D&D 5E [Question] Grappling

[Gaming_Unplugged]

GRAPPLINGWhen you want to grab a creature or wrestle with it, you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple. If you're able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them. The target of your grapple must be no more than one size larger than you, and it must be within your reach.
Using at least one free hand, you try to seize the target by making a grapple check, a Strength (Athletics) check contested by the target's Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check (the target chooses the ability to use). If you succeed, you subject the target to the grappled condition (see appendix A). The condition specifies the things that end it, and you can release the target whenever you like (no action required).
Escaping a Grapple. A grappled creature can use its action to escape. To do so, it must succeed on a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check contested by your Strength (Athletics) check.
Moving a Grappled Creature. When you move, you can drag or carry the grappled creature with you, but your speed is halved, unless the creature is two or more sizes smaller than you.

I'm confused about this as it makes no f-ing sense. Why is it that Grappling a character can take one of the multiple "Attack actions," but breaking said grapple takes "its action" to escape. It seems that a non-grappler pc/npc grappler has equal ability to both grapple and break a grapple in the same way shape or form. Why the distinction? This makes no sense to me.

 

[happyhermit]

I'm confused about this as it makes no f-ing sense. Why is it that Grappling a character can take one of the multiple "Attack actions," but breaking said grapple takes "its action" to escape. It seems that a non-grappler pc/npc grappler has equal ability to both grapple and break a grapple in the same way shape or form. Why the distinction? This makes no sense to me.

It makes sense to me, not sure where the hang-up is. Have you played it out, because then it might be more obvious. First of all the grappled character has a chance to "escape" the grapple at the very beginning (that is what the saving throw is) essentially both parties act. Then, realize that the character who is doing the grappling is not free to do whatever they want if they want to maintain the grapple.

 

[GX.Sigma]

It makes sense to me, not sure where the hang-up is. Have you played it out, because then it might be more obvious. First of all the grappled character has a chance to "escape" the grapple at the very beginning (that is what the saving throw is) essentially both parties act. Then, realize that the character who is doing the grappling is not free to do whatever they want if they want to maintain the grapple.

I concur. Grappling is already a pretty bad deal for the grappler. You give up an attack and a hand to grab your opponent, and on his turn he just keeps attacking you with no penalty.

 

[Gaming_Unplugged]

It makes sense to me, not sure where the hang-up is. Have you played it out, because then it might be more obvious. First of all the grappled character has a chance to "escape" the grapple at the very beginning (that is what the saving throw is) essentially both parties act. Then, realize that the character who is doing the grappling is not free to do whatever they want if they want to maintain the grapple.

The grappling player can do anything they want. They can attack, drag the character around the territory, etc. Not sure what restriction you see being played out as with regard to the grappling player. As long as the grappled party fails their grapple check, they are grappled. And even initiating that grapple check takes an action. So if you fail that action, the player's turn is gone. In the game we played, the player was grappled by a stronger beast and was essentially locked down and beaten because of their weak strength/dex stats. It put the player in a serious disadvantage to the creature, who could actively maintain the grapple while attacking like normal.

Condition text for grapple:

GRAPPLED
A grappled creature's speed becomes O,and it can't benefit from any bonus to its speed.

The condition ends if the grappler is incapacitated (see the condition),

The condition also ends if an effect removes the grappled creature from the reach of the grappler or grappling effect, such as when a creature is hurled away by the thunderwave spell.

 

[Gaming_Unplugged]

I concur. Grappling is already a pretty bad deal for the grappler. You give up an attack and a hand to grab your opponent, and on his turn he just keeps attacking you with no penalty.

I'm confused. Where does it actually say the grappler has to give up future attacks? I don't see that.

 

[Gaming_Unplugged]

I want to make clear, I want to agree that if the grappling player forgoes future attacks, then escaping a grapple MUST be a full round action. Escaping the grapple as a "Attack action" would make grappling horrendous. I just don't see that anywhere. In my mind, I see grapple as sacrificing an attack action for possibly restricting the enemy's ability to run away. And if the player/creature escapes by devoting an attack action, then that means the player/creature has the upper hand for a moment in the momentum of the battle. Does it invalidate the player/creatures action? I don't think so, because the player/creature sacrificed an attack action.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I'm confused. Where does it actually say the grappler has to give up future attacks? I don't see that.

OK, let's say you have a longsword. It deals 1d10 + 3 damage in two hands, or 1d8 + 3 damage in one hand. Let's also say you have an extra attack.

Your options are:

Grapple
Attack for 1d8 + 3

(average damage 7.5)

-or-

Attack for 1d10 + 3
Attack for 1d10 + 3

(average damage 13)

If you choose to grapple, you're dealing less damage overall. The grappled character can still attack back at full efficiency. Assuming the grappler and the grapplee are just trying to kill each other, the grappler falls behind in the damage race.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I'm confused about this as it makes no f-ing sense. Why is it that Grappling a character can take one of the multiple "Attack actions," but breaking said grapple takes "its action" to escape. It seems that a non-grappler pc/npc grappler has equal ability to both grapple and break a grapple in the same way shape or form. Why the distinction? This makes no sense to me.

In practice it doesn't matter--if you have multiple attacks, you break the grapple by Shoving the enemy away from you, which breaks the grapple if it moves it out of range. Doesn't work against things with long tentacle grapples though, so in that case you should just kill it.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

I concur. Grappling is already a pretty bad deal for the grappler. You give up an attack and a hand to grab your opponent, and on his turn he just keeps attacking you with no penalty.

Grappling is great. It prevents the enemy from moving, which means for example that if you push him prone with another attack (or with Thunderous Smite, etc.), he can't get up and he's stuck making his attacks at disadvantage while you attack him at advantage. Even if you don't push him down, you can now spend your turns Dodging while the rest of the party kills him to death from range, which (provided you are smart enough to have a good AC that synergizes well with Dodging) makes grappling essentially equivalent to a kill, since he can't just ignore you and go attack another party member who is less well-defended.

Grappling also prevents an enemy from gaining any benefit from his own Dodge, since Dodging stops working if your speed drops to 0, and being grappled sets your speed to 0.

There are also occasionally opportunities to make the enemy pay in other ways with grapple. For example, if your party druid has cast Protection From Poison on you (1 hour, no concentration) you can now drag the enemy into a Stinking Cloud to deprive him of actions without much risk. A Tiefling might grapple and drag an enemy through a Wall of Fire, and a raging Barbarian might drag one over Spike Growth, and an Aarakocra or monk might drag an enemy off a cliff. Etc., etc.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

OK, let's say you have a longsword. It deals 1d10 + 3 damage in two hands, or 1d8 + 3 damage in one hand. Let's also say you have an extra attack.

Your options are:

Grapple
Attack for 1d8 + 3

(average damage 7.5)

-or-

Attack for 1d10 + 3
Attack for 1d10 + 3

(average damage 13)

If you choose to grapple, you're dealing less damage overall. The grappled character can still attack back at full efficiency. Assuming the grappler and the grapplee are just trying to kill each other, the grappler falls behind in the damage race.

One of these days, you should test a lone fighter against an Earth Elemental. If he just tries to win the damage race by flailing away with his sword, he's likely to lose. If he instead grapples the elemental and slams it prone early in the combat, and then beats it to death at advantage while it attacks him back at disadvantage, he's likely to win.

Forcing an enemy prone and keeping him there is a force multiplier of x2 or x3, well worth the 10 or so points of damage you give up on round 1 while you're setting it up.