Grapple expansion PEACH

[Mjolnirbear]

So with a particularly cinematic martial arts fight in mind, I though à simple houserule expansion to the grapple checks could allow more fun things for monks or fist-fighters.

Recap:
Make a contested athletics check to grapple. While grappling an enemy, you can Shove (athletics check) to make them prone and unable to stand. You can also move the enemy with you provided you have the carry capacity.

Proposed expansion:
While you are grappling your enemy, you can use one of your attacks to make another contested athletics check. If you succeed, you can choose one of the following options:

* trip (as Shove, above)
* lock (target is restrained)
* throw (target is thrown 10 feet and lands prone)

Thoughts? Additional ideas?

[Lombra]

You can already shove prone or 5ft away what you are grappling, but those changes could make grappling more intreasting as you say. 10ft looks like a lot, but if we arr going for cinematic, it works.

[Potato_Priest]

If you could restrain your enemy, why would you want to knock them prone? Using half movement to stand up doesn't seem like it would counteract the general superiority of the restrained condition, since that one doesn't impose disadvantage on ranged attacks against the target (in fact, it does strictly the opposite).

I like the throw rule though. This is always something players want to do, so it's a shame there aren't rules for it.

[Mjolnirbear]

Hmmm. You may be right about restrained vs prone. Do you think requiring both hands for the lock might make it easier? It would mean no spells or attacks basically as a 'cost' for a more powerful status

[nickl_2000]

Hmmm. You may be right about restrained vs prone. Do you think requiring both hands for the lock might make it easier? It would mean no spells or attacks basically as a 'cost' for a more powerful status

Personally I would forgo the restrained status entirely since this is something you can get with a feat and add in other moves instead. Just a few thoughts, although they may be way to much.


Headlock - Opponent cannot easily see and gains disadvantage on all attack rolls and must succeed in a DC 10 concentration check to cast a spell
Half-Nelson - Opponent is unable to make an attack or cast a spell with the arm locked (or doesn't gain an AC bonus from a shield in that hand)
Choke - You cut off your opponents air flow - See suffocation rules

[Grear Bylls]

Restraining a grappled creature makes the Grappler feat (even more) useless. It's a bad feat, but it tries to balance a grapple restrain combo

[Mjolnirbear]

I have no problem getting rid of the grappler feat. I'm honestly surprised I haven't done it already.

I like that I'm getting more suggestions. I do see a problem with the half-nelson, though, since characters are effectively ambidextrous, locking an arm doesn't really do much.

If I bring in the choke, I will have to be prepared to have my fighter do it against every BBEG lol. But it sounds fun. It's something I'd also considered as a crit special ability for the whip. And I'm not opposed to having characters subdue bad guys instead of killing them.

[nickl_2000]

I like that I'm getting more suggestions. I do see a problem with the half-nelson, though, since characters are effectively ambidextrous, locking an arm doesn't really do much.


They are, true, but it brings is more control options. Are you fighting a cleric that doesn't have warcaster? Lock down their non-shield arm and they can't cast a spell at all. Do they have a shield in one hand? Lock down the weapon arm and they can't attack you. It's just one more option that can be used. Have an opponent that you are having trouble hitting, take away 2 AC from the shield and let the party rogue go nuts on them.



If I bring in the choke, I will have to be prepared to have my fighter do it against every BBEG lol. But it sounds fun. It's something I'd also considered as a crit special ability for the whip. And I'm not opposed to having characters subdue bad guys instead of killing them.

It actually would be really hard to completely choke someone out in 5e. According to the rules

A creature can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 1 + its Constitution modifier (minimum of 30 seconds).W hen a creature runs out of breath, it can survive for a number of rounds equal to its Constitution modifier (minimum 1 round). At the start of its next turn, it drops to 0 hit points and is dying.

That's a minimum of 5 rounds of combat where they didn't break the grapple and the PC isn't doing anything else. Sure it is powerful, but that's a substantial requirement in combat to be able to do it. I actually don't see it being used all that often, but it could be really fun to have available.

[Mjolnirbear]

They are, true, but it brings is more control options. Are you fighting a cleric that doesn't have warcaster? Lock down their non-shield arm and they can't cast a spell at all. Do they have a shield in one hand? Lock down the weapon arm and they can't attack you. It's just one more option that can be used. Have an opponent that you are having trouble hitting, take away 2 AC from the shield and let the party rogue go nuts on them.



It actually would be really hard to completely choke someone out in 5e. According to the rules

A creature can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 1 + its Constitution modifier (minimum of 30 seconds).W hen a creature runs out of breath, it can survive for a number of rounds equal to its Constitution modifier (minimum 1 round). At the start of its next turn, it drops to 0 hit points and is dying.

That's a minimum of 5 rounds of combat where they didn't break the grapple and the PC isn't doing anything else. Sure it is powerful, but that's a substantial requirement in combat to be able to do it. I actually don't see it being used all that often, but it could be really fun to have available.

In general, with choking, I start at suffocation unless I judge that they have the chance to take a breath and hold it. If you hold your breath and dive underwater, you have far more time for instance, than if you suddenly find your head submerged.

Also, a chokehold doesn't suffocate you, it prevents blood getting to your brain. So I could use the suffocation rules to replicate it and ignore the holding your breath part.

I'm undecided if that's too strong to make an at-will option though. Maybe I could add that to the Grappler feat and make it worth it lol

[nickl_2000]

Also, a chokehold doesn't suffocate you, it prevents blood getting to your brain. So I could use the suffocation rules to replicate it and ignore the holding your breath part.


Huh, I didn't know that. You learn something new every day :smallbiggrin:

[Ganymede]

I would actually prefer a Grapple retraction instead.

Eliminate the use of all skill checks with grappling and shoving, and replace them with a 10 + Str + Prof DC against a strength or dexterity save.

[Mjolnirbear]

I would actually prefer a Grapple retraction instead.

Eliminate the use of all skill checks with grappling and shoving, and replace them with a 10 + Str + Prof DC against a strength or dexterity save.

Why?

ten char filler

[Spiritchaser]

One thing you might consider adding is a rule i have:

When you have grappled a creature who is attempting to cast a spell with a somatic component you may attempt to disrupt the casting with your reaction.

Functionally this works exactly like a counterspell check with the grappler’s strength against spell level. If you have the grappler feat you may add your proficiency in athletics. (You may wish to axe the last bit, I’m not sure it was for the best)



A caution: this can make grappling character into a VERY effective anti wizard. It does change play balance and it is a big deal. I wanted it in my campaign, but it does make Thaag the human prodigy cuddlebarian into an unholy terror for that grand vizier you were going to scare the party with.

[Vogie]

Proposed expansion:
While you are grappling your enemy, you can use one of your attacks to make another contested athletics check. If you succeed, you can choose one of the following options:

* trip (as Shove, above)
* lock (target is restrained)
* throw (target is thrown 10 feet and lands prone)

Thoughts? Additional ideas?

I'd want to put some counterplay in there, such as:

throw action requiring the target to be the same size category or smaller (dragon toss?) or max size ("... if it is Large or smaller").
adding a subdue action as something available only after target is restrained, a la the suffocate example from above, with appropriate "When you attack a creature that has at least one head" rider not unlike the Vorpal sword wording.
This would also give the grappler the ability to combo with another player's ability to restrain a target.

[Mjolnirbear]

I'd want to put some counterplay in there, such as:

throw action requiring the target to be the same size category or smaller (dragon toss?) or max size ("... if it is Large or smaller").
adding a subdue action as something available only after target is restrained, a la the suffocate example from above, with appropriate "When you attack a creature that has at least one head" rider not unlike the Vorpal sword wording.
This would also give the grappler the ability to combo with another player's ability to restrain a target.

I figure it would have the same limits grappling has. If you can't grapple it, you can't throw it off a cliff.

I think I like the "grapple, lock, choke/subdue" chain. It makes sense, and it has a significant cost that is still actually useful. But it makes it less simple to have a prerequisite for certain options, maybe?

[Vogie]

I figure it would have the same limits grappling has. If you can't grapple it, you can't throw it off a cliff.

I think I like the "grapple, lock, choke/subdue" chain. It makes sense, and it has a significant cost that is still actually useful. But it makes it less simple to have a prerequisite for certain options, maybe?

That's a good point - I had forgotten that grapple had those built in already.

The reason I wanted it to be a prerequisite is so it doesn't turn into a Nonbo if a party member uses Hold Person, Entangle, et cetera - I wanted to avoid requiring the grappler waste an action or attack restrain/lock a target that is already restrained just to fulfill the requirements for subdue.

[Mjolnirbear]

That's a good point - I had forgotten that grapple had those built in already.

The reason I wanted it to be a prerequisite is so it doesn't turn into a Nonbo if a party member uses Hold Person, Entangle, et cetera - I wanted to avoid requiring the grappler waste an action or attack restrain/lock a target that is already restrained just to fulfill the requirements for subdue.

So you mean:

During the attack action, you may choose to grapple. (insert check details)

If the target is grappled, the grappler may: (blah)

If the target is grappled and restrained, the grappler may: (blah 2)



Like that?

[Vogie]

Yeah. If you want to put it in feat language


You've developed the skills necessary to hold your own in close-quarters grappling. You gain the following benefits:

You have advantage on attack rolls against a creature you are grappling.
You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
You can use your action to try to throw a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you can throw that creature up to 10 feet away from you in a straight line. If that creature was restrained, it is knocked prone.
You can use your action to try to subdue a restrained creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, the creature suffers one level of exhaustion.

[nickl_2000]

You can use your action to try to subdue a restrained creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, the creature suffers one level of exhaustion.


This one is to much to much.
1 round of this and they instantly get disadvantage on all grapple checks from there on out, thus effectively failing it from there on out.
2 and their speed is halved
3 and they attack at disadvantage
6 and they are dead

[Mjolnirbear]

I think I like that. Thank you for your assistance!

[Vogie]

You can use your action to try to subdue a restrained creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, the creature suffers one level of exhaustion.


This one is to much to much.
1 round of this and they instantly get disadvantage on all grapple checks from there on out, thus effectively failing it from there on out.
2 and their speed is halved
3 and they attack at disadvantage
6 and they are dead

Yes... that's the idea. It's a really

It also takes 3 entire rounds and 3 passed grapple checks to get a single level.
Round 1 - Grapple
Round 2 - Restrain
Round 3 - Subdue!

So yes, there's a possibility that, after being grappled continuously for 8 rounds, and nothing else it'd be deadly. How long are your normal fights against grapple-able opponents? Think of this as a martial version of Contagion

Even if it's against a creature that is pre-restrained by someone else, the grappler has to succeed in 2 grapple checks before getting a single level of exhaustion on the target.

[nickl_2000]

Yes... that's the idea. It's a really

It also takes 3 entire rounds and 3 passed grapple checks to get a single level.
Round 1 - Grapple
Round 2 - Restrain
Round 3 - Subdue!

So yes, there's a possibility that, after being grappled continuously for 8 rounds, and nothing else it'd be deadly. How long are your normal fights against grapple-able opponents? Think of this as a martial version of Contagion

Even if it's against a creature that is pre-restrained by someone else, the grappler has to succeed in 2 grapple checks before getting a single level of exhaustion on the target.

Normal fights hit a 10 round max, but it's usually not a 1 on 1 situation where 1 PC can take down 1 baddie. I still think it is to powerful, but hey it's not my houserule. Plus there is no save verses exhaustion, nor does they go away when the grapple ends.