Moon Druid Octopus Restraining my BBEG, can the BBEG attack tentacles?

[djreynolds]

"The intent is that monsters that are grappling a creature can be attacked through their limbs. Lead rules designer Jeremy Crawford ruled on twitter that "A creature grappled by a giant octopus can attack the octopus via the grappling tentacle."

Jeremy Crawford

A creature grappled by a giant octopus can attack the octopus via the grappling tentacle.
Attack tentacle if nothing else in reach?

So my question

Are tentacles allowed to be attacked?

A Roper specifically says they can be attacked, but cause no damage to the roper.

Can you attack the octopus' tentacles? If so, does the giant octopus take damage?

How do your table run this?

I was unfamiliar with the rule, and our current druid is using a giant octopus and they said I cannot attack him because he is 15ft away. I said I'm attacking the tentacles. I let the player have it, as they brought up the Roper's example and the octopus does not state this.

[Ganymede]

I'd say ask your DM, but YOU'RE the DM.

Personally, I'd follow Crawford's guidance here and allow an attack against the grappling appendage. I've let my players stab T-rexes in the face when they're grappled in its jaws and the body is too far away to reach.

[Dalebert]

The roper is an exception to the general rule because it's states it. If a creature is attacking you with a part of its body, it's subject to attack while grappling you, and yes, the octopus takes dmg. I use the term "rule" here loosely because it's more of a common sense thing that even Crawford agrees with.

[djreynolds]

I'd say ask your DM, but YOU'RE the DM.

Personally, I'd follow Crawford's guidance here and allow an attack against the grappling appendage. I've let my players stab T-rexes in the face when they're grappled in its jaws and the body is too far away to reach.


The roper is an exception to the general rule because it's states it. If a creature is attacking you with a part of its body, it's subject to attack while grappling you, and yes, the octopus takes dmg. I use the term "rule" here loosely because it's more of a common sense thing that even Crawford agrees with.

First off thanks,

We are in a battle, should I allow the player's version to play out until the battle is over and from then on tell him, your tentacles are fair game?

[Tanarii]

A roper's tendrils can be attacked as independent objects, severing them and freeing the character. An octopus's tentactes can not.

That doesn't mean an octopus's tentacles can't be attacked by a target that is grappled, using the octopus's AC and HPs.

But AFAIK, the rules don't state this is specifically allowed, and the Sage Advice Compendium doesn't say anything about it. And the tules do state creatures must be within your reach. So to me it looks like RAW is no, RAI per official Sage Advice is not provided, RAI by unofficial Crawford tweet is apparently yes, and ultimately you're the DM so make a house rule if you feel the Crawford Tweet should take precedence over RAW.

[djreynolds]

A roper's tendrils can be attacked as independent objects, severing them and freeing the character. An octopus's tentactes can not.

That doesn't mean an octopus's tentacles can't be attacked by a target that is grappled, using the octopus's AC and HPs.

But AFAIK, the rules don't state this is specifically allowed, and the Sage Advice Compendium doesn't say anything about it. And the tules do state creatures must be within your reach. So to me it looks like RAW is no, RAI per official Sage Advice is not provided, RAI by unofficial Crawford tweet is apparently yes, and ultimately you're the DM so make a house rule if you feel the Crawford Tweet should take precedence over RAW.

Tanarii, I would appreciate your wisdom here.

[Tanarii]

Tanarii, I would appreciate your wisdom here.
My "wisdom" is that creatures that are grappled (only) should get to attack the creature grappling them. :smallwink: Thats certainly how I've run it the few times it came up. I just didn't realize I was (apparently) making a house rule.

That said, off the cuff and IMO to keep it balanced creatures not involved in the grapple probably should be required to attack the grappling creatures space directly. Even if that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

[Malifice]

"The intent is that monsters that are grappling a creature can be attacked through their limbs. Lead rules designer Jeremy Crawford ruled on twitter that "A creature grappled by a giant octopus can attack the octopus via the grappling tentacle."

Jeremy Crawford

A creature grappled by a giant octopus can attack the octopus via the grappling tentacle.
Attack tentacle if nothing else in reach?

So my question

Are tentacles allowed to be attacked?

A Roper specifically says they can be attacked, but cause no damage to the roper.

Can you attack the octopus' tentacles? If so, does the giant octopus take damage?

How do your table run this?

I was unfamiliar with the rule, and our current druid is using a giant octopus and they said I cannot attack him because he is 15ft away. I said I'm attacking the tentacles. I let the player have it, as they brought up the Roper's example and the octopus does not state this.

The tentacles are the octopus.

If you're grappling someone with a part of you, they can attack that part of you.

Me to Druid: 'Lol, nope. If you're holding him, he can stab you [rolls attack vs Druids AC].'

[nickl_2000]

Yes, although at disadvantage (since the BBEG is restrained). The only thing that really changes is how you describe the attack. He may be hacking at the tentacle trying to free himself instead of going for the body.

[Thrudd]

The tentacle is part of the octopus and attacks against it count as attacks against the octopus. The thing is, until a tentacle is pinned down by grappling something, their position is unknown/indeterminate/in constant erratic motion and can't be targeted. So normally, only the "head" of the octopus can be targeted for attacks.

However, when grappling, one or more tentacle's position now becomes known/ static enough to be attacked, by anyone IMO, not only the grappled person. Can you not envision someone running over to hack at a tentacle that has grabbed their friend? I can. And any damage done to that tentacle hurts the octopus- it isn't a roper. That would be my ruling.

[Tanarii]

However, when grappling, one or more tentacle's position now becomes known/ static enough to be attacked, by anyone IMO, not only the grappled person. Can you not envision someone running over to hack at a tentacle that has grabbed their friend? I can. And any damage done to that tentacle hurts the octopus- it isn't a roper. That would be my ruling.

The more I think about it, the more this makes sense.

Additionally, I checked the PHB. Melee Attacks have to target the creature within your reach, not the creatures "space" within your reach. If part of the creature is in a known location that's not its normal space, you should be able to target just fine.

[Lunali]

Yes, although at disadvantage (since the BBEG is restrained). The only thing that really changes is how you describe the attack. He may be hacking at the tentacle trying to free himself instead of going for the body.

Not at disadvantage since the BBEG is not restrained, only grappled.

[Corsair14]

I would put the octopus at a disadvantage on rolls. He isnt used to using 8 arms, only two. Further if he is in air, he is having to hold his breath and will pass out shortly. In the process he is gradually losing strength. Doing something extremely strenuous like grappling means he is going to run out of air far faster than he normally would.

[Daghoulish]

I would put the octopus at a disadvantage on rolls. He isnt used to using 8 arms, only two. Further if he is in air, he is having to hold his breath and will pass out shortly. In the process he is gradually losing strength. Doing something extremely strenuous like grappling means he is going to run out of air far faster than he normally would.

See, you can't do this or you would be unnecessarily nerfing moon druids.
"Alright, I'm turning into a giant lizard and using my spit attack at that monster"
"Alright make a ranged attack roll at disadvantage."
"What why?"
"You've never been as a lizard before and have no idea how to make your muscle move in such a way as to spit."
The same problem occurs for a giant spider. If a player turns into a giant spider and wants to use his web to make a bridge are you going to make him roll a d20 and on 10 and below he fails because he has no idea how to contort their muscles to shoot web, then another dice roll because who has ever spun spider web into a bridge? No one that's who. It's assumed when a druid changes into a form they gain base knowledge on how to make the form work. How to swim as a shark, pounce as a tiger, knock prone as a wolf, ect. It's something that just happens because it's magic.

Edit:By the way, Giant Octopus can hold their breath for an hour out of the water, not a huge chance of running out in a fight. The fact that your homeruleing in exerting yourself reduces the air supplies faster (I think I don't remember reading that in a book) and I would say no, the octopus is good.

[MaxWilson]

Not at disadvantage since the BBEG is not restrained, only grappled.

I thought we were talking about Giant Octopus form? It is both grappled and restrained. Quoting Roll20 so I don't have to type it up myself:


Tentacles: Melee Weapon Attack: +5 to hit, reach 15 ft., one target. Hit: 10 (2d6 + 3) bludgeoning damage. If the target is a creature, it is Grappled (escape DC 16). Until this grapple ends, the target is Restrained, and the Octopus can't use its tentacles on another target.

[Snowbluff]

I would put the octopus at a disadvantage on rolls. He isnt used to using 8 arms, only two. Further if he is in air, he is having to hold his breath and will pass out shortly. In the process he is gradually losing strength. Doing something extremely strenuous like grappling means he is going to run out of air far faster than he normally would.

>:(
Octopi can hold their breath for an hour. It's fine.


Hold Breath. While out of water, the octopus can hold its breath for 1 hour.

[hymer]

Octopi
That could be an expected Latin plural. But 'octopus' is from Greek. So in English, the plural is simply 'octopuses'. If you want to make a nod to Greek, you can uses 'octopodes' or 'octopodei'. :smallbiggrin:
My pedantry is complete. For now...

[Dalebert]

I thought we were talking about Giant Octopus form? It is both grappled and restrained. Quoting Roll20 so I don't have to type it up myself:

You're correct. An octopus grapple also restrains.

[Thrudd]

The more I think about it, the more this makes sense.

Additionally, I checked the PHB. Melee Attacks have to target the creature within your reach, not the creatures "space" within your reach. If part of the creature is in a known location that's not its normal space, you should be able to target just fine.

Right. Essentially, the octopus during the grapple is a 15ft long creature (or however far it needs to reach), occupying the spaces in between the body and the grappled space.

[Snowbluff]

That could be an expected Latin plural. But 'octopus' is from Greek. So in English, the plural is simply 'octopuses'. If you want to make a nod to Greek, you can uses 'octopodes' or 'octopodei'. :smallbiggrin:
My pedantry is complete. For now...

Actually, it's English, which borrows from other languages. Octopi and Octopuses are correct, but octopodes and octopedei are strictly wrong.

[hymer]

Actually, it's English, which borrows from other languages. Octopi and Octopuses are correct, but octopodes and octopedei are strictly wrong.
Ah, sorry. I take the OED's word over yours in matters of language any day. :smalltongue:

[Snowbluff]

Ah, sorry. I take the OED's word over yours in matters of language any day. :smalltongue:

Well there's your problem. Cambridge, Merriam-Webster, and a bunch of other dictionaries leave out the Greek plurals because English-speakers don't use them. :smalltongue: The real reason seems to be is that it's New Latin. Even though it's Greek based, it's treated like Latin.

[hymer]

Well there's your problem. Cambridge, Merriam-Webster, and a bunch of other dictionaries leave out the Greek plurals because English-speakers don't use them. :smalltongue:
AhA! I have you now! Because on the dust cover of the ODE, it says 'The world's most trusted dictionaries'! And I have two copies. :smalltongue: