If you use two attacks to grapple the same target twice, I'm pretty sure the target has to resolve each instance of the Grappled condition, one at a time.
The only counter argument I can see is that one ability check satisfies the escape condition for both
You could do this, but there would be almost no reason to. You could no longer attack the grappled creature, but they can still attack you all day without penalty. Further there is no benefit to your party. Being grappled doesn’t grant them advantage. I’d rule that a player cannot use both hands to grapple a creature, as that player is essentially no longer going to be contributing to combat which could cause a death spiral.
outside of combat sure.
but I think you would be correct as far as I understand it. The person would need to escape both grapples.
Nowhere does it state that you have to use hands to perform unarmed strikes.
"Unarmed Strike
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee attack, you can use a punch, kick, headbutt, or similar forceful blow. In game terms, this is an Unarmed Strike—a melee attack that involves you using your body to damage, grapple, or shove a target within 5 feet of you."
The reason to do this is because it takes an action to attempt an escape, meaning they could only escape one of your grapples per turn at the cost of their action.
It's effectively One Grapple per Hand. If multiple effects impose the same Grappled condition, each instance of the condition has its own duration, lasting until escape. A Grappled creature can use its action to make a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check against the grapple’s escape DC, ending (one of ) the condition on itself on a success.
Nowhere does it state that you have to use hands to perform unarmed strikes.
"Unarmed Strike
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee attack, you can use a punch, kick, headbutt, or similar forceful blow. In game terms, this is an Unarmed Strike—a melee attack that involves you using your body to damage, grapple, or shove a target within 5 feet of you."
The reason to do this is because it takes an action to attempt an escape, meaning they could only escape one of your grapples per turn at the cost of their action.
For most characters an unarmed strike is going to be 1-5 damage which is not worth it compared to their normal damage capability.
and there is no need to escape. The grappled person can still do their 30+ damage to the PC while the pc does at best 4-5 damage to them. There are no penalties for attacking the person grappling you.
also since most pcs get 2 attacks it would take both their attacks to grapple. Basically you are wasting your action to make the enemy stay in the spot they were probably already going to stay in.
It's like comparing apple to orange because grappling isn't about damage but speed reduction to limit movement.
Every attack can grapple a creature, each of which require an action to escape by it.
Sure but you are trading damage for holding a creature. To actually do damage to the creature you would need a 2nd pc to attack. But by not attacking you are effectively giving the opponent an extra 30+ hp each round
A single grapple has benefits I am not sure a double grapple does.
It's like comparing apple to orange because grappling isn't about damage but speed reduction to limit movement.
Every attack can grapple a creature, each of which require an action to escape by it.
Sure but you are trading damage for holding a creature. To actually do damage to the creature you would need a 2nd pc to attack. But by not attacking you are effectively giving the opponent an extra 30+ hp each round
A single grapple has benefits I am not sure a double grapple does.
Maybe? Unless their movement was reducing the ability of the rest of the party to effectively do damage to the target. A monk style opponent for example they give up their action vs a one grapple, but then use bonus actions to get enough distance the party is stuck with ranged attacks in which they may suck. With a double grapple it would take two turns of actions to break free, and you can always reestablish the 2nd hold to keep them pinned down permanently, and at that point you may frequently depending off the save is successful or not you may only need 1 attack used on the grapple to keep it at 2.
Not saying it isn't incredibly niche, but i can see it come up across a campaign.
edit to add, also in a RPG sometimes you just want to hold the guy down until the guards show up or something, or hold him to interrogate etc.
Right, you are purposefully avoid damaging a creature to instead grapple it not for inferior result, but for different one.
In a goal to limit movement, multi-grapple makes it harder to escape based on action economy.
Yes and no. Most creatures that are going to escape a grapple probably have a way to escape both simultaneously (via teleportation/an ability.)
Maybe in a particular encounter it makes sense. But normally if you double grapple someone they are going to kill you long before you manage to do anything to them. You need a second pc to actually deal damage for you.
Most creatures that are going to escape a grapple probably have a way to escape both simultaneously (via teleportation/an ability.)
I disagree, most creature don't have a way to escape outside the usual way, very few creatures can teleport.
But against one that can, grapple is not a good tactic indeed.
My point wasn’t most creatures. But most creatures that were going to escape the grapple. Because there are no penalties to attacking the person grappling you, the only reason you would ever want to escape is if you wanted to move. Since you are doing basically 0 damage , the grappled creature can just attack you all day. Also most classes need 1-2 turns to do a double grapple to begin with.
its hard to imagine a scenario where the monster isn’t just going to kill you and move.
The only time this might matter is if you are tossing them into an AOE.
Nowhere does it state that you have to use hands to perform unarmed strikes.
"Unarmed Strike
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee attack, you can use a punch, kick, headbutt, or similar forceful blow. In game terms, this is an Unarmed Strike—a melee attack that involves you using your body to damage, grapple, or shove a target within 5 feet of you."
The reason to do this is because it takes an action to attempt an escape, meaning they could only escape one of your grapples per turn at the cost of their action.
For most characters an unarmed strike is going to be 1-5 damage which is not worth it compared to their normal damage capability.
and there is no need to escape. The grappled person can still do their 30+ damage to the PC while the pc does at best 4-5 damage to them. There are no penalties for attacking the person grappling you.
also since most pcs get 2 attacks it would take both their attacks to grapple. Basically you are wasting your action to make the enemy stay in the spot they were probably already going to stay in.
1. Ok, let's be real. The only PCs who will likely be grappling in combat with any frequency are ones who are building for it. The only one who would be performing this double grapple would be a Monk with Grappler feat. I thought that was apparent, but I'll spell it out to avoid future confusion.
2. It's seems as though you may be unaware of popular grapple tactics and their effectiveness.
Grappler feat: grants adv to all attacks vs your target. If you're a monk with extra attack, that's 4 attacks with FoB. You also get 1 Punch and Grab per turn, for improved action economy.
Prone: grapple a prone enemy or knock a grappled enemy prone and boom.. instant adv for the party and disadvantage for the enemy who cant stand up with a 0 move speed. The party should generally be using focus fire in the first place.
Cheese Grater: holding or dragging your target through active damaging effects (spirit guardians, spike growth, moonbeam, a campfire, etc, etc,)
Control/Peeling: save a squishy caster or damaged ally by locking down their Attacker and dragging them 20ft away.
Flying Enemies: if you can get in range to grapple somehow, a 0 speed will cause them to fall, land prone, and be unable to get up or fly again while the grapple is maintained
Since you are doing basically 0 damage , the grappled creature can just attack you all day.
The grappler can also attack all day but it sorta defeat the purpose. If the target isn't trying to move away, and the grappler intend to just attack it, grapple is not a good tactic indeed.
In general grappling is mainly useful as movement control, by limiting target to move where it want to, and by letting you move it where you want to. If none of these is suitable in an encounter, where opposing targets melee attacks stand-still in a plain battlefield, it's best not to grapple, even less multi-grapple. So i guess it depends context matters.
It’s important to clarify that I’m not arguing against grappling. I’m saying that double grappling is almost always useless. Especially since the opponent gets to make a Dex or str saving throw to avoid being grappled while your DC is 8 + prof + str.
it might not even be beneficial to a monk if they have a low Str. And they are probably the class that it is most viable for.
The prone thing would be super lame.. makes no sense mechanically or thematically. Grappling in 5e isn't a wrestling match, it's just a tight grip so they can't move.
The cheese Grater counter is legit, but as a monk with grappler, you'd still have a huge advantage: can punch and grab in same attack if they break one of your grapples; make all attacks with advantage; can escape grapple as action and still attack or FoB with BA
I wasn't even saying it's a tactic for all situations. It's just a rules question. I brought it up in comment section of some grappling YouTube videos and people are saying you can't even DO the double grapple due to how they interpret the condition stacking/layering.
The reason it's useful is because 2024 makes it way easier to escape grapples now in general because it's not a contested check. If they ca just use an action to break the grapple, they can use their full move to get away (fly?) on the same turn.
Another party tactic is having another member slap some rope, manacles, or a chain on them as a utilize action to layer up to restrained
I wouldn’t say it’s lame because the rules require you to use your hands to grapple. There isn’t any real way to grapple a creature on the ground with your hands without also being on the ground.
Given the following:
- each arm can grapple independently
- same conditions don't stack, but they do layer
If you use two attacks to grapple the same target twice, I'm pretty sure the target has to resolve each instance of the Grappled condition, one at a time.
The only counter argument I can see is that one ability check satisfies the escape condition for both
You could do this, but there would be almost no reason to. You could no longer attack the grappled creature, but they can still attack you all day without penalty. Further there is no benefit to your party. Being grappled doesn’t grant them advantage. I’d rule that a player cannot use both hands to grapple a creature, as that player is essentially no longer going to be contributing to combat which could cause a death spiral.
outside of combat sure.
but I think you would be correct as far as I understand it. The person would need to escape both grapples.
Nowhere does it state that you have to use hands to perform unarmed strikes.
"Unarmed Strike
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee attack, you can use a punch, kick, headbutt, or similar forceful blow. In game terms, this is an Unarmed Strike—a melee attack that involves you using your body to damage, grapple, or shove a target within 5 feet of you."
The reason to do this is because it takes an action to attempt an escape, meaning they could only escape one of your grapples per turn at the cost of their action.
It's effectively One Grapple per Hand. If multiple effects impose the same Grappled condition, each instance of the condition has its own duration, lasting until escape. A Grappled creature can use its action to make a Strength (Athletics) or Dexterity (Acrobatics) check against the grapple’s escape DC, ending (one of ) the condition on itself on a success.
For most characters an unarmed strike is going to be 1-5 damage which is not worth it compared to their normal damage capability.
and there is no need to escape. The grappled person can still do their 30+ damage to the PC while the pc does at best 4-5 damage to them. There are no penalties for attacking the person grappling you.
also since most pcs get 2 attacks it would take both their attacks to grapple. Basically you are wasting your action to make the enemy stay in the spot they were probably already going to stay in.
It's like comparing apple to orange because grappling isn't about damage but speed reduction to limit movement.
Every attack can grapple a creature, each of which require an action to escape by it.
Sure but you are trading damage for holding a creature. To actually do damage to the creature you would need a 2nd pc to attack. But by not attacking you are effectively giving the opponent an extra 30+ hp each round
A single grapple has benefits I am not sure a double grapple does.
Maybe? Unless their movement was reducing the ability of the rest of the party to effectively do damage to the target. A monk style opponent for example they give up their action vs a one grapple, but then use bonus actions to get enough distance the party is stuck with ranged attacks in which they may suck. With a double grapple it would take two turns of actions to break free, and you can always reestablish the 2nd hold to keep them pinned down permanently, and at that point you may frequently depending off the save is successful or not you may only need 1 attack used on the grapple to keep it at 2.
Not saying it isn't incredibly niche, but i can see it come up across a campaign.
edit to add, also in a RPG sometimes you just want to hold the guy down until the guards show up or something, or hold him to interrogate etc.
Yes and no. Most creatures that are going to escape a grapple probably have a way to escape both simultaneously (via teleportation/an ability.)
Maybe in a particular encounter it makes sense. But normally if you double grapple someone they are going to kill you long before you manage to do anything to them. You need a second pc to actually deal damage for you.
I disagree, most creature don't have a way to escape outside the usual way, very few creatures can teleport.
But against one that can, grapple is not a good tactic indeed.
My point wasn’t most creatures. But most creatures that were going to escape the grapple. Because there are no penalties to attacking the person grappling you, the only reason you would ever want to escape is if you wanted to move. Since you are doing basically 0 damage , the grappled creature can just attack you all day. Also most classes need 1-2 turns to do a double grapple to begin with.
its hard to imagine a scenario where the monster isn’t just going to kill you and move.
The only time this might matter is if you are tossing them into an AOE.
1. Ok, let's be real. The only PCs who will likely be grappling in combat with any frequency are ones who are building for it. The only one who would be performing this double grapple would be a Monk with Grappler feat. I thought that was apparent, but I'll spell it out to avoid future confusion.
2. It's seems as though you may be unaware of popular grapple tactics and their effectiveness.
Grappler feat: grants adv to all attacks vs your target. If you're a monk with extra attack, that's 4 attacks with FoB. You also get 1 Punch and Grab per turn, for improved action economy.
Prone: grapple a prone enemy or knock a grappled enemy prone and boom.. instant adv for the party and disadvantage for the enemy who cant stand up with a 0 move speed. The party should generally be using focus fire in the first place.
Cheese Grater: holding or dragging your target through active damaging effects (spirit guardians, spike growth, moonbeam, a campfire, etc, etc,)
Control/Peeling: save a squishy caster or damaged ally by locking down their Attacker and dragging them 20ft away.
Flying Enemies: if you can get in range to grapple somehow, a 0 speed will cause them to fall, land prone, and be unable to get up or fly again while the grapple is maintained
The grappler can also attack all day but it sorta defeat the purpose. If the target isn't trying to move away, and the grappler intend to just attack it, grapple is not a good tactic indeed.
Sure a monk with the grappler feat may benefit from double grappling.
As for cheese grater the opponent just has to grapple you to prevent you from being able to do it.
I can see dms requiring you to be prone to grapple a prone target.
Further I’m not arguing that you shouldn’t grapple, but you shouldn’t double grapple.
In general grappling is mainly useful as movement control, by limiting target to move where it want to, and by letting you move it where you want to. If none of these is suitable in an encounter, where opposing targets melee attacks stand-still in a plain battlefield, it's best not to grapple, even less multi-grapple. So i guess it depends context matters.
It’s important to clarify that I’m not arguing against grappling. I’m saying that double grappling is almost always useless. Especially since the opponent gets to make a Dex or str saving throw to avoid being grappled while your DC is 8 + prof + str.
it might not even be beneficial to a monk if they have a low Str. And they are probably the class that it is most viable for.
The prone thing would be super lame.. makes no sense mechanically or thematically. Grappling in 5e isn't a wrestling match, it's just a tight grip so they can't move.
The cheese Grater counter is legit, but as a monk with grappler, you'd still have a huge advantage: can punch and grab in same attack if they break one of your grapples; make all attacks with advantage; can escape grapple as action and still attack or FoB with BA
I wasn't even saying it's a tactic for all situations. It's just a rules question. I brought it up in comment section of some grappling YouTube videos and people are saying you can't even DO the double grapple due to how they interpret the condition stacking/layering.
The reason it's useful is because 2024 makes it way easier to escape grapples now in general because it's not a contested check. If they ca just use an action to break the grapple, they can use their full move to get away (fly?) on the same turn.
Another party tactic is having another member slap some rope, manacles, or a chain on them as a utilize action to layer up to restrained
I wouldn’t say it’s lame because the rules require you to use your hands to grapple. There isn’t any real way to grapple a creature on the ground with your hands without also being on the ground.
Multi-grapple may be useful to counter escape action , as even if it succeed against one grapple, it remains grappled by another hand.
But serves no purposes against target that don't escape, or that can escape by distancing the grappler somehow (teleportation, forced movement etc)