I just had a player ask if he could.....establish a grapple....hold target over his head....jump....and bodyslam/drop to do damage to the target. His str is 20. he wants his 8' jump +3 ft reach, putting the target at 11' and drop him for d6. My gues is, he wants this to all happen as part of his move, then attacks to follow.
I am inclined to rule no....just due to common sense. I don't have my books with me at work though.
I don't think making your move an atk is balanced. I would allow it if he wanted to just RP it as a cool improvised atk (he has tavern brawler and athlete)
Am I wrong? What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Carl
It strikes me as a shove plus some light damage. That's just a bit more than what one can do with a shove attack action. So I think a simple adjudication is to make it a shove action with disadvantage to the attacker. By giving disadvantage to the attacker, we give that player an opportunity to use resources or create situations that allow him or her to negate that disadvantage (e.g. Inspiration or Help action from a friend). See if your player will go for that.
This sounds like a fun thing to do. I'd probably rule it as a grapple. With a successfull attemp, he can just slam the opponant for d6 plus Str. I'd be hard to convince he could jump his full height while carrying a squirming opponant of equal size, though. The rules say you can only move half your speed while grappling a target, I don't think he'd be able to jump. But I wouldn't get hung up on how high the falling opponant needs to be, just use the grapple to slam the target and move on. You would, in my opinion, be justified in ruling that it would take up all the character's movement for the lifting and dropping, though.
I would rule against it for the reach aspect only. But if the player can get the actual jump height up to 10 feet, go for it.
I'd say that its definitely doable. Its also definitely at least one attack, not just a move though. (He has to establish a grapple, move his opponent, then make the jump and slam attack.)
I'd also say that he'd get his strength bonus on the damage from the drop as well, since he is putting effort into the slam, rather than just dropping his opponent.
I would require a grapple on one turn and on the second turn I would allow it as an athletics check vs. enemy AC dealing 1d6 per 5ft drop and knocking the target prone.
As Timmee pointed out, your speed is halved when moving a grappled creature, so the jumping height of a character with 20 Strength would only be 2 feet if he makes a standing high jump (and 4 feet if he moves at least 10 feet on foot immediately before the jump).
Taking weight into consideration, the carrying capacity of a character with 20 Strength tops out at 300 lbs (which denies the ability to carry most opponents once gear is factored in for both sides), and if you're using the variant encumbrance rules, carrying weight in excess of 100 lbs reduces speed and impacts jumping height even further.
I wouldn't allow this tactic to have a damage impact unless the grappled creature was two or more sizes smaller than the character.
They could really just flavor that as a shove, knocking the opponent prone, and then using their second attack to try and deal the damage. I wouldn't make it all one action to both prone AND damage someone. That would defeat the purpose of certain class abilities, such as the Battlemaster and the Wolf Barbarian.
iserith wrote:
You should see what happens if someone casts Jump on him and then he falls and lands on the person he just hit with his ability to not take as much fall damage. The answer is that it gets super super painful...
An action for an opposed Atheletics vs Athletics or Acrobatics check. 1d4+STR damage if successful. It's no better than his Tavern Brawler would do. He doesn't have to jump, the target doesn't have to land prone, though I would allow it if the PC has Extra Attack.
It’s ridiculous and absurd, and I’d totally allow it. Not without a contested strength check, mind you. But if the PCs are getting creative with their attacks, so too should the monsters. A huge creature could grapple a PC, lift them up, and drop them for far more damage. Into a burning pit of fire or something.
Ralif_Redhammer wrote:
It’s fun 
Just don’t try to make it to difficult or to complicated. Was in a game when creativity from players was stifled down because DM made it not really worth it. When the player came up with a cool idea (like in the example of grapple and throwing down) it came with so many string attached – very high DC, using whole round, smaller damage than attack, putting yourself at risk (all in one!). So naturally players stopped coming up with diversify ways to fight – it was just attack, attack, attack!
TrueManiek wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
iserith wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
I would almost do what iserith said, but not quite... he is attempting a shove + damage (depending on how he is planning to bodyslam... is he going to maintain the grapple & prone himself or let go?)
whatever you are body slamming gets an attack of opportunity with advantage (assuming they haven't already used their reaction), since you are practically throwing yourself on their sword and ignoring any attempt to defend yourself. Assuiming the damage from that doesn't kill you, you make your shove roll as normal and make an unarmed attack as a bonus action
iserith wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
Yeah, after perusing, some of your are prioritizing Process over Intent.
Your job as a DM isn't to run program; it's to adjudicate a player's action and intent. That is, to fairly and faithfully arrive at an outcome, not rewrite their action so it fits the rules.
Essentially, if I want to body slam someone with my action, your job is to make it fit one action, not parse it into sub-actions not demand 42 rolls to accomplish 1 thing.
In essence, if an 8 year player old said "I want to body slam that guy like the Rock!" your job is to make a freaking metal body slam, not make an 8 year old consult probability tables. Likewise, with your adult players, who are here to engage their inner 8 year old pro wrestler.
Action: attack converted to grapple (opposing checks)
Move: jump up using twice the required movement.
Interact with Object (free): release grapple.
- target falls, takes damage, and must make check to see if falls prone.
- "Ultimate Warrior" lands, makes check to see if he/she falls prone, and uses any Extra Attack or bonus action attacks he/she may have available.
Sounds fun to me, just beware of interior environments with low ceilings.
What's more fun to think about is slamming someone into a ceiling. I'd argue using double the fall distance to calculate damage; i.e. 1d6 per 10'-falling translates to 1d6 per 20'-smashed-into-ceiling damage.
iserith wrote:
bawylie wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
@iserith I think disadvantage could possibly be a even trade off for the bonus damage. And I wouldn't make the damage d6, it'd probably make it d6 + str, since you are propelling the opponent to the ground and not just droping.
I am not by any means an expert, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. Fall of five feet equals 1d6 damage from what people here are saying(I do not know myself). Grapple costs an action, so "I want to grab him" sounds to me like it is a grapple move. Followed by "and bodyslam him" means a bodyslam. Pick the kind.
Is the PC picking the enemy up over his head, followed by "throwing" him down? If so, calculate challenge by the PC shoulder height+reach, and consider how hard the PC is throwing. My guess in this case is a dc of moderate difficulty, which leads to the enemy taking half damage when they hit the ground if the player fails the roll(they are still falling, even without being thrown). If grapple is a contested athletics check that is fine, but the slam should not be. The pc already won the contest, they should be allowed to do whatever they want with it.
Is the PC jumping and slamming him down? Calculate pc jump height while burdened. Best to assume the player is holding the enemy above their head before they jump. Calculate the rest as above.
Is there a cliff nearby? Ask the player where they are slamming the enemy. If you feel it is fair you can specifically mention the cliff, or not. That would depend on how much trouble they had so far. Do they need hand holding, or not?
Keep in mind, all of this is from a novice in the middle of the night. It may be inaccurate, as I do not have a rulebook with me right now.
Might releasing the grapple as a result of the slam be enough of a trade off? RAW, a grappled and prone target (with two special attack actions) is unable to stand without breaking the grapple, having 0 move speed; trading out that so that they are relatively free to act on their next turn might be enough of a trade off for damage. Perhaps make it a flat amount equal to the Strength modifier, and then it's also not going to double on a crit.
CraggleRock wrote: