The new Grappler feat has a feature that reads "When you hit a creature with an Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action on your turn, you can use both the Damage and the Grapple option. You can use this benefit only once per turn." Dealing damage is an attack roll, and "when you hit" makes me think an attack roll is involved, but grappling requires a saving throw. Do you make an attack roll that forces a save on a hit? They streamlined most effects like that away in the new rules (see the new Ray of Sickness). Would you allow a player to auto-grapple the target on a hit?

You'd normally make an attack roll as part of the Damage option, and if you hit, you can proceed to deal damage as usual plus use the Grapple option, save and all. If some other feature gives you a non-standard Unarmed Strike that also involves an attack roll, you could use with that too, though I don't know of any.

You're effectively getting a free attack (potentially every round), and the Grappled condition is now harsher than it was in 2014, so requiring the save is still justified. Your one attempt per turn isn't used up if you miss the attack anyways.

Wondering what you mean/ where you're seeing the damage part of "Monks can use Dex and do damage in the hit." Are you saying they get something similar to the Grappler feat's Punch and Grab? https://omegle****/ I haven't seen anything like that mentioned anywhere else online, so I'm curious

I haven't mentioned any Monk features, I'm just asking about Punch and Grab.

Hmmm. . . If we compare a level 4 character with 18 Str to the CR 1 monsters in the new free rules, you'd normally have a 50% chance to successfully grapple any of them. If you try to use Punch and Grab, that number goes DOWN to 35%, on average. Maybe the extra 5 damage is worth it, but it's definitely a tradeoff rather than a strict upgrade.

It seems like if grappling is a part of your game plan, you should just grapple normally. The Grappler feat is probably still worth it for the other benefits, but you can skip over Punch and Grab.

You're correct for the case of only making 1 attack, since you have to succeed on two D20 Tests to get the grapple that way. However, the probability of hitting at least once quickly approaches 100% as you add attacks.

Using the same numbers as in your example (70% hit chance, 50% save chance), the odds of hitting at least 1 out of 2 attacks is 91% (1 - 0.30^2), so you end up with a 45.5% chance of getting a free grapple.

A 5th level Fighter will have 2 attacks and the option to double that with Action Surge, a Monk would reliably get 3-4 depending on whether they use Flurry of Blows. Additionally, if a Monk stuns an enemy with Stunning Strike, the grapple save will automatically fail.

Quote from SomeSortofThing >>

Do you make an attack roll that forces a save on a hit?

Yeah, that one. You attack to hit, and if you do you both deal Damage and force a Grapple saving throw

True, making more attempts will always boost your odds. 45.5% seems right for 2 attacks, but it's still less than the 75% you get for 2 normal grapple attempts, which you can also get more of with Extra Attack, Action Surge, or Flurry of Blows. The way this is set up now, Punch and Grab functions as a small boost to your Unarmed Strike, rather than your grapple, and unless you're a Monk or a Dance Bard, you're likely not relying on your Unarmed Strikes. It's also questionable whether grappling can be treated as an "extra little treat."  If you have plan for it, you'll maximize your chances at it, and if you don't, you won't bother because it'll free up your hands.

I'll admit I hadn't considered Stunning Strike though. That seems like it could be a fun combo.

45.5% is just the odds that you succeed via the feat. That's not the final probability that you can succeed on any grapple; if you fail a Punch And Grab, you can still make further grapple attempts as usual. Let's break it down:

• 35% of the time you'll hit and also succeed on a Punch And Grab with your initial attack (70% * 50%)
• 17.5% of the time you'll hit but fail to grapple, then go for a normal grapple on your second attack and succeed (70% * 50% * 50%)
• 15% of the time you'll miss your first attack, then go for a normal grapple on your second attack and succeed (30% * 50%)

So the Punch And Grab strategy has a 67.5% chance of succeeding on the grapple vs 75% for the pure grapple strategy. The odds get closer as you add more attacks or your hit rate improves. If you had Advantage on your first attack, the Punch And Grab strategy has a 72.75% chance of succeeding on the grapple, and you're getting at least 1 hit in the process.

I think the best way to use Punch and Grab is as part of a Wrestler build, where you're grappling just to get advantage on future attacks (my math tells me that even with the reduced grapple chance it does result in higher average DPR). But if you're just trying to keep an enemy off your allies or are doing a forced movement cheese strat, you probably care about the grapple landing more than the extra damage, in which case you should still just grapple normally. There is no situation, other than an automatic hit with an Unarmed Strike, where Punch and Grab gives you as good odds.

The difference in grapple rate is so small that unless the consequence of not getting it is immediate death, the extra damage from the hit (which could potentially be a crit) plus the chance to Stunning Strike, Improved Critical, use Battle Master maneuvers, etc. has a better chance of making a difference than the 7.5% chance (or less) that the Punch And Grab costs you the grapple. You still have to reduce the enemy's HP to 0, and every time you sacrifice an attack for a grapple attempt you're delaying that goal.

Quote from InquisitiveCoder >>

You still have to reduce the enemy's HP to 0, and every time you sacrifice an attack for a grapple attempt you're delaying that goal.

True, but at that point you should be hitting them with a sword rather than your fists. Again I have to ask, in what situations (other than wrestler builds) is Punch and Grab the best option?

And would removing an extra roll, increasing the odds by 7.5-15%, really break this feat?

Quote from SomeSortofThing>>

True, but at that point you should be hitting them with a sword rather than your fists.

It's not going to make a difference for a Monk, and the damage difference is going to be minimal for a Fighter using a one-handed weapon. If they're picking this feat, they're probably also taking Unarmed Fighting style and dealing an extra 1d4 damage.

Again I have to ask, in what situations (other than wrestler builds) is Punch and Grab the best option?

Any situation where the consequences of a failed grapple is death. Any build that takes this feat instead of Great Weapon Master, Polearm Master, etc. is a wrestler build anyways.

And would removing an extra roll, increasing the odds by 7.5-15%, really break this feat?

 Considering how strong grappling already is with or without the feat, the free grapple attempt, the permanent Advantage, and the lack of movement penalty, I don't think this feat needs any more help, no.

Quote from SomeSortofThing >>

The new Grappler feat has a feature that reads "When you hit a creature with an Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action on your turn, you can use both the Damage and the Grapple option. You can use this benefit only once per turn." Dealing damage is an attack roll, and "when you hit" makes me think an attack roll is involved, but grappling requires a saving throw. Do you make an attack roll that forces a save on a hit? They streamlined most effects like that away in the new rules (see the new Ray of Sickness). Would you allow a player to auto-grapple the target on a hit?

Can you cite where grappling requires a saving throw in 2024, please?  The rules do not indicate it needs one during the initial grapple attempt, just at the end of the entity being grappled turn.  Grapple is just one of 3 options when using an unarmed strike as an attack.

Quote from ConnorReece >> 

Can you cite where grappling requires a saving throw in 2024, please?  The rules do not indicate it needs one during the initial grapple attempt, just at the end of the entity being grappled turn.  Grapple is just one of 3 options when using an unarmed strike as an attack.

The Unarmed Strike Rules:

Grapple. The target must succeed on a Strength or Dexterity saving throw (it chooses which), or it has the Grappled condition. The DC for the saving throw and any escape attempts equals 8 plus your Strength modifier and Proficiency Bonus. This grapple is possible only if the target is no more than one size larger than you and if you have a hand free to grab it.

So for a monk with the Grappler feat, can they make an unarmed strike, damage and grapple and Stunning Strike so that SS is first and they automatically fail the save because of the condition?

Not sure order of operation on this so I assume not, but just popped into my head, lol. 

I'd say you hit with an Unarmed Strike you do Damage, Grapple option then Stunning Strike effect.

Quote from ThriKreenWarrior >>

So for a monk with the Grappler feat, can they make an unarmed strike, damage and grapple and Stunning Strike so that SS is first and they automatically fail the save because of the condition?

I think that's legitimate.

After reconsideration, since both the option of Grappler and Stunning Strike happen when you hit a creature with an Unarmed Strike, i believe the rules on Simultaneous Effects should let you should decides the order in which those things happen.

Quote from Plaguescarred >>

After reconsideration, since both the option of Grappler and Stunning Strike happen when you hit a creature with an Unarmed Strike, i believe the rules on Simultaneous Effects should let you should decides the order in which those things happen.

 That was my thinking, but I wasn’t sure so I wanted to ask and get opinions