Post/Author/DateTime	Post
derfenrirwolv 03-22-05, 10:17 PM	Constrict: Creatures with the constrict special attack deal extra damage when grappling. Most creatures with this attack usually also have the improved grab special attack. A creature deals extra constriction damage when it first grabs a foe and establishes a hold. If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. WTF? Where is he getting this? Isn't getting grappled and damaged every round by constrict bad enough? particularly with the double damage in round one vis a vis the getting hit and constricted Is the sage as high as any of these questions go, or is there someone he gets a check from every once in a while? I'm pretty sure it said somewhere that grappling monsters go off their BAB, but the article has them acting on their natural weapons, and doing their natural weapons for damage. I was seeing grapple attacks for damage as slamming your opponents head into a wall or twisting their arm.. he has them effectively making a claw or bite attack with a grapple check, AND giving monsters the ability to wander off at full movement with characters in their mouths at NO opposed grapple check
OverzealousMephit 03-22-05, 10:30 PM	I am not exactly sure what you mean, but a creature with both Improved Grab and Constrict does deal both the bludgeoning damage, and the damage done by the weapon used to establish the hold every round if he continues succeeding at maintaining the grapple and attempts to 'constrict', not just on round one. See the glossary section of the Monster Manual.
derfenrirwolv 03-23-05, 01:21 AM	Ahhh I see.. so the constrict isn't automatic (except if it first gets a hold), but it effectively deals double damage if it succeeds... ouch. The text in with the critters is very different than the text in the back of the glossary. The part of all about grappling 4 with the monsters grappling according to natural attacks is still contrary to the raw Rake: ...Normaly a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling.. and i found the part where monsters can wander off with their foes firmly in jaw.. nasty. I thought the glossary was just a list of otherwise printed rules for the attacks, not that it had most of the rules not mentioned under the monster descriptions
The_Ditto 03-23-05, 08:14 AM	Ahhh I see.. so the constrict isn't automatic (except if it first gets a hold), but it effectively deals double damage if it succeeds... ouch. The text in with the critters is very different than the text in the back of the glossary. It's worse than that ... it deals it's constrict damage every time you fail to escape it's grasp with a grapple check!! :uh-huh: The part of all about grappling 4 with the monsters grappling according to natural attacks is still contrary to the raw Rake: ...Normaly a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling.. Not that I disagree with the contradiction .. but be careful ... using a secondary source (such as the blurb in Rake) as proof of "primary definition" doesn't hold much salt ... It does help, however, that it doesn't seem mentioned (clearly) anywhere else .. *sigh*
derfenrirwolv 03-23-05, 02:00 PM	It's worse than that ... it deals it's constrict damage every time you fail to escape it's grasp with a grapple check!! Derf: Nope If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. The grapple check it makes to oppose your escape attempt is not a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it is a grapple check for another reason.
The_Ditto 03-23-05, 02:08 PM	Derf: Nope Be careful .. I never commented on Imp. Grab .. and I agree with you on that. constrict .. however, is a different beast altogether ... Read: Constrict (Ex): 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. It then also points out that is also deals constrict dmg in addition in imp. grab in the appropriate situation .. Yes .. constrict is Nasty .. be forewarned! :teach:
derfenrirwolv 03-23-05, 06:40 PM	Be careful .. I never commented on Imp. Grab .. and I agree with you on that. Constrict references heavily to improved grab. It then also points out that is also deals constrict dmg in addition in imp. grab in the appropriate situation That situation being, as clarified in the Rules of the game article If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. meaning that you get hurt when the python bites you, you get hurt right when the python wraps around you. Next round if it wins the grapple check it deals constriction and bite damage, but that you DO NOT take damage from constrict when it wins the grapple check for you to escape. It says after making a successful grapple check, not after making ALL grapple checks, meaning that the creature actualy has to establish a grab you to constrict you, not that it hurts you after ever successfull grapple check it makes, including the reflexive one to keep you in its coils. Yes, i know all about how a python waits for you to exhale then wraps around even tighter... that doesn't matter its squeezing you long enough.
derfenrirwolv 03-23-05, 06:41 PM	Be careful .. I never commented on Imp. Grab .. and I agree with you on that. Constrict references heavily to improved grab. It then also points out that is also deals constrict dmg in addition in imp. grab in the appropriate situation That situation being, as clarified in the Rules of the game article If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. meaning that you get hurt when the python bites you, you get hurt right when the python wraps around you. Next round if it wins the grapple check it deals constriction and bite damage, but that you DO NOT take damage from constrict when it wins the grapple check for you to escape. It says after making a successful grapple check, not after making ALL grapple checks, meaning that the creature actualy has to establish a grab you to constrict you, not that it hurts you after ever successfull grapple check it makes, including the reflexive one to keep you in its coils. Yes, i know all about how a python waits for you to exhale then wraps around even tighter.. thats real world stuff with no reflection on the game.
q'afuu 03-23-05, 07:01 PM	The part of all about grappling 4 with the monsters grappling according to natural attacks is still contrary to the raw Rake: ...Normaly a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling.. Nope. You need to differentiate between attacking while grappling and making opposed grapple checks to deal damage while grappling. While grappling, you can make an attack (a straightforward attack, no grapple check involved) with a single light weapon (or in this case, natural weapon) only. Opposed grapple checks can be made according to the number of attacks you get. This is a muddied issue though: either that means a grapple check for every attack, regardless of the source (which is what the core rules imply, but unfortunately not specifically say) or that means a grapple check for every attack you can make bases solely on your BAB (which is what the Sage said, more or less explicitly, in All about Grappling, part 2). Both possibilities have their problems. The first means you could get extra grapple attempts from sources like dual-wielding and flurry, but that seems contrary to the limitation on attacks while grappling. The second means most creatures with Improved Grab are better off not grappling (because most of them have multiple natural weapons, and they'd trade those multiple attacks for a single grapple check).
derfenrirwolv 03-23-05, 07:42 PM	Ok, let me make something plain to you. I don't know you from adam. WHen you say that "you need to do something" or that something is way X and then don't cite it i have NO, zero, zilch, NADA reason to beleive your interpretation is better than mine. With that in mind... Nope. You need to differentiate between attacking while grappling and making opposed grapple checks to deal damage while grappling. Why? The article made them almost synonomous, having them rely on number of natural attacks, doing natural attack damage etc. While grappling, you can make an attack (a straightforward attack, no grapple check involved) with a single light weapon (or in this case, natural weapon) only. Derf: At a -4 penalty. According to the RAW its only with one weapon. According to the article its 1attack/natural weapon. or that means a grapple check for every attack you can make bases solely on your BAB (which is what the Sage said, more or less explicitly, in All about Grappling, part 2). Which is how it would be for all characters (who canot use multible weapons in combat, even armored spikes) and all monsters who are relegated to attacking with one natural attack in a grapple. It only gets muddied when the stage starts saying that the attacks and their grapples go off of their natural weaponry, not BAB. It also makes the multiattack feat even deadlier. The first means you could get extra grapple attempts from sources like dual-wielding and flurry, but that seems contrary to the limitation on attacks while grappling You cannot duel weild in a grapple. That is spelled out in the grapple rules. Grapple is not a special monk weapon, hence you cannot flurry with it The second means most creatures with Improved Grab are better off not grappling (because most of them have multiple natural weapons, and they'd trade those multiple attacks for a single grapple check). Or they would be grappling according to their BAB, which usualy gives them fewer attacks. This is how it worked according to the 3.0 FAQ I'm not going to cry a river for a creature which can simply walk off with a character, prevent them from casting spells, prevent them from using weapons all the while using their larger size to pound defenceless characters into the ground.
TrustTymora 03-23-05, 08:25 PM	It's worse than that ... it deals it's constrict damage every time you fail to escape it's grasp with a grapple check!! :uh-huh: However, I doubt that is the spirt and intent of it(however we did try it out this way). An opposed grapple check is not an action for the creature. In other words even if the creature wins the opposed grapple check it is not considered to be squeezing even more. RotG1 tries to make this clear in the section: Grappling Basic - "You make opposed checks many times when grappling" RotG4 tell you that it is when the creature makes a grapple check "to damage" an opponent. TT
derfenrirwolv 03-23-05, 09:10 PM	however we did try it out this way So did the grapped person just decide to play dead? My advice to a grappled wizard: Learn still spell My advice to a grappled sorcerer: wet yourself and hope you can make yourself taste bad. My advice to a grappled rogue: keep putting honey BBQ scented meat on the fighters person in hopes of making him a tastier smelling target.
TrustTymora 03-23-05, 10:21 PM	So did the grapped person just decide to play dead? Ya, he did a "real" good job. And so did another PC. Thats when we new immediately this was not the intention of the "constrict" ability. LOL TT
q'afuu 03-23-05, 11:24 PM	Why? The article made them almost synonomous, having them rely on number of natural attacks, doing natural attack damage etc. Derf: At a -4 penalty. According to the RAW its only with one weapon. According to the article its 1attack/natural weapon. As far as I can tell, the article deals only with grapple attacks, not with attacks made while grappling (and listing several houserules for doing so). I didn't think I'd have to cite the rules as written to you. The PHB plainly shows the difference between both.
derfenrirwolv 03-24-05, 12:06 AM	I don't know why you seem to think the distinction is important for anything i said, the article goes against the RAW on both. The article deals VERY much with monster attacks in a grapple, stating that they can make one per natural weapon. Yeah, when you have a even CL encounter result in a multible PC kill either the dice just went horribly wrong, you misread a rule, or someone messed up a cr
The_Ditto 03-24-05, 07:57 AM	That situation being, as clarified in the Rules of the game article the article goes against the RAW on both. :confused: k', I'm confused ... true, these two quotes are from two different posts .. but in the first one you seem to be indicating that you put more weight on the RotG article over the RAW .. (as it clarifies something) .. Then in the second case - when you start talking about the natural weapons ... you seem to imply that the RotG article is bad as it goes against the RAW :confused: Bottom line: RAW = Constrict triggers on "a grapple check" .. doesn't matter how it was made. I've already shown the rules around this ... Yes it's nasty, yes it makes constrict very very bad ... Yes it makes Constrictor snakes at least useful .. :rolleyes: But that's just the point .. and I believe . the intent of it ... Improved Grab is one thing .. Constrict is another .. Ok, so that's from the RAW .. goodie .. now let's take a closer look at the only section in the RotG article which talks about constrict: Constrict: Creatures with the constrict special attack deal extra damage when grappling. Most creatures with this attack usually also have the improved grab special attack. A creature deals extra constriction damage when it first grabs a foe and establishes a hold. If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. Ok, so what's this telling us? 1) if the creature makes a grapple check to deal dmg it: a) deals it's natural weapon dmg (this rule as per improved grab .. both here and the RAW confirm that this dmg only happens when the creature is making a grapple check to do dmg ..) b) also deals extra constriction dmg ... The RAW still stands that "a grapple check" will trigger constrict damage. The RotG article does not contradict nor clarify this in any way .. it only clarifies that constrict dmg is "also" added with an improved grab ... Remember .. Sage doesn't always need to clarify the obvious ... ;) Let me quote that rule from the RAW again .. just to make sure it's obvious: Constrict (Ex): 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. And yes, constrict is nasty .. it's supposed to be ... and any DM that doesn't allow for it, and ends up TPKing a party because of it (possibly) needs to plan his encounters a bit better .. For example: You do not throw a Choker (or 2) at a 1st level party .. that's just asking for TPK .. A high level party should be able to easily handle a constricting creature ... I've encountered them many times ... and yes, they hurt .. but nobody's ever died from them ... call it luck ... call it tactics ... whatever ... :rolleyes: It doesn't change the RAW ... Now .. if you want to houserule ... hey .. that's entirely up to you .. Do I think it shouldn't be this nasty? Again .. I've never seen an actual situation that was "really bad" ... or that showed "conclusively" .. that "Hey, this is broken!! Maybe this isn't the intent" ... But that's just me ... if you have ... than rule away .. :tiphat:
q'afuu 03-24-05, 08:13 AM	I don't know why you seem to think the distinction is important for anything i said, the article goes against the RAW on both. The article deals VERY much with monster attacks in a grapple, stating that they can make one per natural weapon. This is the relevant part of the article:It's easiest, however, to allow a monster one grappling attack per natural weapon it has, provided that the natural weapon can hold on to the target in some fashion. The monster uses its listed grapple bonus when attacking with a primary natural weapon (or weapons) and its listed grapple bonus -5 for any secondary natural weapons. If the monster's grapple attack deals damage to a foe, the damage is lethal (unless the monster takes a -4 penalty to deal nonlethal damage) and equal to the damage rating for the natural weapon. For example, a troll grappling with a claw has a grapple bonus of +14 and deals 1d6+6 point of damage with the attack. A slightly more complex method for handling grappling monsters is to allow the monster one grapple attack for every 5 points of base attack bonus it has. If the monster has natural weaponry, it deals lethal damage from one natural attack. The monster can use each natural weapon only once during its turn. If the monster's base attack allows it more grapple attacks than it has natural weapons, it must deal normal unarmed damage for any extra attacks. As far as I can tell, those are two ways of dealing with grapple or grappling attacks, not with attacks made while grappling.
ManinBlaq 03-24-05, 11:52 AM	As far as I can tell, those are two ways of dealing with grapple or grappling attacks, not with attacks made while grappling. Well .. it gets broken down. Basically, as a DM you have a choice of rules for determining how monsters grapple in your campaign. The first being of course, according to the creature's BAB ... which seems to pretty much be the standard for everyone. So take the other as simply a 'variant' rule ... something to make your game slightly different, if you wanted that additional flavor. As for the Constrict passage.. Everyone agrees that it is a truly poorly-written passage. Hideous in fact. However, given that people on a whole are generaly lazy, and tend to do the least amount required of them ... I doubt very much they would put "after making a successful grapple check" .. when all they would have to say is "after each successful grapple check". That's two whole words!!! 4 Suplerfuous characters!! Again, although it isn't 'clear' ... I am very sure that the meaning of the passage is - The monster can Constrict as a grapple attack, or in conjunction with an Improved Grap. It's not something that happens each and every time. As for the Monster with improved grab -- running off with players... that was already part of Improved Grab. The article simply clarifies ... well, pretty much everything. (Seeing how the MM paragraph didn't explain anything.)
TrustTymora 03-24-05, 12:54 PM	Yes it's nasty, yes it makes constrict very very bad ... Yes it makes Constrictor snakes at least useful .. :rolleyes: But that's just the point .. and I believe . the intent of it ... Improved Grab is one thing .. Constrict is another .. Hmmm...at least useful! Lets just have our constrictor snake slither up and grapple someone for fun. Surprise rnd: avg damage 29 If it wins initative add another 58 damage(2 grapple checks if you play based on BaB determines how many grapple checks it gets) on top of that for a total of 87. Well thats a bit much for the average 5th level PC don't you think? Oh it didn't win initiative okay PC tries to escape but fails grapple check and takes another 29 points. Even the 58 is a bit much for the average 5th level PC. (Not that it really matters if he fails to escape, he better hope that his friends kill the thing!) TT
TrustTymora 03-24-05, 01:01 PM	Well .. it gets broken down. Basically, as a DM you have a choice of rules for determining how monsters grapple in your campaign. The first being of course, according to the creature's BAB ... which seems to pretty much be the standard for everyone. As I have said, this works fine for creatures that don't use natural weapons and make use of manufactured weapons(in other words they are very similar to PC's so grapple like them). For creatures that make use of natural weapons you are better off attempting to first do things based on the creature description. For instance the troll will grapple you and make three grapple checks(2 claws 1 bite). This makes sense. The giant constrictor snake will get 1 grapple attempt(1 bite + constrict). This makes sense. TT
The_Ditto 03-24-05, 02:47 PM	Hmmm...at least useful! Lets just have our constrictor snake slither up and grapple someone for fun. :rolleyes: Yeah .. ok .. I guess you always throw CR 5 encounters at a single PC, right?? Dude .. CR 5 means it's an encounter for an average 5th level party .. While the snake has 1 person grappled, I have no doubt the others can and will turn the thing into swiss cheese in a round or two at most ... And yes .. it does seem a lot ... I even pointed that out ... that constrict is "very bad" ... what's your point?? :confused: oh yeah .. and with that snake with only a +10 to hide .. a 5th level party is going to spot it more often than not (Rogue = 8 ranks in spot, +2 for wis to match, anything else brings it over ... Druid or Ranger is worse ..) Once spotted, that big nasty CR 5 snake .. with a move of 20' is going to be oh-such-the-big threat to 4 level 5 characters .. :rolleyes: It's advantage is surprise and the constrict ... if it gets that, yes it will consume 1/4 of the party's resource ... 1 PC of a party of 4 is 1/4 of the party's resources if you ask me!! :rofl:
Yobgod Ababua 03-24-05, 04:15 PM	A few notes on this... "A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, after making a successful grapple check." 1) When an opponent tries to escape, it's -their- grapple check that succeeds or fails, not the creatures. The creature's grapple check merely sets the DC and cannot of itself succeed or fail. Therefore the constrictor can never have a "successful grapple check" that it did not initiate. 2) More specific statements on the same topic should always trump less specific statements. When the later clarification states that contrict damage occurs after a successful grapple check to deal damage, it needs to take precedence, otherwise it was completely pointless to mention it (not that Wizards doesn't occassionally do pointless things). 3) In your interpretation, a constrictor would do damage when it breaks a pin on itself, escapes from the grapple, or retrieves a spell component. If it escaped from 5 grapplers, it would damage all of them 'on its way out'. These don't fit with common sense, or with how other similar game mechanics work that grant extra damage (like Rend), which always do so after a successful attack. So... we have two possible interpretations of this rule, one which leads to contradictions and nonsensical effects and one which is consistant with the rest of the game. We are compelled in this case to choose the more consistant interpretation.
ManinBlaq 03-24-05, 04:24 PM	Dang ..dude .... :uh-huh: That stuff .. is like deep. You must have like a +6 Wisdom modifier ..or something. :)
Bambrig 03-24-05, 04:58 PM	I've only been DMing in 3.5 for a little while, so I probably don't have all of this stuff right, but here's one problem I see. If the constrictor gets to do damage on every grapple check in a single round, whether it be initiated by the PC or the constrictor, then it seems that the best defense a character would have (unless very, very good at grappling) would be to NOT attempt to escape the grapple. Attempting to escape the grapple simply means that you take even more damage in a round than you already did. If you don't attempt to escape the grapple, you are safer. That doesn't seem to make sense.
TrustTymora 03-24-05, 08:40 PM	And yes .. it does seem a lot ... I even pointed that out ... that constrict is "very bad" ... what's your point?? Tell me what you don't get about the orginal post below and we can start from there. It's worse than that ... it deals it's constrict damage every time you fail to escape it's grasp with a grapple check!! reply: However, I doubt that is the spirt and intent of it(however we did try it out this way). An opposed grapple check is not an action for the creature. In other words even if the creature wins the opposed grapple check it is not considered to be squeezing even more. RotG1 tries to make this clear in the section: Grappling Basic - "You make opposed checks many times when grappling" RotG4 tell you that it is when the creature makes a grapple check "to damage" an opponent. I've told you where your interpretation of the RAW has been cleared up. What more would you like me to make a point about? TT
derfenrirwolv 03-25-05, 11:38 AM	k', I'm confused ... true, these two quotes are from two different posts .. One of which was before i looked at improved grab in the index, as opposed to the improved grab listed after 4 monsters where it was identicle. I didn't know that the index had the complete listing for the ability, i had thought (before someone pointed it out to me that it was otherwise) that the version of improved grab that went with the monster was the version of improved grab that it had. but in the first one you seem to be indicating that you put more weight on the RotG article over the RAW .. (as it clarifies something) No, i'm taking the article over your overly rules lawyery interpretation of the rules as writen. It says after A succesfull grapple check it can contrict someone, not after each and every grapple check it can constrict someone. What it says, and what it means, is that it can't just bite you and constrict you automatically.. it has to make A grapple check first. Notice that no one else is agreeing with your interpretation of it. Then in the second case - when you start talking about the natural weapons ... you seem to imply that the RotG article is bad as it goes against the RAW On those points, yes. However an article with multiple points can have ones that are correct and those which are not. he is however not going against the RAW on constrict attacks, the raw does not say that every grapple check produces a constrict :confused: Bottom line: RAW = Constrict triggers on "a grapple check" .. doesn't matter how it was made. I've already shown the rules around this ... derf: and notice how no one has agreed with your interpretation of them. I've shown the rules for it too. It says A, not EACH. Your interpretation of the raw is not the raw. The rest of your reiterations of your argument fall apart under this. The RAW still stands that "a grapple check" will trigger constrict damage. The RotG article does not contradict nor clarify this in any way .. it only clarifies that constrict dmg is "also" added with an improved grab ... It certainly does clarify it, it states WHICH grapple checks its talking about. Constrict: Creatures with the constrict special attack deal extra damage when grappling. Most creatures with this attack usually also have the improved grab special attack. A creature deals extra constriction damage when it first grabs a foe and establishes a hold. If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. How the heck is that NOT a clarification on "a grapple check" ?????? Some other silliness with your reading: Grappling monk attempts to grapple a snake. Monk makes melee touch attack, snake succeeds on grapple check, constricts character without ever getting around him. The snake somehow managed to wrap its coils around the character to constrict him, but is not now grappling the monk.