Dodge and Grapple - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 tendentious Sep 14, 2014 20:59:51	Dodge and Grapple are pretty straight forward: - If you Dodge then attacks against you have disadvantage; you can't dodge if your speed is 0. - Grapple reduces your speed to 0, which makes it an obvious tactic against a dodging opponent. However, Grappling - while taking up one of your attacks - is not itself an attack; it's a contested Strength (Athletics) vs Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check. RAW it seems that it is no more difficult to Grapple a Dodging opponent than to Grapple a non-Dodging opponent. That's not how I played it when it came up in play. I ruled that the 3 hobgoblins were at Disadvantage to Grapple the Dodging fighter. But what do other people think? In a simple action for action trade-off, Dodge is a single action, so it seems fair that opponents need to spend at least one action to neutralise its benefits. And because there's an ability check involved, the attempt may fail anyway. But some opponents can multiattack, and can presumably use one of their attacks to grapple and, if successful, use the others to attack normally Then there are rogues that can dodge every round (with their bonus action) and still sneak attack targets adjacent to enemies - actually, I think this last instance sort of answers my question. It seems a bit good if rogues can enjoy perpetual Dodge if grappling them is with Disadvantage. Any thoughts?
#2 -ktkenshinx- Sep 14, 2014 23:36:59	The RAW supports this, although it takes a few lines of text to show it. Let's start with the basics. Grapple: "...you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple" (PHB 195) Normally, an attack is defined by the attack roll, and grapple is a skill check ("If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you'r making an attack roll, you're making an attack" PHB 194). That looks like reason to refute your argument. If that "simple" rule applied here, then grappling would definitely not be an attack, because you aren't actually making an attack roll. You are making a skill check. But the grapple rules themselves define grappling as a "special melee attack", which suggests that the specific rule of the grapple overrides the general rule of the attack roll. By this logic, a grapple is actually a special kind of attack roll itself, even if it is really using a skill check. That's a classic application of specific overriding general, and one I would be happy to stand behind. It has the added bonus of making perfect sense from an RAI standpoint. The only argument against this is that the definition of "attack roll" talks about how you add a D20, add/subtract modifiers, and compare to AC. Grapple doesn't follow that model because you are making a skill check and comparing it to an opposed skill check as part of a contest. I would argue that this is the general rule, with grapple being the specific rule tha overrides it (hence, "special melee attack").
#3 Undrhil Sep 15, 2014 1:04:40	I second that interpretation, -krkenshinx-. It makes sense from a RAI standpoint and from a thematic standpoint. Someone Dodging is not going to be any easier to grapple than they are to be attacked. Now, the question then becomes, if someone Grapples a Dodging opponent, does that opponent then stop Dodging, since their Speed is now 0? Or they continue gaining the benefits of Dodge until their turn as normal and are just unable to Dodge again until they get out of the grapple?
#4 2Chlorobutanal Sep 15, 2014 1:08:20	Dodge only affects attack rolls and grapple does not use an attack roll but rather an ability check. Therefore, as written, Dodge does not interfere with Grapple at all. This makes sense to me, as a Grapple check does not use AC or attack bonus at all, which would be the things used to model a "hit." I think this would be a very useful tactic to deal with continually dodging creatures, as grappling them would "turn off" their Dodge until broken. There are many fictional examples of a strong fighter putting a quicker opponent in a hold in order to level the playing field. Grappling is already a sort of fringe maneuver as it doesn't do any damage. It has some applications, though, and I would say that counteracting a Dodge is a good use of it. Note that Multiattack does not generally allow a grapple to be used in place of one of the listed attacks (unless the Multiattack feature explicitly says so). The Grapple attack requires an Attack action, and Multiattack is not the Attack action. Also note that many creatures grapple as a side effect of hitting with a melee attack, and in this case, Dodging would provide disadvantage against the initial attack and thus the subsequent grapple.
#5 lawrencehoy Sep 15, 2014 2:19:08	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
(Reply to #5) 2Chlorobutanal	lawrencehoy wrote:
#7 Timborama Sep 15, 2014 6:58:26	I agree that the Grapple action is a special attack. However! It is a special attack that does not use an attack roll. Thus, no disadvantage to grab (or shove!) dodging opponents. I think this is an interesting key balance choice, since the situation has come up before in my campaigns (albeit not in 5th). Someone with a great AC hunkering down. Oh, what's that, your Reflex/touch AC is garbage? It grabs you...
#8 Jay_Ibero_911 Sep 15, 2014 7:19:00	When you take the Dodge action, you focus entirely on avoiding attacks. Until the start o f your next turn, any attack roll made against you has disadvantage if you can see the attacker, and you make Dexterity saving throws with advantage. You lose this benefit if you are incapacitated (as explained in appendix A) or if your speed drops to 0.
#9 -ktkenshinx- Sep 15, 2014 7:24:26	I agree that Dodge only functions for attack rolls. The question is just, is grapple a skill check by virtue of being an athletics contest? Or is grapple a special type of attack roll (specific overriding general) that just works using a different method than the normal attack roll? Knowing when to apply the specific/general rule is one of the toughest parts of rules lawyering, so it's fair that we have disagreements about it. The other challenge is that specific/general might actually work against the OPs interpretation! It might be the case that the specific rules of the grapple (it's a special attack that uses ability checks, not an attack roll) are actually the specific rules that override the attack roll formula! In that case, the rules state that grapple is not an attack roll at all, but rather just a skill check. That would also be a way to interpret the specific/general tension in this instance. Thinking through that last point, I would actually rule as a DM that this does NOT work. Shoving and grappling might be designed as the natural counters to dodge. The mechanics of a shove/grapple in real life are suitably different from an attack that dodging one does not mean dodging the other. To me, the key is that the specific/general issue can go both ways, and in this case it makes more sense for it to go against the OPs interpretation.
#10 KarlB Sep 15, 2014 8:21:34	I'd say Dodging does not grant disadvantage on a Grappling check as it's a skill check, not an attack role. You also cannot Dodge while grappled as grappled targets have speed 0, and you cannot Dodge while your speed is 0. In my mind, grappling is the logical counter to dodgy types. Please note that Grappling requires a high Strength (Athletics) and it can be countered by either Athletics or Acrobatics. So while a Barbarian could easily grapple, a Rogue cannot. Basically, it's a bone thrown for Strength focused characters who complained they are too weak compared to Dex types.
#11 tendentious Sep 15, 2014 9:18:21	No-one has pointed out that I was wrong about Rogues being able to Dodge as a bonus action. My bad! As I said, it seemed pretty clear to me that, RAW, the grapple check was not affected by Dodge, but I decided that the grapple check was with disadvantage anyway - if you're harder to hit, then it seems reasonable that you're harder to grab as well. But it may be that it was always intended that Grappling was the "antidote" for Dodging, and that imposing disadvantage on the Grapple check interferes with the action trade-off between attacker and defender. The character Dodging has used an action and probably foregone inflicting any damage this round. If the attacker wishes to negate the effect they must also spend an action, also foregoing any damage for the round, and they may still not succeed in negating the Dodge. If you assume the attacker and defender have the same modifier, then there is a 50% chance of the grapple succeeding; a single Dodge is worth 2 Grapples. If the grapple was with disadvantage - lowering the chance of success to 25% - then a Dodge is now worth 4 Grapples. So I suppose the question becomes: how many of the opponents actions should a single Dodge consume just to return to the status quo? At 25% success, 4 attackers still have only an ~68% chance of shutting down a Dodge. At 50%, 4 attackers have an ~94% chance. I'm not entirely sure what my point is here, but to try to break it down: - you can't Defense your way to victory in combat, you can only Offense your way to victory. - therefore for defensive options to be viable they have to be "better" than offensive ones; if they were equal, or if they were "worse", there would be no reason to use them. - Dodge is "better" than Grapple in that it trades a single action in defense for at least one action in offense. - So how much "better" should it be? With disadvantage on the grapple it's 4 times better. Without disadvantage it's 2 times better.
#12 Plaguescarred1 Sep 15, 2014 9:52:15	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
#13 Jay_Ibero_911 Sep 15, 2014 10:31:09	An interesting side-effect of grapple not being an attack roll is that it also ignores blind/invis/hidden. So as long as you can identify what square a target is in, you can grapple them without penalty. Good for keeping sneaky types in one place once you know where they are.
#14 Bennedict Sep 15, 2014 10:36:05	I usually apply real world common sense. If I am "dodging", it means I am attempting to avoid contact with an enemy. So, I would allow dodge to work vs grapple, attack roll or not. I just think the "special" part of the action is the attack roll is replaced by a skill check. But, if someone is attempting to grapple me, there is no question they are attempting to attack me. I could care less what RAW says if it doesn't make sense. I would instead assume RAI.
#15 Plaguescarred1 Sep 15, 2014 12:59:54	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#16 Timborama Sep 15, 2014 13:07:01	No penalty for blind grappling seems okay. For those thinking of it as goofy, it's just the big bugbear being blind and getting angry, so he makes himself super large and runs towards where he thinks you are. When he feels something, he throws his arms around it ^_^ Still has to guess what square though!
#17 lawrencehoy Sep 15, 2014 20:23:37	2Chlorobutanal wrote:
(Reply to #17) 2Chlorobutanal	The difference is that Multiattack is defined as an action while Extra Attack is a modification to "the Attack" action. Many special abilities such as grapple say that you must use the Attack action, so they're technically not allowed outside of an Attack action by the rules- including bonus action attacks, opportunity attacks, or Multiattack. It's not that much of a stretch to rule that "Multiattack" inherits all special action allowances that "Attack" does, but it's not strictly in the rules.
#19 Timborama Sep 16, 2014 10:12:16	I see where you're coming from with the interpretation of this passage, Lawrence. I just disagree (for now, until MM potentially clarifies it): Actions- Multiattack: "A creature that can make multiple attacks on its turn has the Multiattack ability. A creature can’t use Multiattack when making an opportunity attack, which must be a single melee attack." Whereas the grappling (and shove) actions say "If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them." I understand why you'd make that easy jump, but for me, I think it's not allowed because you're not using the Attack action. You're using the Multiattack action. I think of it like a Ranger using Whirlwind. He can't actually shove all of the creatures within 5ft of him. Why? Because he's not making the Attack action, he's making the Whirlwind action to attack. Subtle, yes, but important! That being said, it's not exactly gamebreaking to have a bear try and bear-hug someone (as a Druid or as an NPC monster) before or after a bite attack. I'd personally keep my eye on it if I allowed it, though!
#20 Undrhil Sep 16, 2014 11:16:31	As far as I have seen, whenever a creature has the Multiattack option on their block, it tells you something like "The creature makes two claw attacks." or "The creature makes two bite attacks and a claw attack." I have yet to see a Multiattack that says "The creature takes two (generic) attacks."
#21 E-Tallitnics Sep 16, 2014 11:51:39	-ktkenshinx- wrote:
#22 -ktkenshinx- Sep 16, 2014 14:12:21	E-Tallitnics wrote:
#23 TrustTymora Sep 16, 2014 22:52:49	tendentious wrote:
#24 JamesManhattan Sep 19, 2014 9:44:00	A much simpler tactic. Is for one Hobgoblin to use the "Help" action, which takes no check, it then gives one other Hobgoblin Advantage on its attack roll. That Advantage would counter the Disadvantage the dodging was causing. It wouldn't help that third hobgoblin, but it's guaranteed to work, unlike attempting to grab. By the way: as a judge I would say the Dodging would make it harder for someone to grab you, I would give the grabber disadvantage on his "special" grapple attack check.
#25 mrpopstar Sep 21, 2014 13:36:07	lawrencehoy wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

tendentious

Sep 14, 2014 20:59:51

Dodge and Grapple are pretty straight forward:
- If you Dodge then attacks against you have disadvantage; you can't dodge if your speed is 0.

- Grapple reduces your speed to 0, which makes it an obvious tactic against a dodging opponent.

However, Grappling - while taking up one of your attacks - is not itself an attack; it's a contested Strength (Athletics) vs Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check. RAW it seems that it is no more difficult to Grapple a Dodging opponent than to Grapple a non-Dodging opponent.

That's not how I played it when it came up in play. I ruled that the 3 hobgoblins were at Disadvantage to Grapple the Dodging fighter. But what do other people think? In a simple action for action trade-off, Dodge is a single action, so it seems fair that opponents need to spend at least one action to neutralise its benefits. And because there's an ability check involved, the attempt may fail anyway. But some opponents can multiattack, and can presumably use one of their attacks to grapple and, if successful, use the others to attack normally

Then there are rogues that can dodge every round (with their bonus action) and still sneak attack targets adjacent to enemies - actually, I think this last instance sort of answers my question. It seems a bit good if rogues can enjoy perpetual Dodge if grappling them is with Disadvantage.

Any thoughts?

-ktkenshinx-

Sep 14, 2014 23:36:59

The RAW supports this, although it takes a few lines of text to show it. Let's start with the basics.

Grapple: "...you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple" (PHB 195)

Normally, an attack is defined by the attack roll, and grapple is a skill check ("If there's ever any question whether something you're doing counts as an attack, the rule is simple: if you'r making an attack roll, you're making an attack" PHB 194). That looks like reason to refute your argument. If that "simple" rule applied here, then grappling would definitely not be an attack, because you aren't actually making an attack roll. You are making a skill check.

But the grapple rules themselves define grappling as a "special melee attack", which suggests that the specific rule of the grapple overrides the general rule of the attack roll. By this logic, a grapple is actually a special kind of attack roll itself, even if it is really using a skill check. That's a classic application of specific overriding general, and one I would be happy to stand behind. It has the added bonus of making perfect sense from an RAI standpoint.

The only argument against this is that the definition of "attack roll" talks about how you add a D20, add/subtract modifiers, and compare to AC. Grapple doesn't follow that model because you are making a skill check and comparing it to an opposed skill check as part of a contest. I would argue that this is the general rule, with grapple being the specific rule tha overrides it (hence, "special melee attack").

Undrhil

Sep 15, 2014 1:04:40

I second that interpretation, -krkenshinx-. It makes sense from a RAI standpoint and from a thematic standpoint.

Someone Dodging is not going to be any easier to grapple than they are to be attacked.

Now, the question then becomes, if someone Grapples a Dodging opponent, does that opponent then stop Dodging, since their Speed is now 0? Or they continue gaining the benefits of Dodge until their turn as normal and are just unable to Dodge again until they get out of the grapple?

2Chlorobutanal

Sep 15, 2014 1:08:20

Dodge only affects attack rolls and grapple does not use an attack roll but rather an ability check. Therefore, as written, Dodge does not interfere with Grapple at all. This makes sense to me, as a Grapple check does not use AC or attack bonus at all, which would be the things used to model a "hit."

I think this would be a very useful tactic to deal with continually dodging creatures, as grappling them would "turn off" their Dodge until broken. There are many fictional examples of a strong fighter putting a quicker opponent in a hold in order to level the playing field.

Grappling is already a sort of fringe maneuver as it doesn't do any damage. It has some applications, though, and I would say that counteracting a Dodge is a good use of it.

Note that Multiattack does not generally allow a grapple to be used in place of one of the listed attacks (unless the Multiattack feature explicitly says so). The Grapple attack requires an Attack action, and Multiattack is not the Attack action.

Also note that many creatures grapple as a side effect of hitting with a melee attack, and in this case, Dodging would provide disadvantage against the initial attack and thus the subsequent grapple.

lawrencehoy

Sep 15, 2014 2:19:08

2Chlorobutanal wrote:

(Reply to #5)

2Chlorobutanal

lawrencehoy wrote:

Timborama

Sep 15, 2014 6:58:26

I agree that the Grapple action is a special attack. However! It is a special attack that does not use an attack roll. Thus, no disadvantage to grab (or shove!) dodging opponents. I think this is an interesting key balance choice, since the situation has come up before in my campaigns (albeit not in 5th). Someone with a great AC hunkering down. Oh, what's that, your Reflex/touch AC is garbage? It grabs you...

Jay_Ibero_911

Sep 15, 2014 7:19:00

When you take the Dodge action, you focus entirely on
avoiding attacks. Until the start o f your next turn, any
attack roll made against you has disadvantage if you
can see the attacker, and you make Dexterity saving
throws with advantage. You lose this benefit if you are
incapacitated (as explained in appendix A) or if your
speed drops to 0.

-ktkenshinx-

Sep 15, 2014 7:24:26

I agree that Dodge only functions for attack rolls. The question is just, is grapple a skill check by virtue of being an athletics contest? Or is grapple a special type of attack roll (specific overriding general) that just works using a different method than the normal attack roll? Knowing when to apply the specific/general rule is one of the toughest parts of rules lawyering, so it's fair that we have disagreements about it.

The other challenge is that specific/general might actually work against the OPs interpretation! It might be the case that the specific rules of the grapple (it's a special attack that uses ability checks, not an attack roll) are actually the specific rules that override the attack roll formula! In that case, the rules state that grapple is not an attack roll at all, but rather just a skill check. That would also be a way to interpret the specific/general tension in this instance.

Thinking through that last point, I would actually rule as a DM that this does NOT work. Shoving and grappling might be designed as the natural counters to dodge. The mechanics of a shove/grapple in real life are suitably different from an attack that dodging one does not mean dodging the other. To me, the key is that the specific/general issue can go both ways, and in this case it makes more sense for it to go against the OPs interpretation.

#10

KarlB

Sep 15, 2014 8:21:34

I'd say Dodging does not grant disadvantage on a Grappling check as it's a skill check, not an attack role. You also cannot Dodge while grappled as grappled targets have speed 0, and you cannot Dodge while your speed is 0. In my mind, grappling is the logical counter to dodgy types.

Please note that Grappling requires a high Strength (Athletics) and it can be countered by either Athletics or Acrobatics. So while a Barbarian could easily grapple, a Rogue cannot. Basically, it's a bone thrown for Strength focused characters who complained they are too weak compared to Dex types.

#11

tendentious

Sep 15, 2014 9:18:21

No-one has pointed out that I was wrong about Rogues being able to Dodge as a bonus action. My bad!

As I said, it seemed pretty clear to me that, RAW, the grapple check was not affected by Dodge, but I decided that the grapple check was with disadvantage anyway - if you're harder to hit, then it seems reasonable that you're harder to grab as well.

But it may be that it was always intended that Grappling was the "antidote" for Dodging, and that imposing disadvantage on the Grapple check interferes with the action trade-off between attacker and defender. The character Dodging has used an action and probably foregone inflicting any damage this round. If the attacker wishes to negate the effect they must also spend an action, also foregoing any damage for the round, and they may still not succeed in negating the Dodge. If you assume the attacker and defender have the same modifier, then there is a 50% chance of the grapple succeeding; a single Dodge is worth 2 Grapples. If the grapple was with disadvantage - lowering the chance of success to 25% - then a Dodge is now worth 4 Grapples.

So I suppose the question becomes: how many of the opponents actions should a single Dodge consume just to return to the status quo? At 25% success, 4 attackers still have only an ~68% chance of shutting down a Dodge. At 50%, 4 attackers have an ~94% chance.

I'm not entirely sure what my point is here, but to try to break it down:

- you can't Defense your way to victory in combat, you can only Offense your way to victory.

- therefore for defensive options to be viable they have to be "better" than offensive ones; if they were equal, or if they were "worse", there would be no reason to use them.

- Dodge is "better" than Grapple in that it trades a single action in defense for at least one action in offense.

- So how much "better" should it be? With disadvantage on the grapple it's 4 times better. Without disadvantage it's 2 times better.

#12

Plaguescarred1

Sep 15, 2014 9:52:15

2Chlorobutanal wrote:

#13

Jay_Ibero_911

Sep 15, 2014 10:31:09

An interesting side-effect of grapple not being an attack roll is that it also ignores blind/invis/hidden. So as long as you can identify what square a target is in, you can grapple them without penalty. Good for keeping sneaky types in one place once you know where they are.

#14

Bennedict

Sep 15, 2014 10:36:05

I usually apply real world common sense. If I am "dodging", it means I am attempting to avoid contact with an enemy. So, I would allow dodge to work vs grapple, attack roll or not. I just think the "special" part of the action is the attack roll is replaced by a skill check. But, if someone is attempting to grapple me, there is no question they are attempting to attack me. I could care less what RAW says if it doesn't make sense. I would instead assume RAI.

#15

Plaguescarred1

Sep 15, 2014 12:59:54

Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:

#16

Timborama

Sep 15, 2014 13:07:01

No penalty for blind grappling seems okay. For those thinking of it as goofy, it's just the big bugbear being blind and getting angry, so he makes himself super large and runs towards where he thinks you are. When he feels something, he throws his arms around it ^_^

Still has to guess what square though!

#17

lawrencehoy

Sep 15, 2014 20:23:37

2Chlorobutanal wrote:

(Reply to #17)

2Chlorobutanal

The difference is that Multiattack is defined as an action while Extra Attack is a modification to "the Attack" action. Many special abilities such as grapple say that you must use the Attack action, so they're technically not allowed outside of an Attack action by the rules- including bonus action attacks, opportunity attacks, or Multiattack.

It's not that much of a stretch to rule that "Multiattack" inherits all special action allowances that "Attack" does, but it's not strictly in the rules.

#19

Timborama

Sep 16, 2014 10:12:16

I see where you're coming from with the interpretation of this passage, Lawrence. I just disagree (for now, until MM potentially clarifies it):

Actions-

Multiattack: "A creature that can make multiple attacks on its turn has the Multiattack ability. A creature can’t use Multiattack when making an opportunity attack, which must be a single melee attack."

Whereas the grappling (and shove) actions say "If you’re able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them."

I understand why you'd make that easy jump, but for me, I think it's not allowed because you're not using the Attack action. You're using the Multiattack action. I think of it like a Ranger using Whirlwind. He can't actually shove all of the creatures within 5ft of him. Why? Because he's not making the Attack action, he's making the Whirlwind action to attack. Subtle, yes, but important!

That being said, it's not exactly gamebreaking to have a bear try and bear-hug someone (as a Druid or as an NPC monster) before or after a bite attack. I'd personally keep my eye on it if I allowed it, though!

#20

Undrhil

Sep 16, 2014 11:16:31

As far as I have seen, whenever a creature has the Multiattack option on their block, it tells you something like "The creature makes two claw attacks." or "The creature makes two bite attacks and a claw attack." I have yet to see a Multiattack that says "The creature takes two (generic) attacks."

#21

E-Tallitnics

Sep 16, 2014 11:51:39

-ktkenshinx- wrote:

#22

-ktkenshinx-

Sep 16, 2014 14:12:21

E-Tallitnics wrote:

#23

TrustTymora

Sep 16, 2014 22:52:49

tendentious wrote:

#24

JamesManhattan

Sep 19, 2014 9:44:00

A much simpler tactic.

Is for one Hobgoblin to use the "Help" action, which takes no check, it then gives one other Hobgoblin Advantage on its attack roll.

That Advantage would counter the Disadvantage the dodging was causing.

It wouldn't help that third hobgoblin, but it's guaranteed to work, unlike attempting to grab.

By the way: as a judge I would say the Dodging would make it harder for someone to grab you, I would give the grabber disadvantage on his "special" grapple attack check.

#25

mrpopstar

Sep 21, 2014 13:36:07

lawrencehoy wrote: