Grappling and Melee Spell Attacks

[AmayaElls]

So I recently came across a question. In theory if a spellcaster was grappling a foe (rare I know) and then wanted to cast a spell like Inflict wounds or shocking grasp, would that auto succeed since you are already holding them?

To me this sounds interesting.

[Gtdead]

No because these spells have a somatic component. You need to do this with your free hand as part of the attack.
The target realistically has ways to interrupt, deflect or dodge the attack.

[Sir cryosin]

I'm afb but in 5e grappled doesn't mean you have your arm around someone. The way they have it written is your proven ting the person to move. Like you have your foot on someone's feet. Or other way to keep someone from moving. You can grad someone's cape and have them grappled.

[Plaguescarred]

Both grappling and casting a spell with somatic component require at least one free hand so it's possible to do both if the caster does't have anything in his hand.

[Cazero]

Both grappling and casting a spell with somatic component require at least one free hand so it's possible to do both if the caster does't have anything in his hand.

Yes, but with different hands. You don't get to claim that your hand already succeded the attack roll with the grappling.

[Plaguescarred]

The hand doing the spellcasting would have to be a different hand normally yes. I suppose in the case of shocking grasp the hand from which the lightning spring could be the one doing the grasp as it doesn't specify that the S component must be done by the same hand. There would still need to be an attack roll.

[smcmike]

The simple answer is that it simply does not work this way. You can grapple and shock someone, but you have to make a roll, the same way my barbarian has to make a roll when he stabs someone he is holding.