Post/Author/DateTime	Post
reveal 03-21-07, 02:07 PM	Ok. If a person is hit by a creature that has Improved Grab, the creature can automatically make a grapple check. If successful, they pull the person into their space. In the next round, they can make another grapple check and, if successful, do more damage to the person. My question is, does the second grapple check count as an "attack" and does the person get "hit" for more damage or does the damage just happen?
Kragg Bonemeal 03-21-07, 02:11 PM	They would have to win another grapple check to deal damage appropriate to the size of the creature per normal grapple rules. Or it can use a natural attack at -4 to hit and do the damage from that. Either way, you are held in a grapple. If they have the constrict ability, that is automatic damage for being held in the creature's coils, tentacles, stomach, etc.
ryryguy 03-21-07, 02:28 PM	No, if the creature has Improved Grab, it can deal the regular attack damage of the attack it used to start the grapple using Improved Grab when it wins grapple checks on later rounds. If it has Constrict, it does that damage in addition to its regular attack damage, if and only if it wins that grapple check. From the SRD (emphasis mine): Constrict A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, after making a successful grapple check. The amount of damage is given in the creature’s entry. If the creature also has the improved grab ability it deals constriction damage in addition to damage dealt by the weapon used to grab. Improved Grab If a creature with this special attack hits with a melee weapon (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. No initial touch attack is required. Unless otherwise noted, improved grab works only against opponents at least one size category smaller than the creature. The creature has the option to conduct the grapple normally, or simply use the part of its body it used in the improved grab to hold the opponent. If it chooses to do the latter, it takes a -20 penalty on grapple checks, but is not considered grappled itself; the creature does not lose its Dexterity bonus to AC, still threatens an area, and can use its remaining attacks against other opponents. A successful hold does not deal any extra damage unless the creature also has the constrict special attack. If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature’s descriptive text). When a creature gets a hold after an improved grab attack, it pulls the opponent into its space. This act does not provoke attacks of opportunity. It can even move (possibly carrying away the opponent), provided it can drag the opponent’s weight. Reveal, I'm not sure what you mean by your question: "does the second grapple check count as an "attack" and does the person get "hit" for more damage or does the damage just happen?" It's not an attack roll, it's a grapple check... so the person doesn't get "hit" per se. But the damage doesn't "just happen" either, the creature with Improved Grab must succeed in a grapple check to inflict the damage.
reveal 03-21-07, 02:29 PM	I'm asking because of the Dragon Shaman's energy aura ability. It states that an enemy gets damaged by energy whenever it hits the Dragon Shaman. So, on a successful grapple, does that count as being "hit"?
ryryguy 03-21-07, 02:40 PM	Hmm, I don't know, "whenever it hits the Dragon Shaman" is pretty ambiguous. Is that the exact wording? Not even "whenever it hits the Dragon Shaman with a melee attack"? If forced to make a ruling, I'd say that strictly speaking, doing damage with a grapple check (whether you have Improved Grab or not) wouldn't count as a "hit". On the other hand, if this is some aura that is physically surrounding the creature, it seems like it ought to work against an enemy that is actually touching you in a grapple. So I might rewrite the ability to say something like, "whenever it hits the Dragon Shaman or does damage to the Dragon Shaman with a grapple check". Even there is weird... so it wouldn't damage someone who pins the Dragon Shaman? Maybe a better house rule would be something like having the aura do damage when a creature establishes a hold on the Dragon Shaman, and once per round on its own turn to any creature that is grappling with the Dragon Shaman?
reveal 03-21-07, 02:53 PM	Here's the description of the aura: Any creature striking you or your ally with a natural attack or a nonreach melee weapon is dealt 2 points of energy damage for each point of your aura bonus.
ShubNiggurath 03-21-07, 09:18 PM	I would rule yes, due to logic, but the RAW answer is NO. A grapple check is not an "hit", is an "opposed roll". Would you rule that an opposed strenght check to, say, win an arm wrestling competition is a hit? Grapple is like Bull rush, trip or overrun, never mind that it does damage. About improved grab/constrict, let's give an example, a giant constrictor snake. The snake has: - grapple +23 (BAB +8) - just one attack: bite 1d8+10 - improved grab - constrict 1d8+10 Premise: Let's clear one issue here, the snake, by the FAQ would have 2 grapple checks (monsters use BAB for grapple checks anyway, and +8 means two attacks at +8/+3, or two grapples at +23/+18). But this makes the rules too complicated (believe me, proof on request. Just try to apply this rule to a kraken), so I will use Skip's ruling to equate number of grapple checks=number of natural attacks for monsters that don't use weapons. 1st round) The snake has 1 natural attack and thus one grapple check (see premise). He attacks Joe, and hits. He does 1d8+10 (bite) and improved grab kicks in and, say, he wins the grapple checks. They are GRAPPLING! Joe tries to get free or attacks the snake with a light weapon. We don't care. 2nd round) The snake does the following action in the grapple (Joe could have done that too, but it would have been suicidal) Damage Your Opponent: While grappling, you can deal damage to your opponent equivalent to an unarmed strike. Make an opposed grapple check in place of an attack. If you win, you deal nonlethal damage as normal for your unarmed strike (1d3 points for Medium attackers or 1d2 points for Small attackers, plus Strength modifiers). If you want to deal lethal damage, you take a –4 penalty on your grapple check. The snakes wins the grapple checks and delivers, as per the rule 1d6+7 NONLETHAL damage (note that it could have been lethal if the snake took -4 to the grapple check). Why 1d6+7? The snake has 25 strenght, that's where the +7 comes from. We read in the above rules that a medium attacker does 1d3 damage. The snake is huge so we bump the damage two levels up: 1d3->1d4->1d6 (see for example the improved natural attack feat). But wait! The improved grab kicks in now, since we did a successful grapple check: we add 1d8+10 lethal damage. But wait! Constrict kicks in now! We add ANOTHER 1d8+10 lethal. Total damage dealt: (1d6+7)+1d8+10+1d8+10=1d6+7 NONLETHAL + 2d8+20 LETHAL. If the snake had taken -4 to grapple check, all the damage would have been lethal and it would have been 1d6+2d8+27 (average 39,5). Good, uh? Note that if you are a monk all the damage you deal is lethal without taking the -4 to grapple check.
mpauna 03-22-07, 01:14 PM	1st round) The snake has 1 natural attack and thus one grapple check (see premise). He attacks Joe, and hits. He does 1d8+10 (bite) and improved grab kicks in and, say, he wins the grapple checks. They are GRAPPLING! Joe tries to get free or attacks the snake with a light weapon. We don't care. Actually, because your snake has both improved grab and constrict, it would also deal 1d8+10 constrict damage after the grab. Total damage for round 1 is 2d8+20. The snakes wins the grapple checks and delivers, as per the rule 1d6+7 NONLETHAL damage (note that it could have been lethal if the snake took -4 to the grapple check). Why 1d6+7? The snake has 25 strenght, that's where the +7 comes from. We read in the above rules that a medium attacker does 1d3 damage. The snake is huge so we bump the damage two levels up: 1d3->1d4->1d6 (see for example the improved natural attack feat). But wait! The improved grab kicks in now, since we did a successful grapple check: we add 1d8+10 lethal damage. But wait! Constrict kicks in now! We add ANOTHER 1d8+10 lethal. Actually, most the description for Improved Grab read "If the creature does not constrict, each successful grapple check it makes during successive rounds automatically deals the damage indicated for the attack that established the hold. Otherwise, it deals constriction damage as well (the amount is given in the creature’s descriptive text).". Most people will read this as the attack's damage replaces the normal nonlethal damage of the "Damage your opponent". So instead of 1d6+7 nonlethal and 2d8+20 lethal, most people would just do the 2d8+20 lethal. Over the two rounds, the total damage would be 4d8+40. Adding the improved grab and constrict damage on top of the nonlethal damage is an interpretation which I have not seen before, and could certainly be argued, but I believe that the intent was to replace the non-lethal damage, just as I believe that the intent was for the extra improved grab and constrict damage to apply only to the "Damage your opponent" option, and not to "any" successful grapple check (such as successfully drawing forth a light weapon or escaping from the grapple).
ryryguy 03-22-07, 01:42 PM	Here's the description of the aura: Any creature striking you or your ally with a natural attack or a nonreach melee weapon is dealt 2 points of energy damage for each point of your aura bonus. Anyone have the definition of "natural attack" handy? Unless that includes damaging an opponent in a grapple, by the letter of the rule, the aura would not deal damage in that case. But yeah, it seems logical that it should, and a house rule to extend it to damaging you with a grapple might be in order.
Eightbitmage 03-22-07, 03:22 PM	In a grapple when you deal damage it is with an unarmed strike, a natural weapon or a light weapon. I think unarmed strikes are also considered natural weapons. So yes, the aura deals damage in a grapple.
ryryguy 03-22-07, 05:09 PM	Excellent point, dealing damage with "damage your opponent" during a grapple is considered an unarmed strike! Technically I don't believe an unarmed strike is considered a natural weapon, but it definitely is a "nonreach melee attack", so the aura should affect it! And we could argue over whether "damage your opponent" using Improved Grab should be classified as a natural attack or not, but either way it seems like it should be either a natural attack or an unarmed strike. Either way, it's covered. The next question is, does a creature with natural reach attacking with a non-reach weapon count as a "nonreach melee attack"? :) I'd say yes, for these purposes at least... but I don't know that "nonreach" is really well defined...
reveal 03-23-07, 09:53 PM	Thank you for contacting Wizards of the Coast game support! Technically according to the rules as written, a grapple maneuver does not count as a strike. So the aura would not affect it.
Eightbitmage 03-24-07, 01:17 PM	Technically according to the rules as written, a grapple maneuver does not count as a strike. What question did you ask them? While using the grapple maneuver (as in getting into it) isn't a strike, dealing damage in a grapple is still by RAW at least a non-reach melee weapon.
reveal 03-24-07, 01:30 PM	What question did you ask them? While using the grapple maneuver (as in getting into it) isn't a strike, dealing damage in a grapple is still by RAW at least a non-reach melee weapon. Yes, but look at the description of the aura: Any creature striking you or your ally with a natural attack or a nonreach melee weapon is dealt 2 points of energy damage for each point of your aura bonus. It's all about being hit not taking damage.
Eightbitmage 03-24-07, 06:41 PM	So by the RAW an unarmed strike isn't a strike? I would like to go on record as saying that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard about the D&D ruleset.
reveal 03-24-07, 06:43 PM	So by the RAW an unarmed strike isn't a strike? I would like to go on record as saying that is the dumbest thing I've ever heard about the D&D ruleset. A grapple check is not an unarmed strike. It's a grapple check.