Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Mischiefincdm Dec 09, 2014 15:02:38	I have greatly enjoyed some of the debate and discussion on Grappling and the interpretation of RAW and RAI. In particular i have enjoyed a few of the build threads but wanted to add a few concerns and get some feedback.   In particular I wish to discuss the idea of being ably to move or shove prone large creatures that you have successfully grappled. In addition to this concern, I wish to give a few examples of why I think the current consenus on RAW may be incorrect.   As a caveat, I belive that each DM and group has the right to run as game as they feel best, and I am not here to undermine that. My concerns are more rule and balance based.   The relveant text in the PHB that I wish to discuss comes in two majot locations. The first can be found in 195 under grapple. It states in the paragrapgh that starts Moving a Grappled Creature, "When you move you can drag or carry the grappled creature with you, but your speed is halved, unless teh creature is two or more sizes smaller than you."   Now, I do not disagree with this rule except for when the creatures are very heavy. Here is why.   Turn if you will to PHB page 176 Lifting and Carrying.. There are two relevant sections.   "Carrying Capacity: Your carrying capacity is your strength score multiplied by 15, this is the weight in pounds you can carry."   "Push, Drag or Lift: You can push drag or lift a weight in pounds up to twice your carrying capacity (or 30 times your Strength  score).   Let us take for example an Iron Golem. I estimate its weight to be about 10 tons. Under the first blurb of text, a character may be able to grapple and move the iron golem, perhaps a great distance, if say a wood elf monk. Under RAW concerning Strength, this would be impossible as the monk could not carry or drag the Iron Golem at all, nor would he be able to push the golem at all.   I believe the solution is that RAW for grappling applies so long as the grappler is strong enough to carry, drag, or shove the target, but in the case of wher it cannot, i see no reason why they would be granted superhuman strength.   One more example to fully illustrate my point. Imagine an ogre that when low on hit points is put to sleep by the sleep spell. While unconcious, it auto fails any strength check, so it can be grappled by anyone large enough. In this case let is say a high elf wizard witha strength of 8. Now the wizard picks him up and carries him about the dungeon without any worry of encumberance. The way the current interpretaion of RAW is postulated, this would be entirely legal and entirely silly.
#2 Bloodscythe Dec 09, 2014 21:13:41	Mischiefincdm wrote:
#3 Daydreamer80 Dec 09, 2014 21:16:15	This is actually a reasonable interpretation of a limitation in the raw, and is good, because grapple is starting to get a little  cheesy.
#4 Jay_Ibero_911 Dec 10, 2014 5:36:02	It's an ok houserule if your group is having problems with grapple as it is, but not really needed. The difficulty of moving the resisting opponent is already represented by only being able to move them at half speed. If they are two or more sizes smaller then you, then they cannot slow you down at all, but from one size smaller to one size larger, they are all equally difficult to manipulate for different reasons. One size smaller is lighter, but harder to leverage, while one size larger is heavier, but easier to leverage (The bigger they are...). Grapple is purely a control mechanic, restricting the targets options at the expense of immediately damaging them, barring the Tavern Brawler feat, but even that is giving up your bonus action to grab instead of attack with TWF/Polearm Master, etc....   Adding the weight limit to grappling also goes against the design goal of simplicity, needing to know the weight of all creatures and your max capacity off-hand as an extra factor to check, slowing down the game.
#5 iserith Dec 10, 2014 5:45:46	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#6 Mischiefincdm Dec 10, 2014 12:02:42	Once again I understand the simplicity argument, but this is not why people elect to build grapplers. They build this to lock down opponents. If the argument is as simple as it slows things down, I do not feel that this is true. in fact, it is quite easy to estimate the general weight of a creature. In addition it stops lots of fictions.   Lets say we have two characters in a dungeon, compelled to move a heavy object, says. Statue, to a pressure plate in order to open a secret passage. The characters in question are a half orc barbarian with a 20 strength and a halfling thief with an 8 strength. The half Orc picks up the statue, but due to its weight cannot move any more than 5 feet per round.    the he halfling is able to grapple his friend and carry both taking his cunning action to dash in addition to half his move of 25. He can then carry booth 25 feet according to the current view of RAW.   is it much of a task to rule that a character can move the lesser of the two.   In addition, the grappling rules make no allowance for the ability to drag, push or carry more than they normally would.   here is another fiction. a fighter is on his warhorse that moves 40. The fighter I. A fighter dismounts and grapples the horse and carries it an additional 15 feet using his action surge..    A fighter grapples a creature. The creature is a flesh golem that weighs about 1 ton. While grappled a wizard petrified it. In now weighs 10 tons. The fighter can now carry 10 ton at a rate of 30 feet per turn.   please tell me how this fits raw.is it really worth your build idea to create such fictions?
#7 Mischiefincdm Dec 10, 2014 12:06:35	One more thought. The rules for how much you can drag, push or carry are NOT house rules. They are the rules. RAW demands that you abide by them. The current interpretation ignores these rules and therefore is failing. It is not a house rule at all. I have yet to see an argument that invalidates this section of the rules nor is their a built in exception that specifically invalidates this general rule.
#8 Mischiefincdm Dec 10, 2014 12:10:10	So iserith wrote:
#9 iserith Dec 10, 2014 12:49:21	Well, for one, no game is played by RAW. It is not practical. RAW is only for theorycrafting and arguing on forums. Anyone who tells you they are playing their game straight RAW is not being honest or is ignoring where they deviate.   Secondly, the rules of the game only come into play when the outcome of a player's stated action has an uncertain outcome. So to answer your question, if you're moving an unconscious creature, even a pretty big one, there is no need to bring the grappling rules into play. You either do it or you don't do it as the DM decides. If a creature is resisting you, then it may be appropriate to bring the grappling rules into play if the result of the action is uncertain, again at the DM's discretion. Same goes with your example of pushing around the statue. Given time and resources and no drawback to failing, there is absolutely no need to bring the rules into play. The PCs simply move the statue (or don't, if it's impossible). Same with your fighter pushing the charging horse. First it passes through the filter of the DM - is the player's stated action possible, impossible, or does it have an uncertain outcome? If it's the latter, then the rules get brought into play. I'm inclined to think it's not possible myself and would rule it as such.   If I were you, I'd ask myself what my goal is in worrying about pushing and dragging weight limits as it applies to grappling.
(Reply to #9) Mischiefincdm	I agree with everything you said.    I am expressing a viewpoint to discover the justification used by the advocates of the grapple lockdown style build for ignoring the rules on what a person can carry drag and lift. Given that most monsters are anemic at best in athletics contests, I think that play balance is indeed endangered by such builds. It is not so much an alternative playstyle so much as it is an attempt to trivialize encounters. The same could be said about 3.5 charging Paladins and 4e frost cheese builds.    I actually believe that the ludicrous examples I give are unlikely to come up in the bounds of normal play. I list them only to show the absurd logical conclusion that can be reached by the current interpretation of the rules when not analyzed in the light of all relevant sections.
#11 iserith Dec 10, 2014 14:09:55	I think the takeaway from many of the discussions in the Rules forum is that while some posters can quote chapter and verse of the rules and be absolutely correct, that doesn't mean a damn thing in actual play when you've added fictional context and a DM making calls in pursuit of the goals of play (having fun and creating an exciting, memorable story). When following the rules to the letter leads to the game not being fun (on whatever level you define fun) or fails to help create an exciting, memorable story, then it becomes very clear that the rules were not meant to be brought into play in that instance.
#12 CariadocThorne Dec 10, 2014 14:48:06	I think he was just trying to point out that an entirely relevant rule is being ignored in all the discussion of grappling. That's like seeing someone discussing their favorite build, and pointing out that their AC is too high because they missed part of the rules and shouldn't be stacking unarmoured defence from 2 different classes.
#13 Mischiefincdm Dec 10, 2014 15:47:49	CariadocThorne wrote:
#14 iserith Dec 10, 2014 16:04:27	Since that's the case, it's about as useful as any other argument used in the RAW debates which is to say, mostly theoretical and practically irrelevant at the table since nobody actually plays exactly to RAW. Carry on!
(Reply to #13) Bloodscythe	Mischiefincdm wrote:
#16 Jay_Ibero_911 Dec 10, 2014 18:48:34	If carrying capacity were meant to factor into grappling, then every creature in the monster manual would have a weight listed. Because weight is not included in creature stats, weight must not be intended to factor into grappling. Grappling is already limited to no more than one size larger than you, and moving at half speed. Any additional restrictions are needlessly punitive. Given that virtually every large size creature will be heavier than a medium creature's carrying capacity, yet moving a grappled target is still intended to be an option, carrying capacity is clearly not intended to factor into grappling.
#17 Mischiefincdm Dec 10, 2014 20:10:01	If carrying capacity were meant to factor into grappling, then every creature in the monster manual would have a weight listed.   This is an assumption and is not a rule. Not every ITEM in the world has weights listed for it and yet the RULE for strength is that you cannot carry, drag, or push more than 30 times your strength score. The argument that just because weights are not listed for all objects and creatures does not mean that they can all be carried with impunity.   Because weight is not included in creature stats, weight must not be intended to factor into grappling. Once agian an ssumption, albiet one i partly agree with. I agree that in the process of simplicity and game play they limited grappling movement to half as a simplified version of the bulk concern. I do not belive although that this provides a blanket exception to the rule, or means that grappling allows you to carry lift or drag something you could normally not carry lift or drag.   Just to show you that this is not a strong argument, Could an Iron Golem ride on a broom of flying? The broom of flying is limited to 500 pounds. You mean that the rules have to list the weight of the iron golem to prove to you that this cannot happen? So raw applies only to the broom of flying but not to the PC casue it hurst the build? The rules are rules.   It is also odd that your argument is now based on Rules as Intended. "If weight were intended..:I am still arguing that the rules as written still do not allow you to carry drag or push more than 30 times your strength score and assumed intention and conjecture still do not remove the text from the rulebook. Do you actually belive that if you were playing with the game designers from Wizards that they would allow an 8 strength elven wizard to drag an iron golem around? You belive that your interpretation of the rules is more of what was intended? I counter that MOST DM's would find it silly and rule as I did not as you say was intended.   Grappling is already limited to no more than one size larger than you, and moving at half speed. Any additional restrictions are needlessly punitive. How is it punitive to restrict what a creature can carry. The rules already do this. There have been rules for what you can carry since 1st edition. The same things were added for mounts and sizes for over 10 years now.   It is not restrictive in that you can grapple a creature up to 1 size larger than you. We agree on this. I do not agree that you can move with it as their is a specific rule that states the maximumyou can carry drag or push. I argue that they use the exact same language in both locations and it is no accident..   This empowers the DM to adjudicate. Yes you can grapple the earth elemental, but you cannot drag it around. Yes you can grapple the bugbear and yes you can drag it around. The rule makes sense in terms of math, physics, consistanecy with previous editions, and common sense. It is a rule and there is NO exception given that I can see.   Grappling is far from restrictive. It has very few defenses. Most monsters are basically screwed when you grapple them. In most cases the advantage a fighter or a tricked out PC has over the monsters is more than 50%. You can use one of many attack actions to grapple yet to escape cost your full action and you have already had your movemnet reduced to zero. In most cases you will also end up prone and attacking at disadvantage. I argue that the current consensus on RAW is overly imbalanced in favor of characters. Also how is it overly retsrictive to say you should have a high strength to drag a rampaging bullete (that is strong enough to swim through earth) across a pile of magical spikes to kill it in a few turns.   Given that virtually every large size creature will be heavier than a medium creature's carrying capacity, yet moving a grappled target is still intended to be an option, carrying capacity is clearly not intended to factor into grappling. Or perhaps it is and always has been a factor, just not the factor that defends this pet build..Just because you say clearly, does not mean that grappling gives you superhuman strength..   To be fair, I agree that the easist way to handle this is the half movement, but I do belive that in cases where the creature is by definition very heavy (stone golem, ion golem, earth elemental, etc), it defies not only logic, but the rules on strength to allow them to be carried or dragged just because they have the garppled condition.   I just want to be clear that your argumnet does make sense to me and as a DM i would likely just make the simple ruling in the case of say an ogre that could have weight of 250 to 700 lbs, to move on with the game, but I would also disallow an absurd drag such as the aforementioned really heavy guys as this just makes no sense to me in both logical terms and the rules as written.
#18 paulstrait Dec 10, 2014 20:28:21	I don't really understand why anyone talks about 'rules as intended' these days unless they are also quoting a game designer, since the game designers respond to tweets from the public and will be happy to answer whatever question you throw at them.  Talking about what the designers intended without asking them is both lazy and silly.    As far as the RAW are concerned, it seems reasonable to me to say that the rules that provide an upper limit on how much you can push or pull should apply when you are trying to push or pull a grappled creature.  The fact that there aren't weights listed in the monster manual means that if there is any question at all about whether the grappled monster is within that limit, you should allow the forced movement.  But when there is no question at all -- say with the iron golem -- it seems reasonable to enforce the push/pull/lift limit, unless the player has a really good explanation of how s/he can do it (perhaps somehow relying on the golem's own attempts to free itself from the grapple to gain momentum on the move).    Either way, its a question of the RAW and DM judgment about how to interpret and apply the RAW to the situation.
#19 Ganymede425 Dec 11, 2014 10:08:38	I don't see the big deal here. When I read the relevant portions of the rules quoted in the original post, I see no exception to the carrying capacity/drag limits in the grappling rules. The two sets seem to interact together at the same time, and I see no problem with that.
#20 Mischiefincdm Dec 11, 2014 14:51:26	Ganymede425 wrote:
#21 ad_hocNC Dec 14, 2014 22:58:17	" i would likely just make the simple ruling in the case of say an ogre that could have weight of 250 to 700 lbs" P 237 of the DMG (entry on Ogres) "weighs close to a thousand pounds" Big creatures weigh a lot. A Half-Ogre is listed at 450 lbs on average and so could be pushed/dragged around. Keep in mind that this is also with only 1 hand.  These builds involve walking around with 2 creatures, 1 in each hand. It is silly.
(Reply to #15) CariadocThorne	One thing about this is that it does increae the relevance of the level 6 bear totem feature for a barbarian. Double lifting/carrying capacity. means a STR 20 barbarian can lift/carry 400lb, and push/drag 1200lb. That ogre is starting to look a lot more manageable. Bloodscythe wrote:
#23 EzechielDantan Dec 15, 2014 2:44:29	I'd not follow the weight allowance too closely, but obvious silliness will be disallowed.
#24 Jay_Ibero_911 Dec 15, 2014 3:21:09	Mischiefincdm wrote:
(Reply to #24) CariadocThorne	Jay_Ibero_911 wrote:
#26 Elfcrusher Dec 15, 2014 21:47:39	I have no objection to the house rule about carrying capacity as a requirement for grappling.   However...   Many years ago I was really into Aikido, and for a while this 3rd degree blackbelt from Poland was visiting our dojo.  He was a skinny little thing; I had probably had 50 pounds on him.  Yet when I trained with him, I always had a sense that he wasn't throwing me around, but that I was throwing myself around trying to grab/avoid/counter him.  His understanding of balance and movement was so keen that he could make me go where he wanted with very little force applied.   I'm not saying every cleric, paladin, and warlock is going to have that kind of training. Just sayin'.
#27 jonathonhawke Dec 15, 2014 23:02:14	There is also such a thing as a "come-along" hold, which allows one to pull another about using very little force.
(Reply to #27) EzechielDantan	jonathonhawke wrote:
#29 Maine Dec 16, 2014 0:51:32	I see a big difference between dead-lifting the weight or pushing/dragging a dead weight, vs pushing around something on two feet.   Compare to moving a 100 pound block, vs a 100 pound block in a wheel barrow... or rolling a log vs dragging a log.  It's all about leverage, and that's what grappling is all about, too.   My wife, who used to practice judo (which is all about grappling and throwing), finds little fault with the grapple rules - other than not getting her Monks bonus unarmed attack (which is open to interpretation, and I think I'm going to start allowing).   My issue with grapplling in our game is not moving the target around, it's that the Monk grapples the toughest baddie, then someone else knocks the target down (or the Monk does on her next turn), then the Wizard casts Crown of Madness on the second-biggest baddie, and they just hold the big-bad down while his minion beats him up...
(Reply to #26) CariadocThorne	Elfcrusher wrote:
#31 Noctaem Dec 16, 2014 7:31:35	CariadocThorne wrote:
(Reply to #31) CariadocThorne	Noctaem wrote:
(Reply to #28) 1eejit	EzechielDantan wrote:
#34 CariadocThorne Dec 16, 2014 9:40:37	The speed is another issue. as has been pointed out, it is half your speed, not half the targets speed, which already suggests this is not meant to represent the advanced techniques used to make an opponent move themselves. Not to mention things like higher level monk grapplers often being able able to drag or carry slower opponents faster than those opponents can move themselves. Compare the movement speed of a level 20 wood elf monk and compare it to a human. It's slightly more than double. Anyway, I don't think there is anything wrong with houseruleing it and saying that the carrying capacity rules just slow things down unnecessarily, with worrying about how much a given monster weighs, and deciding common sense is enough to handle this. But do remember you are basically removing the most significant in-game effect of one of the barbarian class feature options.
#35 Mischiefincdm Dec 18, 2014 12:56:40	I wish to thank everyone for their thoughtful responses, even when we do not agree. I understand the opinion of those who feel grappling is best left simple and do not wish to conflate the issue with push pull and drag limits imposed by the rules on strength. I do not agree that the rules on grappling represent an exception to the rules and do not wish to create the many fictions this interpretation can lead too. That said this is in my game, and you others may take their ruling to apply in their own game. My premise is not as some have said, absurd. It is thoughtful and I have remained respectful I. i enjoy these debates and look forward to other constructive discussions.