[3.5] ToB and Grappling

[AslanCross]

Grappling is supposed to restrict one's actions to using light weapons, natural weapons, or unarmed strikes. Since you can perform strikes with any weapons you have, is it legal to perform maneuvers while grappled?

If by RAW it is, do you think it's sensible to follow RAW or to houserule that you can't execute them?

While the idea of a grappled character performing Elder Mountain Hammer with a headbutt sounds patently awesome, it seems odd when say, you can execute Wolf Fang Strike with two short swords (Grappling's rules specifically say TWF cannot be done) or performing a Strike of Perfect Clarity or even Time Stands Still while grappled.

[Epinephrine]

You cannot use maneuvers in a grapple, as it isn't one of the options.

"You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You take a -4 penalty on such attacks.

You can’t attack with two weapons while grappling, even if both are light weapons. "

Nowhere does it state that you may make a standard action or full round action to initiate a maneuver. I would allow boosts in a grapple, but by RAW I don't think they could be used either.

[Kaiyanwang]

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't stated that you cannot mix maneuvers and special attacks unless specifically allowed?

If grapple is a special attack.. you can only use maneuvers that specifically say "you can use it while grappling".

If they exist, barring a TC stance, IIRC.

[Epinephrine]

Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't stated that you cannot mix maneuvers and special attacks unless specifically allowed?

Good point. That is specifically stated, hence why you need the Stone Dragon Fury or whatever to initiate a sunder, and not simply a Mountain Hammer.

[Fixer]

But, at the same time, you can cast spells in a grapple...

I believe this is one of those circumstances where Rule 0 will apply. Some GMs will allow a maneuver to be performed on a successful grapple check, while some will not. I have not heard of any specific ruling but I do not see why it would not be allowed. After all, maneuvers hadn't even been 'invented' when the PHB Grapple Rules were written.

[Epinephrine]

But, at the same time, you can cast spells in a grapple...

But they are specifically allowed. It doesn't say "you can use your standard action to cast," rather, it allows you to cast provided that you don't need somatic components, etc.

The ToB specifically states that you must be able to move to initiate a maneuver, which implies a certain freedom that you may not have in a grapple. It also says "Similarly, if you begin your turn grappled or pinned, you might find that most of the maneuvers available to you simply won’t be of any use until you get free."

This does imply that there are some maneuvers that could be used, without stating which ones. I think you are right about rule 0, since there is no other guidance. I would permit use of a swift action to switch into a new stance (and stances are maneuvers), or a swift maneuver like Shadow Blink to escape a grapple. I would not allow any strikes though, unless they specifically state that they may be used in a grapple.

[Kaiyanwang]

Well we so could say that

- You CANNOT combine grapple and maneuvers (in the same attck I mean)

- You CAN use a strike if you win a grapple check, but, should be a strike delivered with a single light weapon OR a weapon you can use in grapple by feats and stance.

- to do this, you must win a grapple check anyway.

Is this reasonable?

[Eldariel]

Well we so could say that

- You CANNOT combine grapple and maneuvers (in the same attck I mean)

- You CAN use a strike if you win a grapple check, but, should be a strike delivered with a single light weapon OR a weapon you can use in grapple by feats and stance.

- to do this, you must win a grapple check anyway.

Is this reasonable?

This sounds reasonable. Alternatively, you could take a page off casting and state you must succeed a Concentration-check to use a maneuver in grapple, though sensibly the Grapple-check makes somewhat more sense.

Then again, normal attack doesn't require a Grapple-check either, so I'd lean towards Concentration as it matches the two existing mechanics closest to maneuvers (just plain ol' attacking and casting).


The principal issue with Grapple-check is that when you're using attacks in Grapple, chances are you are an underdog with regards to the Grapple-check so requiring a successful Grapple-check pretty much invalidates using Maneuvers defensively in Grapple (and offensively, you'd have no reason to use them anyways).

[Epinephrine]

I like the concentration check, that sounds good. I seem to recall a line in the ToB that describes a maneuver as being "like casting a spell" or something, but then going on to explain that it doesn't provoke AoO. Concentration makes sense then, trying to perform some precise physical task while wrestling around.

[AslanCross]

Hmm, yeah. The concentration check is what I was thinking of originally. Martial Adepts typically have Concentration as a class skill anyway, and it seems that one needs a fair bit of focus to use a maneuver. One can't normally put his full weight behind an Ancient Mountain Hammer while he's being strangled by a Dire Bear.

Epinephrine> My beef with the interpretation of maneuvers as being "specifically" excluded from the list of actions that can be performed in the core grapple rules is that ToB isn't core and hence the rules naturally wouldn't be mentioned in it. It's like saying that I can't take martial adept classes (or any non-core classes) just because they're not mentioned in the PHB.

The spellcasting mechanic does seem to be the most cognate, and limiting the use of maneuvers to light weapons pretty much mirrors the limitation on casting (must have material components on hand; spell must not have somatic components).

[Amiria]

Hmm, yeah. The concentration check is what I was thinking of originally. Martial Adepts typically have Concentration as a class skill anyway, and it seems that one needs a fair bit of focus to use a maneuver. One can't normally put his full weight behind an Ancient Mountain Hammer while he's being strangled by a Dire Bear.

Typically ? All martial adept classes have Concentration as a class skill. But Crusaders don't have access to the discipline that has Concentration as its key skill (Diamond Mind), so they don't have a good reason to gets ranks in it and would get the short end of that ruling (the Close-Quarter Fighting feat to break the initial grapple attempt would be a better option for them, but then, Crusaders don't really have feats to spare). But then, Crusaders are the most powerful martial adepts (but apparently the least liked/used) !

[ColdSepp]

Per the FAQ, you can:

The grapple rules provide a list of actions available to a grappling character, but it’s obviously not an exhaustive list. (It doesn’t, for example, mention “speaking” as an option.) It’s really intended more as a description of how grappling alters many normal actions available to characters (such as attacking and moving). Thus, the DM must apply a bit of his own common sense when adjudicating any grapple situation.
Any maneuver that involves an attack may be used while grappling, as long as it’s made with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling (PHB 156).

[AstralFire]

But then, Crusaders are the most powerful martial adepts (but apparently the least liked/used) !

I can't say I care for the randomness of their mechanic, it's just a hassle, especially as a DM.

[Keld Denar]

Crusaders function better in a face to face game, when the player can use cards to simulat maneuvers. Having to roll in a thread to get your maneuvers is awkward, IMO.

Anyway, its worth mentioning that Wolverine Stance allows you to use whatever weapon you want while grapplin. Unfortunately, martial adepts get FAR too few stances, and that one is way to circumstantial to get unless you know your DM is gonna be spewin owlbears all over you regularly and frequently...

[Amiria]

I played a Crusader in a PbP game here shortly (it died soon). With 6 readied (4 granted) maneuvers I rolled 1d6 and 1d5 at the start of a battle. Those were the 1st and 2nd withheld maneuvers. Going through the readied maneuvers from lowest to highest levels, alphabetically at the same level. Not very awkward just one [roll][/roll] tag more.

[Epinephrine]

Per the FAQ, you can:

Source specific text trumps general text. ToB suggests that you can't.

Enemy interference might make certain maneuvers impossible to complete ... if you begin your turn grappled or pinned, you might find that most of the maneuvers available to you simply won’t be of any use until you get free.

[olentu]

Source specific text trumps general text. ToB suggests that you can't.

And in any case whether the FAQ is right or is wrong it is not actually the rules.

[quick_comment]

Source specific text trumps general text. ToB suggests that you can't.

It says certain maneuvers, not all maneuvers. Maneuvers like ring of fire or bounding assault cannot be initated while in a grapple. There is no reason you couldnt initiate elder mountain hammer or strike of perfect clarity.

[ColdSepp]

It says certain maneuvers, not all maneuvers. Maneuvers like ring of fire or bounding assault cannot be initated while in a grapple. There is no reason you couldnt initiate elder mountain hammer or strike of perfect clarity.

Hmm. Yep, what he said. And yes, we all know the FAQ isn't the rules. It is a handy reference, though.

[Keld Denar]

Source specific text trumps general text. ToB suggests that you can't.

Um....reread the quote you quoted.

Enemy interference might make certain maneuvers impossible to complete ... if you begin your turn grappled or pinned, you might find that most of the maneuvers available to you simply won’t be of any use until you get free.

Emphasis mine.

CERTAIN manevuers. Not ALL manevuers. And, since there are no examples to base off of, that lands it squarely into the realm of ambiguous. Since the purpose of the FAQ is to clarify rules, not errata rules, and the passage cited from the FAQ isn't actually in conflict with the rules, it should be seen as valid.

Just because everyone hates the Sage and the FAQ doesn't mean its total garbage...think for yourselves.

[ericgrau]

If the maneuver is an attack, i.e. you could do multiple on a full attack, then you could make the attack with a light weapon at a -4 penalty. If the maneuver a standard action then no, because that's not one of the grapple actions. Unless there's some rule in ToB that says otherwise. But I think it'd be reasonable to house-rule in, at the same -4 penalty, even if ToB doesn't specify.

EDIT: Based on the quoted rule, I'd say use common sense and think of when it'd be plausible. The FAQ idea seems like the best way to handle this.

[Frosty]

What about Shadow Blink to get OUT of grapple?

[AslanCross]

It seems that the quoted text from ToB (page 39; "Concentration") says that it seems to let the DM decide.

Similarly, if you begin your turn grappled or pinned, you might find that most of the maneuvers available to you simply won't be of any use until you get free.

It's kind of difficult to go through an exhaustive list of this, but off the top of my head, this is what I can think of:

-Charging maneuvers (Charging Minotaur, Battle Leader's Charge, etc) or any other maneuvers that include movement (Bounding Assault, Tornado Throw) are definitely out of the picture.
-Throws---not sure how to handle these. You're already wrestling with your opponent and as such might not need the requisite touch attack, but is it really possible to use your leverage to toss your opponent?
-Other maneuvers seem to be fine, but given how many of them are based on mundane skill and not any supernatural elements, it brings to mind how say, Counters are executed (since they're flat-footed), as well as how one is able to drop his attack "like an avalanche" upon his foe (Elder Mountain Hammer) while he's being grappled.

[9mm]

-Throws---not sure how to handle these. You're already wrestling with your opponent and as such might not need the requisite touch attack, but is it really possible to use your leverage to toss your opponent?

I can say through personal, physical experience that the answer is an emphatic Yes!

[quick_comment]

as well as how one is able to drop his attack "like an avalanche" upon his foe (Elder Mountain Hammer) while he's being grappled.

Have you ever watched an MMA fight?

[oxinabox]

please don't use "Being grappled is an effect - it affects me. I Use Iron heart Surge to end this condition"
You Might (and i say Might) be able to use Iron Heart Surge to end the Flat footed condition that comes with being grappled.
I know My DM might constrerded that and then say, You end it, it then starts again next round.
I'ld have to think for a fong time before i made a desicision like that in a game i'm dming.
a Long time.

[Keld Denar]

Where are you guys getting flatfooted from? No no no.

While grappling, you are DENIED your DEX (different from flatfooted) and that only applies to people OUTSIDE the grapple. Thus, a rogue can't grab you and kidney punch you, but if his fighter friend grabbed you, he could stand over you and kick straight to the groin.

You are never flatfooted in a grapple unless you haven't acted yet in the round (like, you got grapple pounced on). Thus, you would never be unable to initiate a counter, provided its approprate.

Hmmm, I wonder. Since you can make a grapple check to move a grapple at half speed, could you actually initiate a maneuver that gives you movement in a grapple if you beat the check? That would actually allow you to Tornado Throw someone off you, which is all kinda of cool in my book!

[elliott20]

Hmmm, I wonder. Since you can make a grapple check to move a grapple at half speed, could you actually initiate a maneuver that gives you movement in a grapple if you beat the check? That would actually allow you to Tornado Throw someone off you, which is all kinda of cool in my book!

That. is. AWESOME.

someday, I'm gonna do this.

[AslanCross]

Where are you guys getting flatfooted from? No no no.

While grappling, you are DENIED your DEX (different from flatfooted) and that only applies to people OUTSIDE the grapple. Thus, a rogue can't grab you and kidney punch you, but if his fighter friend grabbed you, he could stand over you and kick straight to the groin.

You are never flatfooted in a grapple unless you haven't acted yet in the round (like, you got grapple pounced on). Thus, you would never be unable to initiate a counter, provided its approprate.

Hmmm, I wonder. Since you can make a grapple check to move a grapple at half speed, could you actually initiate a maneuver that gives you movement in a grapple if you beat the check? That would actually allow you to Tornado Throw someone off you, which is all kinda of cool in my book!

Flatfooted was the convenient term that came to mind, I apologize for the confusion. Thanks for clearing up the issue with dex-denied AC only applying to non-grapplers.

Anyway I guess the MMA example does kinda work with the Mountain Hammer maneuver, though probably only with creatures your size or smaller. Good luck trying that with a Behir. (If you get grappled by a Behir, you're probably screwed anyway, Martial Adept or not.)

[Fuzzy_Juan]

Ohh, I dunno, even if something is really big and nasty, there could be a way to gain enough leverage to pull off a decent hit. Perhaps you push them up with enough room and then drop low and use them falling down on top of you as more momentum as you push off the ground.

Maybe you grab their jowl and shift all your weight around their neck sending them spinning to the ground and use the fall increase your effective power to hit them as you land.

All manner of ways to interperet a grapple. Just because they are larger, doesn't necessarily mean they have got the best of you...though it is often the case given most people's lack of grappling skill.

Technically a 'wolf fang fist' could be you boxing someone's ears with your hands...