Is a grapple check an attack?

[Starbuck_II]

I ask because the rules seem unclear.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/specialAttacks.htm#grapple
A grapple check is like a melee attack roll.
"Your attack bonus on a grapple check is:
Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier
Special Size Modifier

The special size modifier for a grapple check is as follows: Colossal +16, Gargantuan +12, Huge +8, Large +4, Medium +0, Small -4, Tiny -8, Diminutive -12, Fine -16. Use this number in place of the normal size modifier you use when making an attack roll.
To start a grapple, you need to grab and hold your target. Starting a grapple requires a successful melee attack roll. If you get multiple attacks, you can attempt to start a grapple multiple times (at successively lower base attack bonuses).
"
Atack bonus means it is an attack to me (they even apply you one grapple check per attack you have).
They should have said grapple bonus if not an attack, they say attack multiple times).

So is it an attack (they do say attack roll multiple times)?

In a game here I'm think of casting True strike to free myself (no somatic) from a grapple, but I was told it wouldn't apply. Should it?
I have no issue accepting his decision but it feels wrong somehow.

Edit the Sage gives it relevant attack roll penalties like Prone in the FAQ:

[Q] Earlier, you talked about Bob the fighter, who was
unconscious and later woke up, prone, to find Grog the orc
standing in his space. You said Bob has to stay prone so
long as he remained in Grog's space, and that Bob would
provoke an attack of opportunity upon leaving that space.
Suppose Bob made a grapple attack on Grog? He can
grapple Grog, can't he? Bob would be at a negative for
being prone but would not provoke an attack of
opportunity, would he? Assuming Bob establishes a hold on
Grog, how long does the prone penalty last?

[A] Sure, Bob can grapple Grog. Bob's initial grab attack
provokes an attack of opportunity from Grog unless Bob has
the Improved Grapple feat or some other circumstance prevents
Grog from threatening Bob. (For example, Grog would not
threaten Bob if Grog were wielding a reach weapon.) If Grog
deals damage to Bob with an attack of opportunity, Bob's
grapple attempt is over.

If Grog doesn't damage Bob, Bob's initial touch attack
would suffer a –4 penalty for being prone. If the grab succeeds,
Bob is still prone and still suffers the –4 penalty for being
prone for the ensuing opposed grapple check.


That second -4 penalty is where the problem lies. Previously, most
of us thought a grapple check was exactly what was described in the
PH:

Most of people had convinced ourselves and each other that opposed
grapple checks like the one The Sage is talking about were like
opposed ability checks (Str vs. Str), with the addition of BAB and
that special size modifier. But Bob suffers a -4 penalty on his
opposed grapple check from being prone. This means that opposed
grapple checks are more like melee attack rolls than we thought.
Since one standard type of melee attack penalty applies to a grapple
check (that -4 from being prone), that implies that other types of
melee attack penalties and bonuses should also apply.

You see, if an opposed grapple check is more like an opposed ability
check than an opposed melee attack roll, only penalties and bonuses
that apply to ability checks would apply, like Prayer and Luckstone.

If an opposed grapple check is more like an opposed melee attack
roll, many more penalties and bonuses apply, like Bless and bard
song (which give an attack bonus but no bonus on ability checks).

[Toliudar]

I've always treated a grapple check as an attack, and would permit True Strike (good idea!).

[ericgrau]

Many but not all grapple checks are attacks. They are not attack rolls however.

That sage answer does puzzle me. It would be nice to see more examples to see whether or not it's a fluke. It does make sense, but might be more of a nice house-rule than anything.

[kestrel404]

Grapple Checks

Repeatedly in a grapple, you need to make opposed grapple checks against an opponent. A grapple check is like a melee attack roll. Your attack bonus on a grapple check is:


You can escape a grapple by winning an opposed grapple check in place of making an attack.

A grapple check is a grapple check. It is not an attack roll - it is LIKE an attack roll. You can use True Strike in order to hit with your initial grapple attack - the melee attack that you use to grab onto your grapple target - however to control and maintain the grapple you must make a Grapple Check - which is not an attack roll (merely LIKE an attack roll). Confusing, but that's pretty clearly the RAW and RAI.

Kind of like the difference between a Dex check and a Hide check - bonus to Hide checks do not add to a Dex check.

[Gwendol]

That contradicts the rules for grappling! A GC is like an attack roll, and it is clearly stated what is added to the GC roll bonus. Regardless, Bob can pull the opponent down to join him, or get up himself once grappling by winning GC checks.

[Keld Denar]

I was recently wondering this in a PbP game. My summoned spider shot a web at a meanypants druid and entangled it. Our party arcanist then hit him with an Evard's Black Tentacles of Tentacley Doom. The tentacles make grapple checks against the druid. Does the druid get a -2 on his grapple check for being entangled (entangled gives a blanket -2 on attack rolls).

While its not an attack roll, it is LIKE an attack roll, and lots of things that affect attack rolls affect grapple rolls (like increaing/decreasing Str). So the question is...HOW alike to an attack roll is it?

[Gwendol]

It's not an attack roll, so I would rule no to the -2. Grappling isn't attacking.

[Keld Denar]

But its "like" an attack roll. How like an attack roll does something need to be to be affected by things that affect attack rolls?

[The Glyphstone]

I believe this is one of the classic Sage cases where he doesnt have a clue what he's talking about.

[Saintheart]

Bear in mind Weapon Focus (grapple) is apparently a legitimate feat assignment, which would lean towards it being a melee attack.

Also, from the WOTC Archives on grappling: (http://http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050301a)


Once you grab someone, you must establish a hold, and you do that by making an opposed grapple check against your foe. The rules say the opposed grapple check that follows a successful grab is a free action for you, but it's really not an action at all. You make the grapple check as part of the attack you used to make the grab. Likewise, the opposed check your foe makes to resist you is not an action for him.

A grapple check is just like a melee attack roll, except that a special size modifier replaces your normal size modifier. In regular melee combat, smaller creatures get both an attack bonus and an Armor Class bonus. When grappling, the advantage goes to the bigger opponent. Table 7-1 in the Monster Manual shows size modifiers for regular and grappling combat. Page 156 in the Player's Handbook also shows special size modifiers for grappling.

The grapple check's part of the attack, if not an attack in itself. Therefore it's subject to penalties and modifiers which would affect an attack roll.

[Curmudgeon]

Also, from the WOTC Archives on grappling: (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050301a)
What you've described as "the WOTC Archives on grappling" are actually "Rules of the Game" articles. The author is Skip Williams ─ the same guy who was the Sage. So that's no confirmation at all; it's the same house rule (presented as if it were RAW) in two different places.

[ericgrau]

So the question is...HOW alike to an attack roll is it?



Your attack bonus on a grapple check is:

Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier

That much like an attack roll. By RAW no special modifiers apply other than size. By common sense I'd make many but not all modifiers apply. For example I wouldn't let gishes quicken true strike grapple-pin everything into oblivion, but I think a -4 or -2 from being prone or entangled is a good idea, as long as the attacker isn't facing the same penalty (which would cancel it out). AFAIK these are pure house rules. Though hearing more sage opinions would be nice to consider if anyone has excerpts, to help check whether the first one is a mistake.

[Keld Denar]

By that logic, you wouldn't get a +4 on grapple checks from Improved Grapple, since Improved Grapple isn't your BAB, Str, or a special size modifier.

I think its much more than that. Look at the things that penalize attack rolls. Prone? Makes sense, its harder for a guy on his back or side to grapple someone who's standing, and if they are both prone, the penalities cancel out. Entangled? Sure...its harder for you to hold someone while wearing bulky clothes, and being wrapped in bulky spider webs makes it even more so. Slowed? Sure, the other guy is faster than you, hes gonna escape your grip easier. Shaken, Frightened, or Paniced? You aren't thinking clearly, due to the fear, of course you aren't going to react in the most optimal matter.

I think that anything that would modify an attack roll would modify a grapple roll. If you have a +3 sacred bonus on attack rolls from Law Devotion, you are moving with conviction, whether that conviction is to smite evildoers or restrain a thief. A +3 weapon, however, would not (unless it was a gauntlet or mancatcher or other grappling weapon). I think that grapple checks are similar enough to attack rolls that they should be modified by anything that generally modifies an attack roll.

[ericgrau]

Feats are a specific exception to the general rule that say so in the feat description. As are any stated +X bonus to Y.

Also check this out:


Saving Throws
Generally, when you are subject to an unusual or magical attack, you get a saving throw to avoid or reduce the effect. Like an attack roll, a saving throw is a d20 roll plus a bonus based on your class, level, and an ability score. Your saving throw modifier is:

Base save bonus + ability modifier




To make a skill check, roll 1d20 and add your character’s skill modifier for that skill. The skill modifier incorporates the character’s ranks in that skill and the ability modifier for that skill’s key ability, plus any other miscellaneous modifiers that may apply, including racial bonuses and armor check penalties. The higher the result, the better. Unlike with attack rolls and saving throws, a natural roll of 20 on the d20 is not an automatic success, and a natural roll of 1 is not an automatic failure.


Attack rolls are a frequent way of explaining other rolls, that's all.

[Keld Denar]

How about items then? Gloves of Titan Grip and otherwise? They aren't mentioned either. Or do they get an exclusion as well? And if they do get an exclusion, it seems like just about everything is an exclusion. If everything is an exclusion, is anything really an exclusion? Or are they just conforming with the rules? Could it be that an a grapple check IS an attack roll, except that instead of a penalty for large sizes, you get a bonus(hence the "like")? That would actually streamline things quite conveniently.

[ericgrau]

See edits. Any +X to Y has its own rules that provide a specific exception to the general. It's a trivial exception in that anyone will say of course a special ability or magic item adds new rules to existing ones, but that does not mean you can start adding whatever you want to existing rules.

[Keld Denar]

Who said anything about adding anything? The rules say "a grapple check is like an attack roll", with absolutely no qualification on HOW it is like, or how much of it it is like.

The common interpretation seems to be that it is like an attack roll only in that it is one of few rolls that include BAB.

I'm proposing that it is "more" like an attack roll. Identical to an attack roll, in fact, except for what size modifiers you use. It is still "like an attack roll", so the rules are still followed.

There really isn't any more support for one than the other. So why not? It definitely makes things a lot easier and more intuitive. Anything that modifies an attack roll modifies a grapple roll. Thus, something like Haste or Slow would affect a grapple check (which makes sense from a fluff point of view...a magically buffed or debuffed wrestler would be more/less adept at wrestling, right?), since Haste and Slow specifically modify attack rolls.

[ericgrau]

I can see the common sense connection, and it seems to fit with the combat modifiers. But if you start considering things like "can I add the +20 to true strike? Sneak attack damage when grappling someone flat-footed? Awesome blow grapple check? Grapple with spectral hands using my own personal grapple modifier plus 2?", etc., etc. then it falls apart. And the distinction between applications that don't make sense and those that do make sense doesn't seem to exist in the rules; you must provide it yourself. It is a fuzzy unspecified area and if you make an assumption about it and apply it to everything it's highly questionable that this was ever the intent. Just house rule it in and define the boundaries as you do so; or else find an existing rules clarification that does this where the SRD does not.

[Telonius]

The Grapple modifiers are just a C&P of the regular melee weapon attack bonus. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#attackRoll)


Combat Statistics:
Your attack bonus with a melee weapon is:

Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + size modifier


Only difference is the size modifier is "special." There are obviously lots of other modifiers than just base attack, strength, and size that affect melee weapon rolls. Being prone is one of those, and I think everybody would agree that being prone does actually give a -4 to an attack with a melee weapon. The absence of other modifiers in the Grapple rules should be no cause for alarm.

You'd still have the odd additional -4 ruling on the grapple checks, but the ruling does seem to make some sort of internal sense. The character started out prone, and hasn't taken a move-equivalent action to stop being prone. Grappling or being grappled (and even Pinning or being Pinned) has no official game-rule effect on whether or not you count as Prone. Make sense? Maybe, maybe not, but it's consistent.

I'm imagining a full attack now... Trip; successful; defender is prone and gets -4 AC vs melee. Grapple (success); characters are now grappling, defender still gets -4 for being prone. Pin; successful; defender still takes -4 from being Prone vs person in grapple, but now takes an additional -4 to AC vs everybody not in the grapple. The defending character also takes -4 to escape the grapple since he's now prone.

[Starbuck_II]

I can see the common sense connection, and it seems to fit with the combat modifiers. But if you start considering things like "can I add the +20 to true strike? Sneak attack damage when grappling someone flat-footed? Awesome blow grapple check? Grapple with spectral hands using my own personal grapple modifier plus 2?", etc., etc. then it falls apart. And the distinction between applications that don't make sense and those that do make sense doesn't seem to exist in the rules; you must provide it yourself. It is a fuzzy unspecified area and if you make an assumption about it and apply it to everything it's highly questionable that this was ever the intent. Just house rule it in and define the boundaries as you do so; or else find an existing rules clarification that does this where the SRD does not.

Wait, yes Sneak attack works whenever you deal damage by an attack roll (grapple is like it so it applies). Grappling works, but how often can you grapple a flatfooted person anyway? (You worried about d3 + Xd6 damage + Str?)

[Keld Denar]

Grappling with a greased person? Thats...hot! :smallcool: