Makes sense--I think I was still obsessed with the first example. My approach to the rules is way different, of course, which leads to:
1) Springing forward, snatching up a paralyzed friend, and springing back to get them out of danger is awesome, and I'd really like to find a way to make it work. It wouldn't be useful very often, which is part of why it's so awesome.
2) Springing forward, snatching up an enemy, and springing back to get oneself out of danger is pretty cool, but it would be useful all the freakin' time (e.g., any time a spellcaster is guarded by mooks), and I'm not particularly enthusiastic about making that one work.

I know this seems really backwards, but I'd like to find a way to distinguish between the two that allows the former and not the latter.

Daniel

 

[FCWesel]

I think the key thing here is that the friend is helpless or willing to be moved, and not struggling against someone, which is what all the opposing rolls in a grapple simulate. If you want to do pretty much anything in a grapple, you must make an opposed roll to see if you can do what you want or if your opponent struggles and blocks you.

Rushing in and pushing/grapping an ally out of the way shoud be doable (within normal movement), but would be something that provokes an Attack of Opportunity.

 

[Xanterith]

Smurf,

I still don't think that moving into an opponents square is 5 feet of movement after the attack.

1) Personally I don't think you moved 5', although I could see someone arguing this especially if they were fighting a large or bigger creature.
2) This movement happens during the attack not after.

As for the second part, I agree with you that if you don't move into an opponents square you don't maintain the grapple, but again that is useless for the situation with the friend.

I guess my point is that I can see no way to spring attack and maintain a grapple - needed for holding and moving the friend.

 

[Pielorinho]

I guess my point is that I can see no way to spring attack and maintain a grapple - needed for holding and moving the friend.

What about this?
1) Movement before the attack: move into your friend's square.
2) Attack: Grapple. Since you're in the friend's square already, you don't need to move 5' further into the square to maintain the grapple.
3) Movement after the attack: drag your friend away.

Note that you'll still suffer AoOs from doing this.

Daniel