PDA

View Full Version : D&D 5e/Next Making 5e Grappling Better



Zaile
2020-05-29, 03:27 PM
Hey Playground, let's do what the title says and make Grappling better.

Grapple + Prone is a great combo, but anyone can do it. For the investment of feats or class abilities, it should make the person much better at it than just anyone. Wizards has some good UA content for grappling, but none of it has made it into official printing. In fact the only official thing Wizards has done is nerfed the namesake feat "Grappler."

Please reply with your favorite builds, Unearthed Aracna and Homebrew. There is already a great Grappler manual here https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-grapplers-manual-2-0-grappling-in-5th-edition.468737/, so I'd like this to focus more on tweaks to existing mechanics, class abilities and feats.

I think the right question for determining feat balance is: Paralyze is too crippling a condition for an every-turn melee tactic, but ways to inflict Prone and Restrained should be open.

UA content

Good grapple-related UA (not class-specific) content I've found:
Unarmed Fighting style - https://media.wizards.com/2019/dnd/downloads/UA-ClassFeatures.pdf
Brawny feat - https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UA-SkillFeats.pdf

Simple fix

Grappler and Tavern Brawler are one feat.

Potential Houserules

Spells that require only Verbal components or a melee spell attack roll can be cast normally while grappled, but all other spells require a Concentration check to be able to cast them. The DC is 8 + the grappler's Athletics modifier. If the check fails, the spell slot is not expended.
A grappled creature has disadvantage on attack rolls with two-handed weapons.
You may reposition a grappled creature as a bonus action.
When you succeed on an Athletics check (such as shove prone) against a creature you are grappling, you may deal your unarmed damage to the creature.
You may choose to make opposed Athletics checks in place of attack rolls against creatures you are grappling, dealing your unarmed damage on a success and you may reposition them. (Think of it like powerboms, suplexes or slams instead of "I knock it prone" or "I hit it." Gives fun, but resistible, options in combat)


A better Grappler feat. A few ideas:

You gain proficiency in the Athletics skill. If you are already proficient in it, you gain expertise instead.
If you have a free hand when you hit an adjacent creature, you may grapple the creature as a bonus action. This can be done between attacks if you have the Extra Attack feature.
If you have two free hands, you can Restrain a creature you are grappling by making an Athletics check opposed by the target's Athletics or Acrobatics check (it's choice). You may still make unarmed strikes against the creature as normal and cast spells with somatic components.



Thoughts?

*Edited based on feedback*

GalacticAxekick
2020-05-29, 05:17 PM
I see two problems with grappling in 5e.

The first is mechanical: that grappling is almost always an inferior option to making ordinary attacks.

The second is thematic: that the best grapplers are Bards and Rogues rather than Barbarians, Fighters and Monks.

To solve #1, grappling needs to be buffed.

Everyone should he able to grapple with their opportunity attacks (one of few times when controlling movement is more important than dealing damage).
Everyone should be able to grapple significantly larger creatures. This should result in climbing the creature, which would allow a character to avoid certain attacks and target vulnerable points.
Certain (sub)classes should be able to blind, deafen, silence, or restain creatures they have grappled.
Certain (sub)classes should be able to strangle or submit creatures they have grappled: damaging or incapacitating them without interacting with AC

To solve #2, grappling must be moved to the hands of certain classes.

Grappling should force a saving throw, not a skill contest, so that skill monkey classes will not become superior grapplers
Not everyone should add their proficiency bonus to this save DC, because not everyone should be a proficient grappler. Full spellcasters such as Clerics, Warlocks and Wizards should not, while non-casters and half-casters such as Fighters, Paladins and Rogues should.
Different (sub) classes should approach grappling in unique ways. Barbarians should be able to swing enemies like clubs, throw them great distances, and wrestle giants. Fighters should access to technical holds, takedowns and pins. Rogues should be able to pounce and abduct targets with ease. Etc

sandmote
2020-05-29, 06:30 PM
A grappler bonus for the Athletics expertise feat sounds a lot better than increased carry capacity.

Additional suggestions:



When you make an attack against a creature you are grappling using a weapon with the versatile or two-handed properties, you can hold the weapon in two hands for the duration of the attack without releasing your grapple.
You can make an opportunity attack against a creature that escapes your grapple.




The second is thematic: that the best grapplers are Bards and Rogues rather than Barbarians, Fighters and Monks. I think you're forgetting to account for grapples counting as an attack instead of its own separate action. So skill monkeys are better at grappling very strong/dextrous creatures because they get a higher bonus, while martials are better at grappling weaker ones because they can make multiple attempts as part of the same action. If you want to put some fluff to that, say the skill moneys are attacking pressure points or nerves while the martials go for brute strength holds.

Zaile
2020-05-29, 06:30 PM
I see two problems with grappling in 5e.

The first is mechanical: that grappling is almost always an inferior option to making ordinary attacks.

The second is thematic: that the best grapplers are Bards and Rogues rather than Barbarians, Fighters and Monks.

To solve #1, grappling needs to be buffed.

Everyone should he able to grapple with their opportunity attacks (one of few times when controlling movement is more important than dealing damage).
Everyone should be able to grapple significantly larger creatures. This should result in climbing the creature, which would allow a character to avoid certain attacks and target vulnerable points.
Certain (sub)classes should be able to blind, deafen, silence, or restain creatures they have grappled.
Certain (sub)classes should be able to strangle or submit creatures they have grappled: damaging or incapacitating them without interacting with AC

To solve #2, grappling must be moved to the hands of certain classes.

Grappling should force a saving throw, not a skill contest, so that skill monkey classes will not become superior grapplers
Not everyone should add their proficiency bonus to this save DC, because not everyone should be a proficient grappler. Full spellcasters such as Clerics, Warlocks and Wizards should not, while non-casters and half-casters such as Fighters, Paladins and Rogues should.
Different (sub) classes should approach grappling in unique ways. Barbarians should be able to swing enemies like clubs, throw them great distances, and wrestle giants. Fighters should access to technical holds, takedowns and pins. Rogues should be able to pounce and abduct targets with ease. Etc

Totally agree it should be buffed and have stronger options when players are willing to invest ASIs, feats, class dips, or sub-classes into the technique.

To your specific points

#1

Grappling as Opportunity attack - This steps on feats & features like Polearm Master. I'm on board as this being part of a revised Grappler feat though.
Check page 271 of the DMG. There is already strong support for this
Sub-class abilities - Fighters should have maneuvers, monks spend Ki, Paladins channel, etc. Would love to see some ideas


#2

Save vs Skill check - Melee enemies usually have higher Str or Dex saves than Athletics/Acrobatics checks. This could easily be more of a nerf than buff. The only monsters I've come across where generally every monster of the type has Athletics proficiency are giants. Most dragons are not proficient in Athletics. But all of the above have high Str saves and things like Legendary Resistance's auto-succeeds. Contested check gives 2 chances for the player to succeed (their roll and the monster's). Since 5e got rid of 3.X higher scaling attack bonus, I love grappling being a skill check you can get Expertise on and buff easier.
Bonuses and penalties based on class. This is an extra layer of rules players and DMs may not want to deal with and will likely forget. Now a DM making a table call of the 10 Str, 12 Dex wizard grappling the Ogre w/out serious spell buffs should be as comical in the result as it is in the attempt. Sneak attack is 6d6+1d8(rapier)+5 avg 27. Paladin with 2 attacks and +1d8 smite is (2d8+5)x2 avg 26 and a 20% chance of crit with smite. Fighter is (1d8+5)x3 avg 27 + any bonuses like maneuver dice. Damage is about equal, but the Paladin and fighter being able to add in extra shoves/attack-equivalent actions each turn can make a world of difference.
Rogue's Reliable Talent is maybe the biggest boon to grapplers. By 11th level, even with a 10 Str, that's a minimum roll of 18. Same with Bard and Cutting Words/Inspiration (though resource limited) That's the trade-off of the +13 Athletics Fighter 11 or Paladin 11 with extra attacks, Action Surge and Smites.
On using enemies as weapons - The DMG states an improvised weapon's damage should be that of the closest approximate weapon in the PHB. To argue swinging a humanoid, even a 30lb goblin is the equivalent of anything less than a 2d6 10lb Maul is more ridiculous than swinging the creature itself


Like where you're head is at. Please post more ideas for abilities and sub-class features.

Amechra
2020-05-29, 11:24 PM
So, here's part of a Barbarian tweak that I'm itching to try out:

1. At 1st level, you deal +1d4 damage when making Strength-based weapon attacks. This increases to +1d6 at 9th level and +1d8 at 16th level. This replaces the static bonus to damage that Barbarians get while raging.
2. While Raging, a successful Grapple or Shove check deals bludgeoning damage equal to your rage damage die.
3. Whenever you successfully Grapple or Shove someone while using Reckless Attack, you deal bludgeoning damage equal to your Strength modifier.

If you want Barbarians and Fighters to be great at grappling, you need to give them incentives to grapple.

Zaile
2020-05-30, 07:10 AM
So, here's part of a Barbarian tweak that I'm itching to try out:

1. At 1st level, you deal +1d4 damage when making Strength-based weapon attacks. This increases to +1d6 at 9th level and +1d8 at 16th level. This replaces the static bonus to damage that Barbarians get while raging.
2. While Raging, a successful Grapple or Shove check deals bludgeoning damage equal to your rage damage die.
3. Whenever you successfully Grapple or Shove someone while using Reckless Attack, you deal bludgeoning damage equal to your Strength modifier.

If you want Barbarians and Fighters to be great at grappling, you need to give them incentives to grapple.

Looks fun!

Is the extra damage die just when raging? If so, that kinda limits the usefulness to twice a day.

Check out the Unarmed fighting style in the UA link in my original post. It adds 1d4 to grapple damage and deal it even if you don't attack, just maintain. I could see scaling that like you did here. Find a way to get expertise in athletics and you're golden. Rogue 1 or 2 (for Cunning Action) is great.

GalacticAxekick
2020-05-30, 11:59 AM
I think you're forgetting to account for grapples counting as an attack instead of its own separate action. So skill monkeys are better at grappling very strong/dextrous creatures because they get a higher bonus, while martials are better at grappling weaker ones because they can make multiple attempts as part of the same action. If you want to put some fluff to that, say the skill moneys are attacking pressure points or nerves while the martials go for brute strength holds.This fluff is insufficient. There's no reason a fighter or a monk wouldn't be able to use pressure points, and likewise, there's no reason a fighter or a monk shouldn't have bonuses to grappling as high as bard or rogue. These are not brute strength classes. These are masters of the finest techniques of their disciplines.


Grappling as Opportunity attack - This steps on feats & features like Polearm Master. I'm on board as this being part of a revised Grappler feat though.Thematically, I disagree completely. If a commoner has a reasonable chance of doing something, it should not require a feat to do. Anyone can stand in someone's path and grab them as they run past.

I disagree mechanically as well. Even if players can grab enemies using opportunity attacks, feats like Sentinel remain useful because they allow players to control a larger area (10 feet rather than 5), to intercept Disengaged enemies, and to do this while dealing damage.


Check page 271 of the DMG. There is already strong support for thispNoted!


Sub-class abilities - Fighters should have maneuvers, monks spend Ki, Paladins channel, etc. Would love to see some ideasThis may require significant overhaul of various subclasses. I'll have to get back to you.


Save vs Skill check - Melee enemies usually have higher Str or Dex saves than Athletics/Acrobatics checks. This could easily be more of a nerf than buff. The only monsters I've come across where generally every monster of the type has Athletics proficiency are giants. Most dragons are not proficient in Athletics. But all of the above have high Str saves and things like Legendary Resistance's auto-succeeds.Switching from skill checks to saves is not meant to be a buff. It's meant to remove the undeserved advantages that Bards and Rogues have. I'm totally willing to nerf grappling in the process, especially since I'm going to be buffing it in other ways anyway.


Contested check gives 2 chances for the player to succeed (their roll and the monster's). Contested checks also give 2 chances for the player to fail. In terms of odds of success, there's no difference between a contest and a roll against a DC.


Bonuses and penalties based on class. This is an extra layer of rules players and DMs may not want to deal with and will likely forget.Imagine all forms of wrestling (grappling, shoving, etc) use the same DC system as spells (8 + Strength + proficiency). Adding proficiency here might require proficiency in Athletics, or with martial weapons, or with "wrestling" as a new weapon group similar to "unarmed strikes". It doesn't particularly matter, as long as it favours martial classes over spellcasters.

Shoves force a Strength save. Grapples force a Dexterity save. Escaping grapples requires a Strength save.

Simple.


[...] Damage is about equal, but the Paladin and fighter being able to add in extra shoves/attack-equivalent actions each turn can make a world of difference. [...] Rogue's Reliable Talent is maybe the biggest boon to grapplers. By 11th level, even with a 10 Str, that's a minimum roll of 18. Same with Bard and Cutting Words/Inspiration (though resource limited) That's the trade-off of the +13 Athletics Fighter 11 or Paladin 11 with extra attacks, Action Surge and Smites.I'm aware that martial classes benefit from their Extra Attacks, and that Rogue features such as Expertise and Reliable Talent bridge this gap.

I don't want this gap to be bridged. I firmly believe that Rogues should be inferior grapplers, except when their subclass specifically caters to grappling. Rogues are masters of indirect, asymmetrical combat, but not especially skilled in any kind of a direct, symmetrical and fair fight (reflected by their hit dice, weapon proficiencies, and armour proficiencies on par with clerics, druids and warlocks).


On using enemies as weapons - The DMG states an improvised weapon's damage should be that of the closest approximate weapon in the PHB. To argue swinging a humanoid, even a 30lb goblin is the equivalent of anything less than a 2d6 10lb Maul is more ridiculous than swinging the creature itselfExcept that a maul does not resist being swung. It doesn't try to catch a surface with its hands before crashing into it, or try to swerve out of harm's way, or flop around awkwardly.

Swinging a goblin should hurt, but less than swinging similarly large weapon. I would let creatures deal (and receive!) damage based on their size category (1d4 for tiny, 1d6 for small, 1d8 for medium, etc). What the barbarian loses in damage dealt to their target, they gain in dealing damage to their living weapon.

sandmote
2020-05-30, 12:58 PM
1. At 1st level, you deal +1d4 damage when making Strength-based weapon attacks. This increases to +1d6 at 9th level and +1d8 at 16th level. This replaces the static bonus to damage that Barbarians get while raging.
2. While Raging, a successful Grapple or Shove check deals bludgeoning damage equal to your rage damage die.
3. Whenever you successfully Grapple or Shove someone while using Reckless Attack, you deal bludgeoning damage equal to your Strength modifier. These sound neat.


This fluff is insufficient. There's no reason a fighter or a monk wouldn't be able to use pressure points, and likewise, there's no reason a fighter or a monk shouldn't have bonuses to grappling as high as bard or rogue. These are not brute strength classes. These are masters of the finest techniques of their disciplines. "Wouldn't be able to" and "isn't trained to do so" are separate things. I'm saying the martials aren't trained to do so. And part of their mastery is the ability to force the target to make multiple checks to avoid the grapple in one turn.


Thematically, I disagree completely. If a commoner has a reasonable chance of doing something, it should not require a feat to do. Anyone can stand in someone's path and grab them as they run past. Opportunity attacks in 5e happen when they leave your reach. That's not a situation a "typical person," can grab them. You're lunging through an opening, not standing in their way. Breaking out of a hold is also one of the easiest defensive moves to learn as well, so escape would be easier for anyone trained to fight or without a humanoid build.


I don't want this gap to be bridged. I firmly believe that Rogues should be inferior grapplers, except when their subclass specifically caters to grappling. Rogues are masters of indirect, asymmetrical combat, but not especially skilled in any kind of a direct, symmetrical and fair fight (reflected by their hit dice, weapon proficiencies, and armour proficiencies on par with clerics, druids and warlocks). I don't see why a rogue's grapple needs to be direct or symmetrical. Unfair and asymmetrical don't result in automatic success, so the fact there's a roll doesn't mean the rogue is suddenly fighting in a fair or symmetrical manner. They're just applying their unfair and asymmetric style to getting a hold on the enemy.

GalacticAxekick
2020-05-30, 01:47 PM
"Wouldn't be able to" and "isn't trained to do so" are separate things. I'm saying the martials aren't trained to do so. And part of their mastery is the ability to force the target to make multiple checks to avoid the grapple in one turn.And I'm saying that they're certainly trained to do so: that this is exactly their area of expertise.

The barbarian is an unskilled, but abnormally strong, durable and tenacious brute unfit to use pressure points and the like. But the fighter and monk are physically normal, extraordinarily skilled warriors who cannot help but abuse pressure points, joint locks, and other such vulnerabilities. This is what martial arts are.


Opportunity attacks in 5e happen when they leave your reach. That's not a situation a "typical person," can grab them. You're lunging through an opening, not standing in their way.A man turns his back and begins to run away from you. You hug him around the waist (opportunity attack grapple). If you can play tag, you can do this.

A man backs away and uses his hands to bat yours away (Disengaging). You see no opportunity to grab him. This is normal.

A man backs away and uses his hands to bat yours away (Disengaging). You grab him by one wrist and wrestle your grip deeper until you are hugging him close (Sentinel feat + opportunity attack grapple). Extraordinary people can do this.


I don't see why a rogue's grapple needs to be direct or symmetrical. Unfair and asymmetrical don't result in automatic success, so the fact there's a roll doesn't mean the rogue is suddenly fighting in a fair or symmetrical manner. They're just applying their unfair and asymmetric style to getting a hold on the enemy.Mechanics need to reflect the themes they represent.

You can say "rogues use unfair, asymmetrical strategies to grapple". But the mechanical reality is that they charge right up to a target and grab it with their +17 modifier and minimum 10 roll.

Instead of unconditional bonuses, roguish grappling should rely on the same asymmetries as Sneak Attacks. "When you have advantage on melee attacks against a creature, or when an enemy of the creature is within 5 feet of it, you gain advantage on your attempts to grapple or shove that creature, as well as your attempts to prevent their escape from your grapple" for example.

TIPOT
2020-05-30, 02:38 PM
Not sure your second homebrew rule is needed? You already get disadvantage with ranged attacks while within 5ft of an enemy and I'm not sure 2 handed weapons need a nerf exactly.

I like the feat idea but I think it gives too much for a single feat. 3 features is pretty standard for a reason. Anymore and it gets annoying to track -- as at least 1 is going to be irrelevant.

I'd maybe cut out the last 2 points, leaving

"A better Grappler feat. A few ideas:
- You gain proficiency in the Athletics skill. If you are already proficient in it, you double your proficiency bonus.
- If you have a free hand when you hit a creature with a melee weapon or unarmed strike, you may grapple the creature as a bonus action. This can be done between attacks if you can male more than one attack per turn.
- If you shove a creature you are grappling Prone, you may choose to Restrain it instead."

Zaile
2020-05-30, 06:56 PM
And I'm saying that they're certainly trained to do so: that this is exactly their area of expertise.

The barbarian is an unskilled, but abnormally strong, durable and tenacious brute unfit to use pressure points and the like. But the fighter and monk are physically normal, extraordinarily skilled warriors who cannot help but abuse pressure points, joint locks, and other such vulnerabilities. This is what martial arts are.

A man turns his back and begins to run away from you. You hug him around the waist (opportunity attack grapple). If you can play tag, you can do this.

A man backs away and uses his hands to bat yours away (Disengaging). You see no opportunity to grab him. This is normal.

A man backs away and uses his hands to bat yours away (Disengaging). You grab him by one wrist and wrestle your grip deeper until you are hugging him close (Sentinel feat + opportunity attack grapple). Extraordinary people can do this.

Mechanics need to reflect the themes they represent.

You can say "rogues use unfair, asymmetrical strategies to grapple". But the mechanical reality is that they charge right up to a target and grab it with their +17 modifier and minimum 10 roll.

Instead of unconditional bonuses, roguish grappling should rely on the same asymmetries as Sneak Attacks. "When you have advantage on melee attacks against a creature, or when an enemy of the creature is within 5 feet of it, you gain advantage on your attempts to grapple or shove that creature, as well as your attempts to prevent their escape from your grapple" for example.

I agree with you on thematics, but I see some dangers with the mechanics.

Letting grapple in place of opportunity attack anyone can do is a very dangerous idea. If the enemy fighter gets close to the wizard, it's over. This would also lead to the other alternate combat action, the shove, being allowed as well. As a DM I would slaughter a party with this rule alone. Get enemy melee on squishes > knocking all the squishes prone as they try to escape melee > TPK

I'm still not sold on the Grapple being a Save vs a check. I don't know of a single way to increase save DC to boost a grapple save. There are dozens of ways to increase ability checks. Advantage/disadvantage is lopsided as well, more ways to do that on checks than saves. It takes a spell or feat like mage slayer to give disadvantage on one type of save.

If a skillful class like rogue, wants to invest a skill choice, one of his expertise choices and choosing Str over Dex for the extra boost, so be it. There are also Valor and Swords bard subclasses who I always see as Deadpool

Now a houserule could be: If you are not proficient in Athletics, you provoke an attack of opportunity if you initiate a grapple and the attempt fails if the opportunity attack hits.

I do like the Rogue being able to sneak attack to grapple, but again this is a very narrow rule and you would have to do it for every class you don't want to be able to grapple.

Then there is also the AC issue with squishier classes. Rouge would have the best AC, but 17 (+5 Dex, +2 studded) is easier to hit than the shielded plate wearer.

Zaile
2020-05-30, 07:12 PM
Not sure your second homebrew rule is needed? You already get disadvantage with ranged attacks while within 5ft of an enemy and I'm not sure 2 handed weapons need a nerf exactly.

I like the feat idea but I think it gives too much for a single feat. 3 features is pretty standard for a reason. Anymore and it gets annoying to track -- as at least 1 is going to be irrelevant.

I'd maybe cut out the last 2 points, leaving

"A better Grappler feat. A few ideas:
- You gain proficiency in the Athletics skill. If you are already proficient in it, you double your proficiency bonus.
- If you have a free hand when you hit a creature with a melee weapon or unarmed strike, you may grapple the creature as a bonus action. This can be done between attacks if you can male more than one attack per turn.
- If you shove a creature you are grappling Prone, you may choose to Restrain it instead."

Thanks!

I totally forgot about the disadvantage on ranged in melee. Once grappled, I think it would be much harder to wield a 2-hander.

I think you are right about the last 2 points. I think those are better as house rules. The reposition is already a rule "shove aside" but this makes it more useful and easier since you already have control of their movement.

GalacticAxekick
2020-05-30, 07:25 PM
Letting grapple in place of opportunity attack anyone can do is a very dangerous idea. If the enemy fighter gets close to the wizard, it's over. This would also lead to the other alternate combat action, the shove, being allowed as well. As a DM I would slaughter a party with this rule alone. Get enemy melee on squishes > knocking all the squishes prone as they try to escape melee > TPKI've been DMing with this houserule since 2017.

A wizard player has been grappled by a whole group of goblins and dragged off, struggling to pry himself free from more than one goblin's grip at a time, only to be rescued when an ally shoved him loose, breaking all of their grapples simultaneously.

A barbarian player of mine grappled a red dragon as it swooped down and claw him, then continued to fight it in middair as it tried to shake him loose.

A whole encounter of mine involved the party trying to come up with sources of cover, concealment and other defenses as they closed in on a sniper 600 ft away. Once they closed in, it began to run. The fighter grappled it, and they got their payoff.

It is a dangerous idea, but that's good. It means combat is a contest of strategy and not a race to deal the most damage.


I'm still not sold on the Grapple being a Save vs a check. I don't know of a single way to increase save DC to boost a grapple save. There are dozens of ways to increase ability checks. Advantage/disadvantage is lopsided as well, more ways to do that on checks than saves. It takes a spell or feat like mage slayer to give disadvantage on one type of save. Spellcasters get along fine without ways to increase their save DC. Why do we need ways to increase the grapple save DC? What problem is that solving?


If a skillful class like rogue, wants to invest a skill choice, one of his expertise choices and choosing Str over Dex for the extra boost, so be it.The fact that the rogue payed, mechanically, for the ability to grapple does not justify it thematically.


There are also Valor and Swords bard subclasses who I always see as DeadpoolValor and Swords bards are meant to be bards with elements of a martial class. There is no combat skill they possess that the fighter does not possess in greater measure. They should not be better grapplers than the martial classes, except with magical assistance.


Now a houserule could be: If you are not proficient in Athletics, you provoke an attack of opportunity if you initiate a grapple and the attempt fails if the opportunity attack hits.This makes grappling—an already weak action—exceptionally risky. Why would you introduce this rule?


I do like the Rogue being able to sneak attack to grapple, but again this is a very narrow rule and you would have to do it for every class you don't want to be able to grapple.No, I wouldn't.


Then there is also the AC issue with squishier classes. Rouge would have the best AC, but 17 (+5 Dex, +2 studded) is easier to hit than the shielded plate wearer.This seems completely unrelated to the topic at hand. What does this have to do with grappling?

Zaile
2020-05-30, 08:17 PM
I've been DMing with this houserule since 2017.

A wizard player has been grappled by a whole group of goblins and dragged off, struggling to pry himself free from more than one goblin's grip at a time, only to be rescued when an ally shoved him loose, breaking all of their grapples simultaneously.

A barbarian player of mine grappled a red dragon as it swooped down and claw him, then continued to fight it in middair as it tried to shake him loose.

A whole encounter of mine involved the party trying to come up with sources of cover, concealment and other defenses as they closed in on a sniper 600 ft away. Once they closed in, it began to run. The fighter grappled it, and they got their payoff.

It is a dangerous idea, but that's good. It means combat is a contest of strategy and not a race to deal the most damage.

I see. This is actually kinda neat. Now that you show examples, I'm sold on this. I would not let it extend to shove though.



Spellcasters get along fine without ways to increase their save DC. Why do we need ways to increase the grapple save DC? What problem is that solving?


That goes back to my original point, monsters have better saves than Athletics checks. This makes the investment of grappling (mechanically) much harder and much lower payoff. I thought we were trying to make grappling better?



This makes grappling—an already weak action—exceptionally risky. Why would you introduce this rule?


You did say you wanted to make certain classes less effective. How often do non-melee, non-str characters select Athletics? At your tables, how often do characters without Athletics try to grapple?




Then there is also the AC issue with squishier classes. Rouge would have the best AC, but 17 (+5 Dex, +2 studded) is easier to hit than the shielded plate wearer.
This seems completely unrelated to the topic at hand. What does this have to do with grappling?


You can still be attacked in a grapple. Lower AC, one attack, and lower HP are 3 other inherent weakness that skillful/spellcasting classes have when trying to grapple, especially if the grappled creature has multi-attack.

Also, I don't see any thematic or mechanical issue with a Rogue trying to grapple an enemy caster.

Zaile
2020-05-30, 08:26 PM
There are also Valor and Swords bard subclasses who I always see as Deadpool

Valor and Swords bards are meant to be bards with elements of a martial class. There is no combat skill they possess that the fighter does not possess in greater measure. They should not be better grapplers than the martial classes, except with magical assistance


True, are less martial than dedicated classes thematically, but they get extra attack, same number as Barbarians, Paladins and Rangers and they get medium armor, same as Rangers and Barbs.

They DO use magical assistance. Their Bardic inspiration is a magical, limited resource. Sure the get expertise, but a Bard makes total sense if you were looking to create essentially a WWE wrestler in 5e.

GalacticAxekick
2020-05-30, 11:29 PM
That goes back to my original point, monsters have better saves than Athletics checks. This makes the investment of grappling (mechanically) much harder and much lower payoff. I thought we were trying to make grappling better?Grappling allows the target to make either a Acrobatics check or Athletics check. If instead it were to force the target to make a Dexterity saving throw, you'll find that most monsters are either unaffected easier to grapple (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10anA394CmxeLYTxuMYVnmmjiYLLedXfv6MBbpxEy2Kw/edit#gid=0) Monsters can be sorted into three categories:
Monsters who have strong Athletics checks but weaker Dexterity saving throws (golems, giants, monstrosities, fighter-like humanoids, hulking beasts, etc). They become easier to grapple
Monsters who have approximately equal Athletics or Acrobatics checks and Dexterity saving throws (dragons, spellcasting humanoids, nimble beasts, goons, etc) Grappling them does not change
Monsters who have weak Acrobatics checks but strong Dexterity saving throws. Few such creatures exist (vampires, vampire spawn, drow elite warriors and naga are the only ones I could find quickly) because most of the monsters with high Dex either have BOTH Acrobatics and Dex saves or NEITHER acrobatics nor Dex saves (Assassins, pixies, sprites, etc). The creatures left over become harder to grapple


You did say you wanted to make certain classes less effective. How often do non-melee, non-str characters select Athletics? At your tables, how often do characters without Athletics try to grapple?I want to make the skill monkey classes—Bards and Rogues—less effective. Nerfing creature who lack the Athletics skill doesn't accomplish this.


You can still be attacked in a grapple. Lower AC, one attack, and lower HP are 3 other inherent weakness that skillful/spellcasting classes have when trying to grapple, especially if the grappled creature has multi-attack.I'm aware that they have inherent weaknesses. This is good. They are supposed to be worse than martial classes at grappling. Features like Expertise or Remarkable Talent should not be allowed to level the playing field.


Also, I don't see any thematic or mechanical issue with a Rogue trying to grapple an enemy caster.There is no thematic or mechanical issue with that. The issue is with rogues having features (Expertise and Remarkable Athlete) that make them better than average at this. Wrestling is not a roguish skill.


[...] Sure the get expertise, but a Bard makes total sense if you were looking to create essentially a WWE wrestler in 5e.Them using Expertise to improve their grappling is exactly where I draw the line. It's a non-magical bonus to their wrestling skills: an area where they must be inferior to the martial classes.

And as a side note, I can only imagine a WWE wrestlers as a martial class (such as barbarian, fighter, or monk) with the Entertainer background. Like bards, WWE wrestlers are charismatic performers, but unlike bards, they do not have the god-like authority to sculpt and command reality, in the vein of "Let there be light."

Zaile
2020-06-04, 05:21 AM
Grappling allows the target to make either a Acrobatics check or Athletics check. If instead it were to force the target to make a Dexterity saving throw, you'll find that most monsters are either unaffected easier to grapple (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10anA394CmxeLYTxuMYVnmmjiYLLedXfv6MBbpxEy2Kw/edit#gid=0) Monsters can be sorted into three categories:
Monsters who have strong Athletics checks but weaker Dexterity saving throws (golems, giants, monstrosities, fighter-like humanoids, hulking beasts, etc). They become easier to grapple
Monsters who have approximately equal Athletics or Acrobatics checks and Dexterity saving throws (dragons, spellcasting humanoids, nimble beasts, goons, etc) Grappling them does not change
Monsters who have weak Acrobatics checks but strong Dexterity saving throws. Few such creatures exist (vampires, vampire spawn, drow elite warriors and naga are the only ones I could find quickly) because most of the monsters with high Dex either have BOTH Acrobatics and Dex saves or NEITHER acrobatics nor Dex saves (Assassins, pixies, sprites, etc). The creatures left over become harder to grapple

I want to make the skill monkey classes—Bards and Rogues—less effective. Nerfing creature who lack the Athletics skill doesn't accomplish this.

I'm aware that they have inherent weaknesses. This is good. They are supposed to be worse than martial classes at grappling. Features like Expertise or Remarkable Talent should not be allowed to level the playing field.

There is no thematic or mechanical issue with that. The issue is with rogues having features (Expertise and Remarkable Athlete) that make them better than average at this. Wrestling is not a roguish skill.

Them using Expertise to improve their grappling is exactly where I draw the line. It's a non-magical bonus to their wrestling skills: an area where they must be inferior to the martial classes.

And as a side note, I can only imagine a WWE wrestlers as a martial class (such as barbarian, fighter, or monk) with the Entertainer background. Like bards, WWE wrestlers are charismatic performers, but unlike bards, they do not have the god-like authority to sculpt and command reality, in the vein of "Let there be light."

Cool spreadsheet, thanks for that.

Still, I'm really leery of the Reflex ONLY save. The original rules allowed opposed Athletics or Acrobatics to represent the 2 ways to resist: brute force and elusiveness. Conversely, an OR save has just as many, if not more, problems than just a Reflex save. Using this on the players, then every Dex-based monster would be able to grapple every Str-based, low-dex, melee in the party. Of the 5 martial classes, only 2 (monk & ranger) are proficient in Dex saves. I'm just not seeing enough payoff in your change to justify even trying to grapple. I think this actually BUFFS Rogues and Bards if you use the save DC calculation like the rest of the melee classes of 8+Prof+STR or DEX for melee DCs.

Then there are the monsters with auto-save every turn features (like Adult Large dragons). This pretty much makes it useless on any serious monster or BBEG players at mind-high levels would face.

Expertise should be a feat, or just work it into the base classes if they give up a sub-class feature. That solves that.

I think you're over-valuing Rogue. They still have very limited action economy. It takes minimum 2 Actions to Grapple+prone. A Martial 5/Rogue 1 (say a Champ fighter 5 w/menacing attack or Raging Barb) will murder a Rogue 6 (or any level) in a grapple. 4 attacks, 2 with Advantage for Barb, for grapple+prone and a bonus action on the first round vs a few d6 at disadvantage every turn? No contest. Bare minimum the rogue will be spending every action breaking a grapple and never get a shot in. At level 11 the action-economy gap widens, even with reliable talent.

I say leave Expertise and Reliable Talent be. These are features that 99% of the time are better spent on Stealth, Perception, Deception, Insight, Persuasion and really every other skill (and some tools like thieves') before Athletics. If they want to use it on the least useful skill for a Dex-based class (or want to be a Str Rogue with only light armor), so be it.

sandmote
2020-06-04, 04:25 PM
I'm putting this first because it looks very significant to me:

There is no thematic or mechanical issue with that. The issue is with rogues having features (Expertise and Remarkable Athlete) that make them better than average at this. Wrestling is not a roguish skill.
...
And as a side note, I can only imagine a WWE wrestlers as a martial class (such as barbarian, fighter, or monk) with the Entertainer background. Like bards, WWE wrestlers are charismatic performers, but unlike bards, they do not have the god-like authority to sculpt and command reality, in the vein of "Let there be light."
The primary theme of the rogue is "skill and precision." The stereotype of a sneaky thief does nothing to make grappling any less roguish. For a rogue, the focus in on skill over number of attempts, and there are equivalent methods of keeping a hold on a person.

Particularly given that having to ignore fighter and monk features to make your case here. Do you also deny rogues Sneak Attack because fighters and monks can't deal the same amount of damage on a hit that a rogue can?

The same repeats for bards:


Your magic comes from the heart and soul you pour into the performance of your music or oration.
That this is the same type of music as that of creation does absolutely nothing to strip enchantment or illusion spells from the bard spell list. The same goes for the enchanting and illusory (but non-magical) displays that some performers do. There a certainly non-bard performers, but their existence doesn't change the concept of a bard as described in the books.



But the fighter and monk are physically normal, extraordinarily skilled warriors who cannot help but abuse pressure points, joint locks, and other such vulnerabilities. This is what martial arts are. I would love to hear how swordmanship, archery, and heavy armor training have anything to do with exploiting such vulnerabilities

Monk might be a less bad example, but many such vulnerabilities are likely to be better represented as a second grapple attempt. I'd put joint locks into this category, particularly given the set up needed.


Mechanics need to reflect the themes they represent. This would merely shift the point of disagreement to what the theme is, rather than justify your argument that mechanics should be less representative of the action being performed.


Instead of unconditional bonuses, roguish grappling should rely on the same asymmetries as Sneak Attacks. "When you have advantage on melee attacks against a creature, or when an enemy of the creature is within 5 feet of it, you gain advantage on your attempts to grapple or shove that creature, as well as your attempts to prevent their escape from your grapple" for example.
The default Sneak Attack is based off of advantage, and no version of it grants advantage on attacks. This would not be rogue exclusive either.


Spellcasters get along fine without ways to increase their save DC. Why do we need ways to increase the grapple save DC? What problem is that solving? There is a wide variety of ways to get a hold on someone. Your preference for scrawny dragons doesn't justify taking away mechanics that would reflect various methods of grappling.

This makes grappling—an already weak action—exceptionally risky. Why would you introduce this rule?


I'm aware that they have inherent weaknesses. This is good. They are supposed to be worse than martial classes at grappling. They are worse than martial classes at grappling, particularly monks. Fighters also get a jump in grappling ability at 11th level.

GalacticAxekick
2020-06-05, 04:00 AM
This would merely shift the point of disagreement to what the theme is, rather than justify your argument that mechanics should be less representative of the action being performed. [...] The primary theme of the rogue is "skill and precision." The stereotype of a sneaky thief does nothing to make grappling any less roguish. For a rogue, the focus in on skill over number of attempts, and there are equivalent methods of keeping a hold on a person.I'm starting to see that we fundamentally disagree on what the themes of each class are, and so I understand why we disagree on mechanics.

The fundamental theme of the Rogue, as I understand it, is trickery. While fighters defeat enemies using superior combat skill, while barbarians defeat enemies using superior fortitude, rogues defeat enemies that are both more skilled and more powerful than themselves by fighting unfairly and unpredictably.


Particularly given that having to ignore fighter and monk features to make your case here. Do you also deny rogues Sneak Attack because fighters and monks can't deal the same amount of damage on a hit that a rogue can? Rogues can't have Extra Attack. They need Sneak Attack to represent the all-or-nothing nature of unfair fighting. If a rogue tries to stab you when your back is turned but fails, the jig is up; he can't be in a position to continue attacking. If a rogue tries stab you and your back isn't turned, the rogue must be no more dangerous than a commoner.

But as long as rogues don't have Extra Attack, they need to deal massive damage to keep up.

It would make thematic sense for fighters and monks to deal that much damage in one hit. But I'm willing to make thematic concessions for balance's sake.


That this is the same type of music as that of creation does absolutely nothing to strip enchantment or illusion spells from the bard spell list. The same goes for the enchanting and illusory (but non-magical) displays that some performers do. There a certainly non-bard performers, but their existence doesn't change the concept of a bard as described in the books.I'm not sure what point you're making.

All that I'm saying is that if bards use world-bending magic and pro wrestlers don't, bards are not the class to represent pro wrestlers. The superficial similarity that both of these groups are performers is not enough to equate them. Do you disagree?


I would love to hear how swordmanship, archery, and heavy armor training have anything to do with exploiting such vulnerabilitiesThey don't. But boxing, muay thai, aikido and judo do. Fighters are not just masters of weapons or armour, but masters of combat.


Monk might be a less bad example, but many such vulnerabilities are likely to be better represented as a second grapple attempt. I'd put joint locks into this category, particularly given the set up needed.I don't know how many of my jiu-jitsu matches have opened with an attempted wrist lock or or shoulder lock. Joint locks with the real potential to submit an opponent take plenty of set up. Joint locks used to limit the opponent's movement can be performed basically spontaneously.


The default Sneak Attack is based off of advantage, and no version of it grants advantage on attacks. This would not be rogue exclusive either. My version doesn't grant advantage on attacks either. Grappling is an ability check.

Just as the Sneak Attack feature rewards advantageous attacking position (combat trickery) with extra damage (combat effectiveness), my roguish grapple feature rewards advantageous attacking position (combat trickery) with a more reliable grapple (combat effectiveness). Why shouldn't this be rogue exclusive?


There is a wide variety of ways to get a hold on someone. Your preference for scrawny dragons doesn't justify taking away mechanics that would reflect various methods of grappling. I don't think Expertise effectively represents any form of grappling.


This makes grappling—an already weak action—exceptionally risky. Why would you introduce this rule?To divorce grappling from Expertise and Reliable Talent.


They are worse than martial classes at grappling, particularly monks. Fighters also get a jump in grappling ability at 11th level.When a rogue makes one grapple attempt with +17 and a minimum roll of 10, it has a higher average result (https://anydice.com/program/1c091) than the average highest result (https://anydice.com/program/1c090) of a fighter making four grapple attempts with +11.

The fighter has the advantage of being able to grapple and attack, or to grapple and shove, absolutely.

But if all you want is to hold a slippery target still, the rogue is more reliable than the fighter. Which fits fine with your understanding of rogues as precise, but doesn't mesh with my understanding of rogues as tricksters.


Still, I'm really leery of the Reflex ONLY save. The original rules allowed opposed Athletics or Acrobatics to represent the 2 ways to resist: brute force and elusiveness. Conversely, an OR save has just as many, if not more, problems than just a Reflex save. Using this on the players, then every Dex-based monster would be able to grapple every Str-based, low-dex, melee in the party. Of the 5 martial classes, only 2 (monk & ranger) are proficient in Dex saves. I'm just not seeing enough payoff in your change to justify even trying to grapple. I think this actually BUFFS Rogues and Bards if you use the save DC calculation like the rest of the melee classes of 8+Prof+STR or DEX for melee DCs.Perhaps I was unclear. I'll explain my grappling rules once again:
When you attempt to grapple a creature, you force it to make a Dexterity saving throw.
The DC of this saving throw = 8 + your Strength modifier + your proficiency bonus

This means that Dex-based monsters, Rogues and Bards will have a hard time grappling. And while many martial classes lack proficiency in Dexterity saving throws, these classes also have the ability to shove the grappler, thereby escaping using Strength.


Then there are the monsters with auto-save every turn features (like Adult Large dragons). This pretty much makes it useless on any serious monster or BBEG players at mind-high levels would face. The feature you're refering to, Legendary Resistance, has limited uses per day. If grappling involves a saving throw, it forces the monster into a dilemma.

"Do I burn my 3-per-day feature to shake this guy off me, leaving myself vulnerable to spells? Or do I let him crawl up to my weak spot so that I can ignore the spellcaster?"

I'd call that a win-win, and thus a buff.


Expertise should be a feat, or just work it into the base classes if they give up a sub-class feature. That solves that. I would accept Expertise being available to every class.


I think you're over-valuing Rogue. [...]When a rogue makes one grapple attempt with +17 and a minimum roll of 10, it has a higher average result (https://anydice.com/program/1c091) than the average highest result (https://anydice.com/program/1c090) of a fighter making four grapple attempts with +11.

The fighter has the advantage of being able to grapple and attack, or to grapple and shove, absolutely.

But if all you want is to hold a slippery target still, the rogue is more reliable than the fighter. Which doesn't mesh with my understanding of rogues as tricksters, rather than direct combatants.


I say leave Expertise and Reliable Talent be. These are features that 99% of the time are better spent on Stealth, Perception, Deception, Insight, Persuasion and really every other skill (and some tools like thieves') before Athletics. If they want to use it on the least useful skill for a Dex-based class (or want to be a Str Rogue with only light armor), so be it.You're free to leave them be, but I'd advise against it.

sandmote
2020-06-06, 02:56 PM
Rogues can't have Extra Attack. They need Sneak Attack to represent the all-or-nothing nature of unfair fighting. If a rogue tries to stab you when your back is turned but fails, the jig is up; he can't be in a position to continue attacking. If a rogue tries stab you and your back isn't turned, the rogue must be no more dangerous than a commoner.

But as long as rogues don't have Extra Attack, they need to deal massive damage to keep up. All of this applies equally to grapples:

Rogues can't have Extra Attack. They need Expertise to represent the all-or-nothing nature of unfair fighting. If a rogue tries to grab you with the fancy superior hold and fails, the jig is up; he can't be in a position to continue grappling. If a rogue tries grabbing you and you can counter that hold, the rogue must be no more dangerous than a commoner.

But as long as rogues don't have Extra Attack, they need to have a massive bonus to keep up.


It would make thematic sense for fighters and monks to deal that much damage in one hit. But I'm willing to make thematic concessions for balance's sake. Any particular reason this doesn't apply to specialized holding techniques?


All that I'm saying is that if bards use world-bending magic and pro wrestlers don't, bards are not the class to represent pro wrestlers. The physiological tricks used would be the closest equivalent to magic. "magic doesn't exist IRL," doesn't mean every concept that exists IRL is best represented by marital classes.

Note also that all magic is "world bending magic," so I'm not clear what that is supposed to specify.


My version doesn't grant advantage on attacks either. Grappling is an ability check. The RAW version is a "special melee attack."

More relevantly, however, is that your version does boil down to "advantage on grapples when you get advantage on attacks." Additionally, if it is a feature of the rogue class you'd be making the typical rogue better at grappling, because they'd all be getting a bonus to grappling, whereas the book version requires rogues to put resources into getting strong grapples. This is exacerbated if you treat rogues as focusing on trickery, because most rogues would need to be giving up they bonuses it skills tied to obvious trickery (thieves' tool, stealth, deception, ect.) to get this bonus.


I don't think Expertise effectively represents any form of grappling. Is serves tricky holds fine.


When a rogue makes one grapple attempt with +17 and a minimum roll of 10, it has a higher average result (https://anydice.com/program/1c091) than the average highest result (https://anydice.com/program/1c090) of a fighter making four grapple attempts with +11. When I factor in that the target is rolling, I'm not seeing this kind of difference. Against a target with 26 or 27 strength the chances of the fighter (https://anydice.com/program/1c0ff) and rogue (https://anydice.com/program/1c100) seem pretty consistent.


The feature you're refering to, Legendary Resistance, has limited uses per day. If grappling involves a saving throw, it forces the monster into a dilemma.

"Do I burn my 3-per-day feature to shake this guy off me, leaving myself vulnerable to spells? Or do I let him crawl up to my weak spot so that I can ignore the spellcaster?"

I'd call that a win-win, and thus a buff. Legendary resistance was previously unavailable as on option for this. So your case of a win-win is to give the enemy more options to deal with a problem you're trying to inflict on them.

Zaile
2020-06-06, 10:54 PM
Perhaps I was unclear. I'll explain my grappling rules once again:

When you attempt to grapple a creature, you force it to make a Dexterity saving throw.
The DC of this saving throw = 8 + your Strength modifier + your proficiency bonus


Thanks for re-posting the rules you use. This is our biggest point of disagreement. I'm not trying to pile on, but I think this is important.

I still don't think it makes sense nor is fair. It is saying the only way to resist a grapple is to wiggle out of it. You can never use brute force to resist. Under this rule Zangeif can only resist a grapple by finesse?

Also, this would make the Str-based Melee you say you want to be better at grappling (Barbs, Fighters, Paladins) worse. They now have their main defense against enemy grapplers (Str-based Athletics check) reduced to one of the lowest bonuses on their character sheet. This is the opposite of skill and makes them divert valuable points from Str to Dex to have any reasonable defense.

I think you may have a very narrow view, or just don't like, grappling and want it to be a very limited option in your games. That's fine, but I do not agree with these rules, that's all.