Regarding monks and grappling, one of my players is a monk, with low strength and high dex. She was complaining that her monk can't grapple effectively, due to her low strength. I've searched for, but haven't found, anything regarding this topic. Is there a work-around for monks grappling using dex instead of strength?
Yeah what people have said so far houserule it so you can use acrobatics, or just Dex instead of Str and allow that for the Grapple feat too if the player is inclined to take it. I made a homebrew subclass where I tried to tackle this issue and a few others I thought remained with the monk making the class somewhat MAD (multiple attribute dependent) Though 5e corrected alot that made Monk really bad and kinda broken in the previous editions.
Regarding monks and grappling, one of my players is a monk, with low strength and high dex. She was complaining that her monk can't grapple effectively, due to her low strength. I've searched for, but haven't found, anything regarding this topic. Is there a work-around for monks grappling using dex instead of strength?
I guess one question would be; why is your Monk trying to grapple targets?
The types of martial arts that Monks seem intended to represent aren't really ones I'd say involve a lot of grappling, as Monks have a lot of emphasis on strikes, mobility and active defence. With that in mind, you would be more likely to want to throw an enemy than grapple them, as quite a lot of martial arts involve throws, and some of these also involve pinning on the ground. Way of the Open Hand for example lets you attempt to push or knock prone an enemy when you unleash a flurry of blows, which suits some of these styles quite well as you strike to distract or gain advantage, before pushing/throwing or knocking prone.
Grappling in D&D is strange in that it doesn't really give you the ability to subdue an enemy in the way you see in martial arts, it only stops them from moving away from you; they can otherwise act normally without further action and a DM ruling.
As others have said, you could certainly ask your DM to allow Dexterity for a grapple check, though I'm not sure if I'd allow it personally, as the action of grappling is to restrict movement, which means you need to be able to hold the target in place which isn't really a dextrous act. Speed/agility would certainly let you grab them, but if you can't hold them in place then they aren't grappled; all you've done is attached yourself to them. 😉
It's kind of weird we don't actually have a proper restrain action available, as part of a grapple or otherwise, as you could argue dexterity for that (as it's a matter of getting in position to lock arms, wrap a leg around etc.) but it's just not really a mechanic in D&D without magic or similar (or time and a rope).
It's kind of weird we don't actually have a proper restrain action available, as part of a grapple or otherwise, as you could argue dexterity for that (as it's a matter of getting in position to lock arms, wrap a leg around etc.) but it's just not really a mechanic in D&D without magic or similar (or time and a rope).
The Grappler feat does provide a guaranteed mechanic for pinning the target.
You’ve developed the skills necessary to hold your own in close-quarters grappling. You gain the following benefits:
You have advantage on attack rolls against a creature you are grappling.
You can use your action to try to pin a creature grappled by you. To do so, make another grapple check. If you succeed, you and the creature are both restrained until the grapple ends.
That said I don't think it's strange there's no official, general way to pin a target at will. It's a bit like asking for a way to stab your target in the eye at will. The combat system is built around combatants not getting much control over the outcome of attacks and really good outcomes (e.g. critical hits) being luck-based. A DM could add optional rules to make exceptional attacks possible but that would complicate the rules to a degree not everyone will benefit from, so it's left up to the people that like that kind of combat.
I replace the initial contest with an unarmed strike against 10 + the target's Dexterity saving throw modifier (i.e. the number on the saving throw section of the character sheet or monster stat block, or the Dexterity modifier if the monster lacks Dexterity saving throw proficiency.) On a hit, the attack deals no damage and the target makes a Strength saving throw against 15 + the attacker's Strength modifier. The higher base DC is needed to compensate for the fact that the attacker now has two chances to fail. Proficiency bonus isn't included on the save because it'd push the DCs above 20, which is extremely rare in 5e and could easily produce unescapable DCs for monsters without high strength scores. I still use the usual ability contest for escaping the grapple, but with a +5 bonus if the attacker or victim are using both hands.
Running it this way fixes a couple of things I consider broken in the official rules:
Conditions like blinded or restrained hinder the attacker and defender like you'd expect.
Monsters get to use their Strength and Dexterity saves to avoid the initial grapple. Like I said, very few monsters actually have athletics or acrobatics (the only ones I can think of off the top of my head are NPC stat blocks and giants) so the majority basically have no defense against being grappled or shoved.
Martial classes are automatically good at avoiding grapples (though not automatically good at escaping them once grabbed without the relevant skill proficiency.)
Legendary Monsters can use Legendary Resistance to avoid a grapple.
It's much harder for players to set up a near-guaranteed success by stacking Expertise and easy to get bonuses like Bardic Inspiration, Bless, Enlarge/Reduce or Enhance Ability. Again, monsters rarely get to benefit from these.
As a bonus, treating the attack roll as an unarmed strike lets monks use Dexterity for their attack roll as usual and lets them qualify for the Martial Arts bonus action if they use their Attack action on grappling.
This is something that has bothered me for a while.
If you're inside a monster I can understand the Restrained condition.
I can understand all the circumstances where you might take incidental damage.
I can understand limiting your actions to what you have in your hand.
But I will never understand how a monster's AC is the same on the inside as it is on the outside. No armor, no scales, no hide, no dexterity; as a DM I might also negate the Disadvantage aspect as you have inherent Advantage from proximity. I think that I would make the AC a 10 unless something really weird was going on. I understand that this isn't RAW, but it would make sense to me were I running the game. I would consider using Suffocation rules, after all you're sloshing around in a bag full of gas and liquid.
But I will never understand how a monster's AC is the same on the inside as it is on the outside. No armor, no scales, no hide, no dexterity; as a DM I might also negate the Disadvantage aspect as you have inherent Advantage from proximity. I think that I would make the AC a 10 unless something really weird was going on. I understand that this isn't RAW, but it would make sense to me were I running the game. I would consider using Suffocation rules, after all you're sloshing around in a bag full of gas and liquid.
I'd be wary about doing that; disadvantage and advantage don't stack in D&D 5e, and always cancel out, so anything that lets you gain advantage effectively lets you ignore all sources of disadvantage you have from being restrained, blinded etc., which means lowering the AC could make it overly easy to fight something from within.
Unless you're into vore (probably don't look it up) and want your party to spend most of all future encounters inside your boss monsters to exploit this then I think leaving the AC intact is the best thing to do, as even big creatures like dragons wouldn't have enough internal space for you to move around normally within, so there should still be some penalty.
I get what you're saying. Couple it with the fact that very few monsters can actually swallow something whole without killing it in the process. It's all a silly situation. I think if you're in something's stomach, it's not a "Jonah and the Whale situation"; I think you will be fully restrained by the muscular walls of the stomach, submerged at least partially in digestive fluids, and suffocation would be fairly quick. If it happened fast, then you wouldn't have had time to load your lungs with air, so I'd say you have just a few rounds before your unconscious and start rolling Death Saves. So, if you have your weapon in hand - after making the esophageal transit - you might be able to poke around, but your not slashing. If you don't have a weapon drawn, you're not drawing one except maybe a dagger. A caster isn't going to be able to reach components. Maybe poking it might cause it to regurgitate you? I would just avoid having monsters swallow PCs while they're conscious.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Yeah what people have said so far houserule it so you can use acrobatics, or just Dex instead of Str and allow that for the Grapple feat too if the player is inclined to take it.
I made a homebrew subclass where I tried to tackle this issue and a few others I thought remained with the monk making the class somewhat MAD (multiple attribute dependent)
Though 5e corrected alot that made Monk really bad and kinda broken in the previous editions.
Here is the homebrew subclass if you are interested
https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/class-forums/monk/51764-way-of-the-closed-fist
I guess one question would be; why is your Monk trying to grapple targets?
The types of martial arts that Monks seem intended to represent aren't really ones I'd say involve a lot of grappling, as Monks have a lot of emphasis on strikes, mobility and active defence. With that in mind, you would be more likely to want to throw an enemy than grapple them, as quite a lot of martial arts involve throws, and some of these also involve pinning on the ground. Way of the Open Hand for example lets you attempt to push or knock prone an enemy when you unleash a flurry of blows, which suits some of these styles quite well as you strike to distract or gain advantage, before pushing/throwing or knocking prone.
Grappling in D&D is strange in that it doesn't really give you the ability to subdue an enemy in the way you see in martial arts, it only stops them from moving away from you; they can otherwise act normally without further action and a DM ruling.
As others have said, you could certainly ask your DM to allow Dexterity for a grapple check, though I'm not sure if I'd allow it personally, as the action of grappling is to restrict movement, which means you need to be able to hold the target in place which isn't really a dextrous act. Speed/agility would certainly let you grab them, but if you can't hold them in place then they aren't grappled; all you've done is attached yourself to them. 😉
It's kind of weird we don't actually have a proper restrain action available, as part of a grapple or otherwise, as you could argue dexterity for that (as it's a matter of getting in position to lock arms, wrap a leg around etc.) but it's just not really a mechanic in D&D without magic or similar (or time and a rope).
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
The Grappler feat does provide a guaranteed mechanic for pinning the target.
That said I don't think it's strange there's no official, general way to pin a target at will. It's a bit like asking for a way to stab your target in the eye at will. The combat system is built around combatants not getting much control over the outcome of attacks and really good outcomes (e.g. critical hits) being luck-based. A DM could add optional rules to make exceptional attacks possible but that would complicate the rules to a degree not everyone will benefit from, so it's left up to the people that like that kind of combat.
Excellent! I totally forgot about that variant. I'll totally use it. Thanks.
I often struggle with grappling. What type of rules do you use for it? And is it successful?
I replace the initial contest with an unarmed strike against 10 + the target's Dexterity saving throw modifier (i.e. the number on the saving throw section of the character sheet or monster stat block, or the Dexterity modifier if the monster lacks Dexterity saving throw proficiency.) On a hit, the attack deals no damage and the target makes a Strength saving throw against 15 + the attacker's Strength modifier. The higher base DC is needed to compensate for the fact that the attacker now has two chances to fail. Proficiency bonus isn't included on the save because it'd push the DCs above 20, which is extremely rare in 5e and could easily produce unescapable DCs for monsters without high strength scores. I still use the usual ability contest for escaping the grapple, but with a +5 bonus if the attacker or victim are using both hands.
Running it this way fixes a couple of things I consider broken in the official rules:
As a bonus, treating the attack roll as an unarmed strike lets monks use Dexterity for their attack roll as usual and lets them qualify for the Martial Arts bonus action if they use their Attack action on grappling.
This is something that has bothered me for a while.
If you're inside a monster I can understand the Restrained condition.
I can understand all the circumstances where you might take incidental damage.
I can understand limiting your actions to what you have in your hand.
But I will never understand how a monster's AC is the same on the inside as it is on the outside. No armor, no scales, no hide, no dexterity; as a DM I might also negate the Disadvantage aspect as you have inherent Advantage from proximity. I think that I would make the AC a 10 unless something really weird was going on. I understand that this isn't RAW, but it would make sense to me were I running the game. I would consider using Suffocation rules, after all you're sloshing around in a bag full of gas and liquid.
I'd be wary about doing that; disadvantage and advantage don't stack in D&D 5e, and always cancel out, so anything that lets you gain advantage effectively lets you ignore all sources of disadvantage you have from being restrained, blinded etc., which means lowering the AC could make it overly easy to fight something from within.
Unless you're into vore (probably don't look it up) and want your party to spend most of all future encounters inside your boss monsters to exploit this then I think leaving the AC intact is the best thing to do, as even big creatures like dragons wouldn't have enough internal space for you to move around normally within, so there should still be some penalty.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
I get what you're saying. Couple it with the fact that very few monsters can actually swallow something whole without killing it in the process. It's all a silly situation. I think if you're in something's stomach, it's not a "Jonah and the Whale situation"; I think you will be fully restrained by the muscular walls of the stomach, submerged at least partially in digestive fluids, and suffocation would be fairly quick. If it happened fast, then you wouldn't have had time to load your lungs with air, so I'd say you have just a few rounds before your unconscious and start rolling Death Saves. So, if you have your weapon in hand - after making the esophageal transit - you might be able to poke around, but your not slashing. If you don't have a weapon drawn, you're not drawing one except maybe a dagger. A caster isn't going to be able to reach components. Maybe poking it might cause it to regurgitate you? I would just avoid having monsters swallow PCs while they're conscious.