3.5 had some issues, though not overly complicated...
Saga really nerfed it to requiring feats to do anything with it.
Now 4e has little point to it. You have to have a free hand to attempt, and if you succeed all you do is immobilize them. You don't stop or reduce the foes effectiveness in combat besides movement. Hell they don't lose the ability to use 2hd weapons against you or anyone else.
I was working on some alterations to Saga some time ago but haven't had much times these last few months to really think about it. Has anyone come up with some alternatives to the existing format?
I'll post some of mine in the following few days.
3.5 had some issues, though not overly complicated...
. . . REALLY?!
What 3.5 grapple rules were you looking at?
Because the ones in my PHB are both broken and overly complicated...
You don't stop or reduce the foes effectiveness in combat besides movement.
That IS reducing their effectiveness in combat.
Movement is a very big tactical thing in 4E.
Immobilization is a very bad thing.
Hell they don't lose the ability to use 2hd weapons against you or anyone else.
They most certainly do.
How the heck can they attack anybody else if they can even get to them?
Has anyone come up with some alternatives to the existing format?
I think the reason nobody has is because nobody sees the problem with the existing grapple rules...
I'm not even sure I understand yours...
Grapple
Grapple Checks
Repeatedly in a grapple, you need to make opposed grapple checks against an opponent. A grapple check is like a melee attack roll. Your attack bonus on a grapple check is:
Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + special size modifier
Special Size Modifier
The special size modifier for a grapple check is as follows: Colossal +16, Gargantuan +12, Huge +8, Large +4, Medium +0, Small -4, Tiny -8, Diminutive -12, Fine -16.
Starting a Grapple
To start a grapple, you need to grab and hold your target. Starting a grapple requires a successful melee attack roll. If you get multiple attacks, you can attempt to start a grapple multiple times (at successively lower base attack bonuses).
Step 1
Attack of Opportunity. You provoke an attack of opportunity from the target you are trying to grapple. If the attack of opportunity deals damage, the grapple attempt fails. (Certain monsters do not provoke attacks of opportunity when they attempt to grapple, nor do characters with the Improved Grapple feat.) If the attack of opportunity misses or fails to deal damage, proceed to Step 2.
Step 2
Grab. You make a melee touch attack to grab the target. If you fail to hit the target, the grapple attempt fails. If you succeed, proceed to Step 3.
Step 3
Hold. Make an opposed grapple check as a free action.
If you succeed, you and your target are now grappling.
If you lose, you fail to start the grapple. You automatically lose an attempt to hold if the target is two or more size categories larger than you are.
In case of a tie, roll again to break the tie.
Grappling Consequences
While you’re grappling, your ability to attack others and defend yourself is limited.
No Attacks of Opportunity
You can’t make any attacks of opportunity while grappling
No Movement
You can’t move normally while grappling. You may, however, make an opposed grapple check to move while grappling.
Combat Advantage
You grant Combat Advantage, a +2 bonus to any attacks made against you, to attackers while grappling
If You’re Grappling
When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses.
Attack Your Opponent
You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You can’t attack with two weapons while grappling, even if both are light weapons.
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 damage as normal for your unarmed strike.
Escape from Grapple
You can escape a grapple by winning an opposed grapple check in place of making an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check if you so desire, but this requires a standard action.
Move
You can move half your speed (bringing all others engaged in the grapple with you) by winning an opposed grapple check. This requires a standard action, and you must beat all the other individual check results to move the grapple.
Note: You get a +4 bonus on your grapple check to move an opponent you‘ve locked down, but only if no one else is involved in the grapple.
Lock Down Your Opponent
You can hold your opponent immobile by winning an opposed grapple check (made in place of an attack). Once you have an opponent locked down, you have a few options available to you (see below).
If You Locked down an Opponent
You can attempt to damage your opponent with an opposed grapple check, you can attempt to use your opponent’s weapon against him, or you can attempt to move the grapple (all described above). At your option, you can prevent an opponent you’ve locked down from speaking. You may also opt to become prone in which case your opponent becomes prone as well.
Any disarm attempts you make against a locked down opponent receive a +4 bonus.
If You’re Locked Down by an Opponent
When an opponent has locked you down, you are held immobile. While you’re locked down, you take a -4 penalty to your AC. At your opponent’s option, you may also be unable to speak. On your turn, you can try to escape the lockdown by making an opposed grapple check in place of an attack. You can make an Escape Artist check in place of your grapple check to escape the lockdown if you want, but this requires a standard action.
Helping a Grappled Character
You may assist an ally in a grapple by becoming adjacent to them and making a grapple check. If you make a DC 10 check you grant a +2 bonus to your allies grapple check. For every additional 10 by which you beat the check you grant an additional +2 (Ex. A 30 would grant a +6)
. . . REALLY?!
What 3.5 grapple rules were you looking at?
Because the ones in my PHB are both broken and overly complicated...
Conan 2ed streamlined them a touch. Seriously 3.5 at least modelled grappling more effectively.
That IS reducing their effectiveness in combat.
Movement is a very big tactical thing in 4E.
Immobilization is a very bad thing.
You do realize that the initiator is effectively immobilized as well.
. They most certainly do.
How the heck can they attack anybody else if they can even get to them?
So you think it makes any sense that if you are grappling me (not holding my shirt thank you) that I will not be impaired in the slightest when I attempt to cut you in half with my greatsword.
Being grappled is very distracting, impaires movement, can be extremely painful and exhausts the crap out of you. You should be able to restrain or pin your opponent, deal damage, knock them down, etc.
Watch UFC, and how many people are taken out while grappling or in a submission hold. It may not be glamorous, but it is one of the best methods of taking down heavily armoured opponents.
. I think the reason nobody has is because nobody sees the problem with the existing grapple rules...
I'm not even sure I understand yours...
Wow, why bother commenting if you have nothing constructive to add. To say that nobody has a problem with them is a bit off the mark, there are plenty of problems with the lack of Unarmed combat features, which indirectly does grappling as it's an unarmed attack.
GRAB: STANDARD ACTION
GRAPPLE ATTACK: STANDARD ACTION
Initiating a Grapple:
Grappling: You maintain a grapple as long as you continue to make a grapple attack (successful or not) or your opponent successfully escapes or overpowers you. If you choose not to maintain the grapple (not make a grapple attack) the grapple will revert to a grab for a minor action or end.
Grapple attacks:
- Pin: Strength vs. Fortitude attack that renders opponent helpless until the start of your next turn.
- Crush: Strength vs. Fortitude attack that deals unarmed 1(w) + Str Mod damage. Unarmed 2(w) + Str Mod at 21st level.
- Attack: Basic Melee Attack made at a -2.
- Takedown: Strength vs. Reflex to knock opponent prone and inflict Str Mod. damage. You may release the opponent or you are prone as well.
ESCAPE/OVERPOWER:
Escape: See PHB p.288
Overpower: When held in a grab or grapple you may attempt to overpower your opponent and put them in a grapple.
Make a Strength vs. Fortitude attack as a Standard Action with all modifiers to break out and put your opponent into a grapple, as if initiating a grapple.
It penalizes the grabbed target a bit more and makes more sense in my head.
Now it's actually worth it, sometimes, for the monster to grab.
Here is the start of what I am working on.
GRAB: STANDARD ACTION
I believe you are looking for the word adjacent here.
So the target cannot move, takes a -2 on all attacks that do not include you, and takes an additional -2 on all attacks that are not unarmed/off-hand. I see what you want to do here, but I think one or the other would be sufficient. Also, the mark from grab can be overwritten by other mark effects, which seems against your intent, so I would probably choose to keep the -2 unless making off-hand/unarmed attacks.
GRAPPLE ATTACK: STANDARD ACTION
Initiating a Grapple:
Again, your mark can be overwritten. As a Str based attack, shouldn't you be able to add your Str modifier to the damage? ***Upon further reading, I suggest changing the Hit section completely. Take the damage out and insert your "Grapple Attacks" section below. I'm guessing that your intent is that a grappler can use their standard action to attempt any of those attack types.
Miss: does this mean that I do not have to expend my minor action to maintain the grab but on a hit I would still have to expend the minor action to maintain the grab?
Who is "you". The grappler? The creature being grappled? Both?
Grappling: You maintain a grapple as long as you continue to make grapple attack (successful or not) or your opponent successfully escapes or overpowers you.
This seems redundant since you need to maintain your grab in order to perform a grapple maneuver. Or are you saying that in order for a creature to escape they must break both the grapple and the grab, because that seems a bit much.
Grapple attacks:
- Pin: Strength vs. Fortitude attack that renders opponent helpless until the start of your next turn.
- Crush: Strength vs. Fortitude attack that deals unarmed 1(w) + Str Mod damage. Unarmed 2(w) + Str Mod at 21st level.
- Attack: Basic Melee Attack made at a -2.
- Takedown: Strength vs. Dex to knock opponent prone and inflict Str Mod. damage. You may release the opponent or you are prone as well.
Takedown: Str vs. Ref maybe? Change the wording a little: Hit: Str Mod damage and you and your target are prone. If you choose to end your grab only your target is prone.
ESCAPE/OVERPOWER:
Escape: See PHB p.288
Overpower: Make a Strength vs. Fortitude attack as a Standard Action with all modifiers to break out and put your opponent into a grapple, as if initiating a grapple.
The problem I see here is that overpower allows you to make a grapple without first making a grab, nor does it grant a grab which means you would only get the one grapple attack and then its over.
I highly recommend cleaning up your idea. I would suggest that you make grab the baseline and include all penalties in the grab section only. Reserve grapple for attacks only. Leave out all wording about maintaining grapple and instead just leave the wording for maintaining grab, since grab is what is required for a grapple attack.
So you think it makes any sense that if you are grappling me (not holding my shirt thank you) that I will not be impaired in the slightest when I attempt to cut you in half with my greatsword.
Being grappled is very distracting, impaires movement, can be extremely painful and exhausts the crap out of you. You should be able to restrain or pin your opponent, deal damage, knock them down, etc.
Watch UFC, and how many people are taken out while grappling or in a submission hold. It may not be glamorous, but it is one of the best methods of taking down heavily armoured opponents.
I get what you want to do. And I think future powers/classes might allow for this sort of stuff (actually they probably do allow for this stuff now, but would require some reflavoring).
I also watch UFC, but I have to question the validity of asserting that two unarmed combatants grappling would be the same as if one guy was in 50lbs of armor wrestling with another guy in 20lbs of armor and both armed with swords. Trying to apply real world fighting to DnD is typically not a good idea.
Anyway, my suggestions are in the post above. I think you are trying for too much by making a grappling system like this and I worry that this will be more helpful for monsters than players.
I also watch UFC, but I have to question the validity of asserting that two unarmed combatants grappling would be the same as if one guy was in 50lbs of armor wrestling with another guy in 20lbs of armor and both armed with swords. Trying to apply real world fighting to DnD is typically not a good idea.
Why is this a bad idea?
I like to play in games that are fantasy with real world feel to things like physics and common sense. If we take our queue from history we can find all kinds of situations where metal armored folks were at a disadvantage to lesser armored folks and this frequently had to do with mobility, speed, fatigue and grappling issues.
Personally I think the reason that grappling is not discussed in detail is because, like many other elements in the basic three books, grappling and unarmed combat were left to be developed in later supplements.
You should be able to Grab anything, even if it is much larger. The penalties should just get significantly larger each time.
Not all grappling is executed by size and sheer power, there are some pretty prolific wiry folks out there that can wrap you up, throw a joint lock on you and 'pin' you even though they are quite a bit smaller, lighter, and weaker. This is however, ususally a reflection of training and skill.
Mechanically I am not sure how to incorporate it, but those are my thoughts.
Good work, keep it up. :D
Conan 2ed streamlined them a touch.
I don't know what that is. I thought we were talking about 3.5 D&D.
You do realize that the initiator is effectively immobilized as well.
I don't see this as being a problem? I mean, what else would you expect? That's basically what grappling is even in 3.5. You're taking yourself out of the rest of the battle to take an opponent out of it too.
So you think it makes any sense that if you are grappling me (not holding my shirt thank you) that I will not be impaired in the slightest when I attempt to cut you in half with my greatsword.
Sure you'll be impaired, but if I'm grappling you, I'm also impaired in avoiding being cut in half by your greatsword. Give two people the same penalty, and the net effect is the same as though there hadn't been any penalties.
Being grappled is very distracting, impaires movement, can be extremely painful and exhausts the crap out of you.
I agree, but 4E doesn't mechanically model fatigue or exhaustion in any case that I can remember, nor does it mechanically model pain that isn't HP damage.
You should be able to restrain or pin your opponent, deal damage, knock them down, etc.
You can. You can still attack people while you're grabbing them, you know, and you can even use powers that knock them down, etc...
Watch UFC, and how many people are taken out while grappling or in a submission hold. It may not be glamorous, but it is one of the best methods of taking down heavily armoured opponents.
Okay, judging from that, your problem doesn't so much seem to be with the grab rules as it is with the lack of support for unarmed attack rules.
Wow, why bother commenting if you have nothing constructive to add.
You really post things with the expectation that everybody is going to agree with you? I commented because I was trying to better understand your concern, because I didn't understand it. Now, I realize that you're problem isn't so much with the grab rules themselves as it is with the lack of support for combat via unarmed attacks in general. Am I correct? Because if so, I can definitely understand that concern, and I agree.
I don't know what that is. I thought we were talking about 3.5 D&D.
Conan uses 3.5 rules, they eliminated Touch attacks and the like.
I don't see this as being a problem? I mean, what else would you expect? That's basically what grappling is even in 3.5. You're taking yourself out of the rest of the battle to take an opponent out of it too.
That's not the issue. The grabber must use a free hand, net effect that he either can't use a weapon, shield, or the like to immobilize while the opponent may still use all it's equipment.
Sure you'll be impaired, but if I'm grappling you, I'm also impaired in avoiding being cut in half by your greatsword. Give two people the same penalty, and the net effect is the same as though there hadn't been any penalties.
Yes, and no. See above.
I agree, but 4E doesn't mechanically model fatigue or exhaustion in any case that I can remember, nor does it mechanically model pain that isn't HP damage.
To a large extent Hp represents fatigue, though pain isn't modelled much in the system. I have no problem with unarmed damage being used to represent fatigue.
You can. You can still attack people while you're grabbing them, you know, and you can even use powers that knock them down, etc...
I am aware of that, they can be used in my house rules as well. I still need to refine them abit, it's a work in progress.
Okay, judging from that, your problem doesn't so much seem to be with the grab rules as it is with the lack of support for unarmed attack rules.
Definately, Grab is fine, it's still in my house rules, I just want more depth in general.
You really post things with the expectation that everybody is going to agree with you? I commented because I was trying to better understand your concern, because I didn't understand it. Now, I realize that you're problem isn't so much with the grab rules themselves as it is with the lack of support for combat via unarmed attacks in general. Am I correct? Because if so, I can definitely understand that concern, and I agree.
I don't expect everyone to agree. I was looking for similar thoughts and solutions to a perceived issue. Now that I posted my work in progress, I expect holes to pointed out and thoughts on how they work or don't work. I don't want to hear how great/bad 4e vs 3.x are, it's not relavent as this is a houserule forum.
Cheers.
Personally I think the reason that grappling is not discussed in detail is because, like many other elements in the basic three books, grappling and unarmed combat were left to be developed in later supplements.
Hope so, until then house rule away!
You should be able to Grab anything, even if it is much larger. The penalties should just get significantly larger each time.
While I don't disagree with you, I don't want to break the mold so to speak, which is why I kept Grab with a slight tweak.
Not all grappling is executed by size and sheer power, there are some pretty prolific wiry folks out there that can wrap you up, throw a joint lock on you and 'pin' you even though they are quite a bit smaller, lighter, and weaker. This is however, ususally a reflection of training and skill.
Most agreed on this. I am still refining my rules before I add my feats and powers to the equation. I see some class options being made available to incorporate such a thing.
Mechanically I am not sure how to incorporate it, but those are my thoughts.
Feats, Class options, Paragon Paths, and maybe a special class (monk). To cover a few areas.
Good work, keep it up. :D
Thanks!:D
I believe you are looking for the word adjacent here.
Actually, threatning reach was what I was looking for. Strangely it's not really important as I can't find a single creature with threatning reach.
So the target cannot move, takes a -2 on all attacks that do not include you, and takes an additional -2 on all attacks that are not unarmed/off-hand. I see what you want to do here, but I think one or the other would be sufficient. Also, the mark from grab can be overwritten by other mark effects, which seems against your intent, so I would probably choose to keep the -2 unless making off-hand/unarmed attacks.
Actually, the mark from grab is supposed to overide the standard rules. It's extremely difficult to ignore a guy/gal who has their hands all over you.
I do get your point though, it's getting away from simple. I'll refine it soon.
Technically, since unarmed strike is an improvised one handed weapon without the offhand quality, you are stating that I cannot make an unarmed attack here.
True, but you wield a fist. It simply states that to grapple you can't hold anything bigger than a small blade so no long swords and battle axes, but i'll clean the language a bit.
Again, your mark can be overwritten. As a Str based attack, shouldn't you be able to add your Str modifier to the damage? ***Upon further reading, I suggest changing the Hit section completely. Take the damage out and insert your "Grapple Attacks" section below. I'm guessing that your intent is that a grappler can use their standard action to attempt any of those attack types.
No, it's essentially puting them into a hold, they don't get the options until they have successfully initiated a grapple. So, with out feats it'll take 3 rounds to render an opponent pinned.
Miss: does this mean that I do not have to expend my minor action to maintain the grab but on a hit I would still have to expend the minor action to maintain the grab?
No, Grappling is considered an active state of grab and grab considered a passive state.
Who is "you". The grappler? The creature being grappled? Both?
The grappler, the grappled is already restrained and gives combat advantage.
This seems redundant since you need to maintain your grab in order to perform a grapple maneuver. Or are you saying that in order for a creature to escape they must break both the grapple and the grab, because that seems a bit much.
One roll to escape as before, same with overpower. The exception is Pinned, I left it out. It will be added on my next update.
Takedown: Str vs. Ref maybe? Change the wording a little: Hit: Str Mod damage and you and your target are prone. If you choose to end your grab only your target is prone.
Sounds good.
The problem I see here is that overpower allows you to make a grapple without first making a grab, nor does it grant a grab which means you would only get the one grapple attack and then its over.
Overpower is like an escape, you must be grabbed/grappled to use. Then with one roll, you break the hold on you, and initiate a grapple with them.
I highly recommend cleaning up your idea. I would suggest that you make grab the baseline and include all penalties in the grab section only. Reserve grapple for attacks only. Leave out all wording about maintaining grapple and instead just leave the wording for maintaining grab, since grab is what is required for a grapple attack.
I will put it in my update, but they are basically on is active, and the other passive. Currently Grapple state (restraining) is only maintained while you are making grapple attacks (success or failure), and if they don't keep up the grapple it breaks down to a grab and would then need to spend the minor to keep a hold on the creature.
So as long as you are grappling (spending the action) you keep the creature in grappled state. If you don't want to spend the standard action to grapple you must then spend a minor to keep a grab on it or let go all together.
Thanks for the input.
Cheers.
Most agreed on this. I am still refining my rules before I add my feats and powers to the equation. I see some class options being made available to incorporate such a thing.
Another thought....
Use of a weapon to assist in the various actions, or adding modifiers if they are in the off hand at the time of a takedown, crush or pin.
I will use the example of the billy club; once held a trip action or take down would be greatly assisted by the off hand use of a club, in the same way it could be used to facilitate a pin, or a crush through a choke action.
If the crush does not fully represent the suffocation that could occur through a choke, then a choke action could be added to the grapple.
If a choke action is added, a WILL component could be optioned. Resisting a choke is part fortitude but it is also part willpower as being able to remain focused and calm is a key component of how well you function in that situation.
Some food for thought, but getting kind of complex.
Hope it helps. :D
Grappler: Trained in the art of grappling, may add weapon bonus to grapple attack rolls if weapon is allowed in grappling.
or
Close Quarter Combatant: Off-hand weapon bonus applies in grapples...
Not sure until I write up my base feats.
I'm big on grapples, and so are my players. So I'm thinking they should be there. On the other hand, I did think it got a little too complicated in 3.5e. I did a lot of grappling in a lot of games and I still had to look up some rule or another now and then.
So, going with the ethics (as I perceive them) of 4e, I think that there should be fewer dice rolls. Rather than opposing checks, I like the 4e ethic of a single die roll made by the attacker against a passive resistance.
Grappling, therefore, is something you do once you've already grabbed someone (or someone who has grabbed you). Standard action (the "Improved Grapple" feat would make it a minor action -- grabbing people with Improved Grapple might not be wise).
If you succeed in your grapple attack, which is Strength vs. Fortitude, you do unarmed damage, and you and your target now both have the "grappled" condition, which means you have all the hassles of being grabbed, plus you have one fewer hand free, the effect of which is mostly that neither you nor your target can do anything that requires the use of one more than one hand (swinging a greatsword, clapping, that sort of thing).
I'm basically thinking of a grapple as another thing you can do to someone you've grabbed, sort of like moving them. Which, incidentally, I think you should still be able to do to someone you've grappled (or someone who's grappled you).
What I've written is close to what I am going to be using in Saga as well, I find it too feat driven in that rule set.
I feel that the RAW is just missing so much that I have to add to it. Ironically what made Grappling so useful in 3.x isn't so detrimental in 4e, as it would almost render a spellcaster unable to do much. With the power format, this isn't a problem as it doesn't stop them, just hinders them, which is good for a high fantasy game. It stays fun, while having more options.
Cheers.
Brawler
Prerequisite: Str 13
Benefit: Unarmed attacks count as a Mace in all intents and purposes and has the off-hand quality. +2 prof. bonus, 1d4 damage.
Wrestler
Prerequisite: Con 13, Trained in Athletics
Benefit: Add Con bonus to all grappling damage.
Fast Hands
Prerequisite: Rogue, Trained in Athletics
Benefit: Grapple Attack are Dex attacks instead of Strength attacks.
Paragon Tier
Ground Pounder
Prerequisite: Trained in Athletics
Benefit: +1 to Melee Attack, Damage, AC, and Grappling while Prone.
Glad to see you are back and still working on this.
Seems good, but what about having a prerequisite of Trained in Athletics?
At some points it seems to me there should be a Feat that allows a free unarmed attack on someone that is held in a grapple.
All I have for now, post more and I will comment more. Also I will be bouncing these ideas off my DM, and get some feedback for you.
Later. :D
I appreciate the feedback. Should have more soon.
That is not to say that brawling does not require training, or athletic talent, but it seems like an ability that might call for a little more raw talent as opposed to technical and skilled training (i.e. chokes, holds, joint manipulation, reverses, releases).
Just some more thoughts....
I should have a bit more after the weekend. I have some ideas that need to be fleshed out yet.
Yep, Brawling will only have a Str requirement. Athletics for Wrestling is a good suggestion, it's tough decision as it relies on both heavily. Hmm...
I should have a bit more after the weekend. I have some ideas that need to be fleshed out yet.
Its a tough call, and I don't think anyone would flip out on you either way, it just seems to me that it might lean a little to the Athletics side. STR is important but there are some pretty good and effective wiry, little wrestlers. STR would certainly factor into the equation when it comes to ones effetiveness, but when you talk about a prerequisite, does someone really need to be brawny to study and be a wrestler? I don't think so, but they do have to have some level of competence in athletics.
Can't wait to see what more you come up with... :D
Its a tough call, and I don't think anyone would flip out on you either way, it just seems to me that it might lean a little to the Athletics side. STR is important but there are some pretty good and effective wiry, little wrestlers. STR would certainly factor into the equation when it comes to ones effetiveness, but when you talk about a prerequisite, does someone really need to be brawny to study and be a wrestler? I don't think so, but they do have to have some level of competence in athletics.
Can't wait to see what more you come up with... :D
That's why I used Con as the attribute requirement for Grappler, or are you suggesting leave Grappler as is and have brawler Just Trained in Athletics for a requirement. Show what you have in mind for requirements.
Added a new feat to the Grapple rule set.
That's why I used Con as the attribute requirement for Grappler, or are you suggesting leave Grappler as is and have brawler Just Trained in Athletics for a requirement. Show what you have in mind for requirements.
Added a new feat to the Grapple rule set.
Sorry, my mistake I read it wrong when I quickly looked back at what you had listed. I thought the CON 15 was STR 15, and was basing my discussion on that misconception. I think what you have here is good, only maybe Athletics instead of CON, but again, I think it is kind of a wash.
Which mechanism do you think would make the FEAT more available to more people. CON 15 or Athletics? Probably Athletics?
Do you think that these two prereqs together make the Feat more inaccessible than a simple CON 15?
I bring it up to provoke thought, as I sit here and don't think about it I don't think it would. But I would hate to see an 'entry' level Feat make access too restricted.
I am glad you see the value in homebrew rules and are out there working on something like this. ;)
I will be sure to share this with my DM.
What are your thoughts on the Paragon feat?
Off topic a bit. Thank you for your input, it has helped round things out, and does inspire some outside the box thinking. Your ability to critique has been very helpful, and most welcome.
Thanks. :D
As for the Paragon Tier. Need to change the preqs I think to match the flavor of the changes made to the other. I think the bonuses appear good and balanced.
What about allowing for a five foot movement while grappling and prone to reflect the ability of someone on the ground to control a roll of the two in a manner to continue to gain advantage? Or might this be rolled into another feat, maybe something like Ground Technician?
As for the Paragon Tier. Need to change the preqs I think to match the flavor of the changes made to the other. I think the bonuses appear good and balanced.
I don't really want to favor an attribute on it because anyone of them are important in ground combat, whether through will, endurance and the like, but being Athletic is important. The feat Back to the Wall is where I started with it and it has no requirements.
What about allowing for a five foot movement while grappling and prone to reflect the ability of someone on the ground to control a roll of the two in a manner to continue to gain advantage? Or might this be rolled into another feat, maybe something like Ground Technician?
Hmm... Interesting, most interesting.
That sounds like some stuff in Conan D20, which is the best 3.5 based ruleset I've played. I might have to port in some of that brutal combat goodness somehow.
Cheers.
Conan d20 uses 3.x rules that are heavily modified and brutal. The one thing that I really liked about it that I ported into all my 3e based games were the combat maneuvers, which were actions that you could do in combat if you met the prerequisites. They were like mini-feats that anyone with the right skills could do. I really like them, but I don't think they'd fit 4e very well.
If there were to be a feat associated with Bullrush, I think having the feat itself should give some sort of defense bonus to the character when they are having the tactic used against them.
This would also be a place where certain weapons could assist in the action or give specific pluses to their defense against this action.
Not sure how I want to approach Bullrush yet. It gives me something to think on.
Fast Hands
Prerequisite: Rogue, Trained in Athletics
Benefit: Grapple Attack are Dex attacks instead of Strength attacks.
I think it looks good, seems balanced. I wouldn't change a thing.