Strangling someone : how to?

[The Shadowdove]

Hey forum-lurkers,

Let's say a barbarian or similar class wants to do something like FLY INTO a screaming a rage, strangling the guy who made fun of their kilt/lion pelt.

How would they go about choking someone to death?

James Bond is attacked in the shower and has to use his nearby belt to strangle his attacker, who he'd just disarmed?

What about a rogue who sneak attacks with a garrote?

I imagine there's some sort of grapple going on.

However, lots of people with any sort of con can hold their breath for a long time in this edition of the game.

Thanks in advance!!


-Dove

[RumoCrytuf]

Hey forum-lurkers,

Let's say a barbarian or similar class wants to do something like FLY INTO a screaming a rage, strangling the guy who made fun of their kilt/lion pelt.

How would they go about choking someone to death?

James Bond is attacked in the shower and has to use his nearby belt to strangle his attacker, who he'd just disarmed?

What about a rogue who sneak attacks with a garrote?

I imagine there's some sort of grapple going on.

However, lots of people with any sort of con can hold their breath for a long time in this edition of the game.

Thanks in advance!!


-Dove

I actually did this very thing last night. DM had two STR checks. One for grapple, the next for choking. Passing both, follow rules of suffocation. ( Hold breath for 1 round+CON, after that Immediately drop to 0 hp and start dying)

[Naanomi]

An ettercap uses a garrote attack in the MM, I'd start there (but take away advantage on the initial attack) for such an attack. I'd let someone grappling make a second grapple attempt (taking a second action) to do something similar by manually choking (though likely less or perhaps even no damage beyond suffocation)

[Specter]

I don't believe believe there are rules for that. If I had to homebrew it, I'd make it five turns of grappling where the attacker uses his action to keep hold of the choking. If he maintains hold for 5 rounds, unconsciousness. But I imagine this could be abused with Expertise and Rage and stuff.

[CursedRhubarb]

Tough question. No real rules for it so the DM would get to decide how it works. An idea on each:

1. Grapple STR check to grab the victim by the neck, with advantage due to rage if I remember right. Then a second check of STR vs their CON (Advantage if raged) to squeeze. If they fail the second then they take unarmed damage (1+STR or I'd say 2+STR if using both hands to choke) and make a CON save to hold their breath. Success and they hang in there, Fail and they begin to suffocate, and fall to 0hp in a number of rounds equal to their CON mod. Gives them a change to escape the grapple before then, but it won't be likely. If they escape they suffer a level of exhaustion.

2. It would be using an improvised weapon so, grapple STR check to get them but it would be without your STR mod due to using improvised weapons. Then STR vs CON check same as before to try and strangle, but a bit easier to escape with a grapple to escape being their DEX or STR vs your STR with no mod.

3. This one is interesting. I'm guessing this is done when undetected and sneaking from behind. If so, I figure a garrote would fit in a set of thieves tools and would do a Dex (sleight of hand) check vs their passive perception to get it on them. Then, since they would be caught off guard I don't see them being able to get a prepared breath to hold so a DEX vs CON check since I figure a rogue would use leverage rather than brute strength to make it right, and if they fail they fall to 0hp in rounds equal to their CON mod but on saves until they hit 0hp or escape they make with disadvantage so escape is very unlikely.

[Saeviomage]

I think that any of those are going to be as follows:

1. Grapple check to hold your foe down.
2. Make attack rolls and apply damage.

How much damage? Pretty easy: for the barbarian, he's just using his bare hands, so regular unarmed damage will do.

For James Bond? Seems like he's improvising a weapon. The formal version of that weapon is probably the garrote, so we'll look to the next scenario for that one.

The garrote is a two-handed weapon that does not count as occupying your hands for the purpose of a grapple. It can only be used to make an attack on a foe that you are grappling.
It's also (probably) restricted by the size of your foe, requires your foe to have a neck etc etc. Given those factors, I'm tempted to give it some high damage dice. However: is it honestly more effective than just stabbing someone with a dagger?

End result: the garrote has a damage of somewhere between 1d4 and 2d6, depending on whether you want people to choose to use it. Personally I'm happy with it sucking: it's advantages are elsewhere. So 1d4.

It's also not a finesse weapon.

I would however say that it allows you to apply sneak attack damage. In fact, it might specifically always allow the application of sneak attack damage regardless of other factors.

So Mr Bond is improvising a 1d4 damage weapon, which explains why he doesn't necessarily whip off his belt any time he's in an unarmed fight: he can pick up anything and deal 1d4 with it.

The only element missing from this is the whole idea that a garrote silences your foe while you have them grappled. I guess you could add that as a special property of the garrote? When you are grappling a foe with a garrote in hand, they can speak no louder than a whisper.

Incidentally, that last bit means that garrotes are not especially effective against spellcasters. You can still make noise, just not a lot. I think that is a good thing for game balance: spellcasters are already on the ropes through having poor stats to defend against this with.

So... does your assassin want to use a garrote? Only if he's alone, needs a silent kill, and has a good strength and athletics score.

Which I think makes sense.