Grappling in DCC?

[smathis]

I'm going to be opinionated for a second. But I think grappling has ALWAYS sucked in D&D.

Does DCC do anything to make it simpler or better?

[Fullerton]

When most players tell me that they want their character to grapple, that's not really what they mean ... or at least not completely what they mean.

So what do you mean, smathis? What do you foresee the characters doing via the "grappling rules?"

By answering that, I think it's easier to find out whether there would even need to be a special grappling mechanic in the DCC RPG beyond what the fighter stunts mechanic and unarmed swings together provide.

[smathis]

When most players tell me that they want their character to grapple, that's not really what they mean ... or at least not completely what they mean.

So what do you mean, smathis? What do you foresee the characters doing via the "grappling rules?"

By answering that, I think it's easier to find out whether there would even need to be a special grappling mechanic in the DCC RPG beyond what the fighter stunts mechanic and unarmed swings together provide.

Good question, Fullerton.

By "grappling" I mean engaging an opponent in an attempt to restrain or immobilize them. Like wrestling... of the non "chair to the head" or "flying elbow off the top turnbuckle" sort. Generally what grappling mechanics have tried to emulate. Not punching. Not kicking, disarming or whacking with improvised weapons. Just grappling.

So, say Conan finds a big Monkey Man in a red cape. He's going to stab that Monkey Man with his dagger. That Monkey Man has other ideas. He's going to grab Conan and prevent him from stabbing him. Then he's going to use his Strength to overpower that wiry Cimmerian and crush his ribcage.

How does that work in DCC?

And, believe it or not, I have no "special grappling mechanic" to pitch. I'm just curious. I think Grappling sub-systems have been overly complicated, yet what existed prior to them wasn't great either. I've tried all kinds and found them either way too complicated (3e) or simplistic to the point of hardly being a mechanic (roll under stat, make up the rest).

BTW, that example is straight out of Conan. So Appendix N is covered!

So let's talk wrasslin!

[Black Dougal]

I think Grappling sub-systems have been overly complicated, yet what existed prior to them wasn't great either. I've tried all kinds and found them either way too complicated (3e) or simplistic to the point of hardly being a mechanic (roll under stat, make up the rest).

Check out the CMB/CMD (Combat Maneuver Bonus/Combat Maneuver Defense) mechanic from Pathfinder RPG. I have seen it used a few times and it works rather well. If DCC includes any special rules for grapples I suggest something like this, since it is a fairly simple concept that works.

More information is available towards the bottom of the following link:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html

[smathis]

Check out the CMB/CMD (Combat Maneuver Bonus/Combat Maneuver Defense) mechanic from Pathfinder RPG. I have seen it used a few times and it works rather well. If DCC includes any special rules for grapples I suggest something like this, since it is a fairly simple concept that works.

More information is available towards the bottom of the following link:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html

Interesting. So basically it's d20 + BAB + STR + Size Modifier against 10 + BAB + STR + DEX + Size Modifier. Pretty streamlined. Seems straightforward. It would appeal to me if DCC had something similar.

Did anyone from the playtests try to get someone in a headlock? How does DCC do this now?

[Fullerton]

By "grappling" I mean engaging an opponent in an attempt to restrain or immobilize them.

These days I'm not fond of there being a general mechanism in a D&D-like game by which any arbitrary character can essentially defeat an opponent while ignoring that opponent's hit points. (However, class-specific and/or non-systemized mechanisms are fine, IMO, mainly because they involve other costs.)

This isn't really for a balance reason. It's just that I like to think of the opponent's hit points as including their ability to fend off attempts to restrain/immobilize, because I already imagine these sorts of assaults being part of normal attacks...

So, say Conan finds a big Monkey Man in a red cape. He's going to stab that Monkey Man with his dagger. That Monkey Man has other ideas. He's going to grab Conan and prevent him from stabbing him. Then he's going to use his Strength to overpower that wiry Cimmerian and crush his ribcage.

Conan and Monkey Man just make normal attacks against one another, and their success/failures (i.e., subtractions to the enemy's hit points ... or not) guide a verbal description of what happened. Perhaps Conan hits, but since Monkey Man also hit (and did normal damage), the players & DM imagine Conan's hits not as dagger stabs, but rather as punches, pommel strikes, or similar.

If Monkey Man is trained to the point where a hit foe is somehow restrained, then Monkey Man's monster summary just declares it to be so, done, end of story. (Much like the automatic constrict abilities of some giant snakes in AD&D.)

And of course Conan, presumably being a fighter, might be able to do something similar and/or counter that technique simply by virtue of the freeform stunt capability afforded to him by his additional attack die. (I didn't run a fighter in the playtest, so I don't remember what this ability is called.)

Other situations can be handled on an ad-hoc basis, based on the specific situations of combat, tools at hand, and possibly leveraging the character's occupation.

[Hamakto]

I personally have never seen a 'grapple' system that was effective at anything over 3rd or 4th levels. At that point, someone doing d3 damage with a fist is laughable and it becomes a 30 round fight to knock someone out. But a punch can be considered the same as a weapon in DCC.

I am not thrilled with the 4e decision on non-lethal damage, but it is simple. Any damage you do can be considered regular or non-lethal. You can make the decision on each swing. When you hit zero if it was via non-lethal, you are knocked out.

While simple, it is just another thing that further breaks the illusion of reality that a good RPG framework provides.

So how do you symbolize grappling? Realistically speaking if 10 guards charged you at once, you would go down in a pile (Conan excluded). So requiring that they go through your HP before you are captured is not realistic from a game perspective.

As for a simple record, you just do the following:

d20+combat die+str -4 for the first person doing a grapple. --- The roll would be vs CMD in Pathfider (or something like that)

Why a -4? since there is no AOO in RPG (good thing), we make it more difficult to do the action.

You get +2 to the roll for each person after the first that does a grapple. So a mob of six guards would each get a roll of d20+d2+8 on their grapple roll.

Each creature that successfully grapples adds their strength bonus together (min of +1) to determine what happens with the grapple.

< targets STR bonus ... they are just touching him and his move is impeeded
= targets STR bonus ... They have restrained them and they cannot move from the square.
> targets STR bonus ... They have the option to restrain or knock him on the ground and dog pile.

Trip would work similar to the above, but instead of using STR substitute AGL.

< targets AGL bonus ... causes a stumble and move cut in half
= targets AGL bonus ... causes a stumble and move immediately stops
> targets AGL bonus ... causes them to fall to the ground

This numbers are just thrown out as an idea and are probably not fully balanced.

PS - the problem with proposing good ideas is that we do not know what combat is like yet... as it is a work in progress.

[geordie racer]

And of course Conan, presumably being a fighter, might be able to do something similar and/or counter that technique simply by virtue of the freeform stunt capability afforded to him by his additional attack die. (I didn't run a fighter in the playtest, so I don't remember what this ability is called.)

Mighty Deed of Arms

Combine that with an unarmed crit table, and just use the d20 + (level action die) + (highest mod between STR and AGL). With the freeform stunts I see no need for more complex specialised sub-systems.

[Ogrepuppy]

Pretty streamlined. Seems straightforward. It would appeal to me if DCC had something similar.

My guess, based on everything else Joseph has written, is that grappling will be even easier than the (admittedly elegant and streamlined) Pathfinder rules--something along the lines of "if you can verbally describe it and you roll your D16 + D-whatever and get a Mighty Deed of Arms success, you grapple".

But hey, what do I know?



EDIT: D'ooooh! Scooped!

[Fullerton]

Realistically speaking if 10 guards charged you at once, you would go down in a pile (Conan excluded). So requiring that they go through your HP before you are captured is not realistic from a game perspective.

Should that also be true if the guards just went for conventional melee attacks? (That is, swinging with their swords and not trying to overbear.)

[smathis]

Thanks to everyone for the replies. There are a lot of good ideas and interesting approaches being shared. Which is very cool.

I was wondering how DCC addressed Grappling and was hoping someone from the playtest had tried to put an Evil Sorcerer in an armbar. So if "Mighty Deed of Arms" is the answer, that's cool. I was hoping for something simple. I could see that working, especially with some sort of crit chart related specifically to that style of fighting -- as opposed to punching, kicking and biting.

Maybe we can get a "Figure Four Leglock" on there somewhere...

[smathis]

Should that also be true if the guards just went for conventional melee attacks? (That is, swinging with their swords and not trying to overbear.)

Well, it depends on what "hit points" represent. Subdual damage has always been a sticking point for D&D. So does a character "die" at zero hit points? Or just go unconscious?

I agree with Hamakton's take on 4e's approach. I don't like it either. But it's kind of a way to deal with the issue.

Are all fights "to the death"? Or do some end at some point before that? 4e even has issues with this.

I suppose, in the end, it's not a big deal. I handwaved it in B/X. I can handwave it in DCC. But it's that dadgum hit points thing I've been harping on, all over again. Is it actual physical harm? Or scrapes, bumps and a little browsweat?

But I think the main question of "What is Grappling in DCC?" has an answer. Joseph or Harley maybe can elaborate if we're missing something.

[Fullerton]

Well, it depends on what "hit points" represent. Subdual damage has always been a sticking point for D&D. So does a character "die" at zero hit points? Or just go unconscious?

Ignore the questions of what happens at zero hit points. That small of a detail isn't relevant to my question.

Your question about what hit points represent is the key, IMO.

If hit points represent a combatant's overall toughness and resilience in a physical combat situation, then it probably makes sense for "grappling" attacks to go against hit points the same way "normal" attacks do. (For some definition of "go against.") That is, if a warrior's high hit points means he is tough enough to beat a horde of 10 guards in a weapon-based melee, then he also ought to be able to beat them all in a grappling situation, and vice-versa.

... or so my instincts tell me. I'm open to the possibility of a convincing counter-argument ...

[smathis]

Ignore the questions of what happens at zero hit points. That small of a detail isn't relevant to my question.

Your question about what hit points represent is the key, IMO.

If hit points represent a combatant's overall toughness and resilience in a physical combat situation, then it probably makes sense for "grappling" attacks to go against hit points the same way "normal" attacks do. (For some definition of "go against.") That is, if a warrior's high hit points means he is tough enough to beat a horde of 10 guards in a weapon-based melee, then he also ought to be able to beat them all in a grappling situation, and vice-versa.

... or so my instincts tell me. I'm open to the possibility of a convincing counter-argument ...

Well.... A Warrior "losing" to a horde of 10 guards in weapon-based melee is likely to end with the Warrior dead. Losing to those same guards in a grappling situation is much less likely to result in the Warrior's death -- as a result of injuries sustained in the altercation. He might be knocked out, captured and fed to an evil Frog god. But only as an consequence of being beaten by the guards.

It's a question of what happens if an Orc punches me in the face versus hits me in the face with an Axe. Both should drop me to zero hit points. But the punch won't kill me. I'll likely not be my normal, bubbly self in the morning. I'll likely have a bruise the size of Toledo somewhere on my face. But if I get hit in the face with an axe, well... it's been nice chatting with y'all.

So do hit points represent "toughness and resilience"? Or do they represent "life"? My summation is that they've tried to emulate both traditionally. And those two things don't necessarily co-exist happily.

In Appendix N, characters get conked on the head or knocked out. How would that work in DCC? Would they just be dead?

And if I restrain a Bandit with a Step-Over Toehold via a Mighty Deed of Legs, does he die if I hang on to the hold 10 seconds too long?

To me, that's why what happens when a character runs out of hit points is sort of relevant. I don't know how one is addressed without the other. There's subdual damage. Which has always felt "meh" to me. I also disliked its overly complex implementation in 3e -- adding on yet another ablative currency.

I mean, who knows, maybe getting knocked out or forced to submit are part of the Grappling and Pugilistic Crit Charts? Or maybe there's some other simple, yet elegant, mechanic that Joseph has up his sleeve.

[Fullerton]

I don't disagree with your additional assertions: Some methods of attack should bias toward a foe's death, while other sorts of attack should bias toward incapacitation without death (some sort of submission). (And perhaps the bias is strong-to-absolute.)

[smathis]

I don't disagree with your additional assertions: Some methods of attack should bias toward a foe's death, while other sorts of attack should bias toward incapacitation without death (some sort of submission). (And perhaps the bias is strong-to-absolute.)

I think we agree here.

Trouble is, I have no idea how to do that without adding inelegant complexities to the core system. See, I like hit points. I just don't know what to do about them to make them bias one way or the other.

I was giving it some thought and considered that maybe there could be some sort of "Cry Uncle" mechanic. Something along the lines of a chart with a column for Fisticuffs, Wrestling and Running Away. So when a combat gets to the point that one side or the other is ready to break it off, they'll roll on this table and abide by the result. Maybe Fisticuffs has the possibility for the character to get knocked out. Maybe the Wrestling column includes passing out and submission.

The Running Away would probably be deadlier. Because it would cover situations where a character is making a hasty retreat from a dangerous foe.

But that seems very house-ruley to me. I like that it doesn't add another number to keep track of. Which is to say it's like Chinese Food. Satisfying, but not filling.

[Black Dougal]

I was giving it some thought and considered that maybe there could be some sort of "Cry Uncle" mechanic. Something along the lines of a chart with a column for Fisticuffs, Wrestling and Running Away. So when a combat gets to the point that one side or the other is ready to break it off, they'll roll on this table and abide by the result. Maybe Fisticuffs has the possibility for the character to get knocked out. Maybe the Wrestling column includes passing out and submission.

The Running Away would probably be deadlier. Because it would cover situations where a character is making a hasty retreat from a dangerous foe.

But that seems very house-ruley to me. I like that it doesn't add another number to keep track of. Which is to say it's like Chinese Food. Satisfying, but not filling.

Your suggestion is very similar to the 2e AD&D approach. In the Revised PHB there is a section on "Attacking Without Killing" which has a table called the "Punching and Wrestling Results" table. This is not a "Cry Uncle" sort of situation where combat is breaking off, but an option for non-lethal combat.

[Black Dougal]

I remember reading on this forum that Joesph wanted to try and keep the rulebook down to around 64 pages if possible. So, assuming this minimalistic approach is still one of the goals, I am left with a question.

Do we really need specific rules for grapples, overruns, etc. or is the "Mighty Deeds of Arms" mechanic enough?

[smathis]

I remember reading on this forum that Joesph wanted to try and keep the rulebook down to around 64 pages if possible. So, assuming this minimalistic approach is still one of the goals, I am left with a question.

Do we really need specific rules for grapples, overruns, etc. or is the "Mighty Deeds of Arms" mechanic enough?

I don't think specific rules are necessary. This thread was intended to be more about how DCC was going to handle Grappling, less about coming up with rules about it.

Then the topic drifted to hit points and incapacitation without death. I don't know if we need rules for that. But there are instances of characters in Appendix N "losing" a combat by being knocked out or subdued.

I feel the original question I'd asked "What does DCC do about Grappling?" was adequately answered with the "Mighty Deeds of Arms" response. But this new question is more about how, or if, DCC has a mechanic for "dramatically knocked out" or "subdued by a bunch of humanoids and dragged off to the slave pits".

I'm not sure something like that needs a whole new subsystem. And I feel the 2e chart, a "Cry Uncle" mechanic or something along those lines would probably be adequate.

Just my two cents...

[Ogrepuppy]

I remember reading on this forum that Joesph wanted to try and keep the rulebook down to around 64 pages if possible. So, assuming this minimalistic approach is still one of the goals, I am left with a question.

Do we really need specific rules for grapples, overruns, etc. or is the "Mighty Deeds of Arms" mechanic enough?

MDoA is enough, IM not HO.

[JRR]

Here's my rule for grappling: There is no grappling. This is a game about swords and axes and spells. Grappling has no place. Leave it to lesser games.

[Hamakto]

I remember reading on this forum that Joesph wanted to try and keep the rulebook down to around 64 pages if possible. So, assuming this minimalistic approach is still one of the goals, I am left with a question.

Do we really need specific rules for grapples, overruns, etc. or is the "Mighty Deeds of Arms" mechanic enough?

MDoA is enough, IM not HO.

*Andy looks into his crystal ball for information on the MDoA... but the Crystal ball is full of static*

[geordie racer]

*Andy looks into his crystal ball for information on the MDoA... but the Crystal ball is full of static*

It's explained in the first post of the Warrior Mechanics thread Andy.

[rabindranath72]

AD&D 1e Unearthed Arcana had pretty fast and simple grappling rules (System I.)
Some interesting rules also appeared in the old I1 module, which later "evolved" into the AD&D 2e system (which also was quite nice.)

[Hamakto]

*Andy looks into his crystal ball for information on the MDoA... but the Crystal ball is full of static*

It's explained in the first post of the Warrior Mechanics thread Andy.

*shakes his crystal balls some more and hooks up some shock therapy electrodes to his brain*

Ahh... the picture is much clearer now... *sorry about the brain freeze there, I read that earlier and forgot the term*

So you are saying that for grappling all you need it to hit and roll a 50/50 chance for the grapple to work? (the sample #'s went for 33% to 60%... I picked 50/50 as an average #).

WOW. Forget fighting a Boss monster... just tackle him.

50/50 chance for a high strength fighter to take out a wizard (he will probably hit the wiz low ac), not too bad at all.

To be honest, will the MDoA just be a point of contention between the DM and players. What is the limit of actions? Heck, I can be pretty imaginative for a 50/50 shot at something? --- And yes I know I have to land the attack... but to be honest, if I roll low on my supplemental dice, the chance of me hitting is small anyway. So most attacks that land will probably be potentially MDoA.