D&D 5E Saving throw to resist a grapple

[Greenstone.Walker]

Some comments in the "Consequences of failure" made me think. in 5E, saving throws are generally reactive (an instinctive response to something) and ability checks are generally proactive (you are trying to do something). Grapple checks are called out as breaking this consistency.

So, what is the hivemind's opinion on change grappling to be consistent with other abilities (the web spell for example).

Grappling
When 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. If you are proficient in Athletics then the saving throw DC is 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Strength modifier, otherwise it is 8 + your Strength modifier.

The target of your grapple must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach. Using at least one free hand, you try to seize the target by making a grapple check instead of an attack roll: The target must make a Strength or Dexterity saving throw (its choice). On a failed save, the creature is grappled. The creatire fails automatically if it is incapacitated. The grappled 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 (its choice) against your grapple save DC.

 

[DND_Reborn]

It would work fine IMO. However, I don't think it will change a lot, but you should think about how many creatures have proficiency in Athletics or Acrobatics in order to escape vs. how many have proficiency in STR or DEX saves. IME it seems like not a lot of creatures have either, but maybe a bit more have proficiency in the skills over the saves...

 

[5ekyu]

Not part of any hivemind, so just responding as an individual.

First, why? I get the notion ofsdome thread theory but every house rule is another exception you have to reference and this one hits a lot of stat blocks. So, unless you get a noticable in-play gain at the table, why add the house rule?

Second, I think by shifting the defense away from skill check to save, you really change the dynamics to favor the grappler. Expertise and skill adjusting features are more common than save adjusters are.

Right now, two characters both with relevant expertise balance each out, but if the defender turns to save... no expertise for that.

Off hand, my GM yellow light is flashing in a way that says this on the surface looks simple but has a lot more under the hood wrinkles that hit in play. Before I did it, I would go thru a lot of in-game interactions looking for unintended consequences.

This seems like a change for "aesthetic theory craft" that will actually hit play much more significantly.

 

[the Jester]

Sounds like a solution in search of a problem to me, frankly. Is there some reason you want to change this (other than simply making it more consistent)? Is there some way that you feel this would improve the game?

 

[ad_hoc]

Sounds like a solution in search of a problem to me, frankly. Is there some reason you want to change this (other than simply making it more consistent)? Is there some way that you feel this would improve the game?

Well it makes PC grappling worse.

Most monsters don't have proficiency in skills but they do have proficiency in saving throws.

So it gives big strong monsters a chance to resist the Bard's grapple if that is a thing that you want in your game.

I've thought about such a houserule myself, but ultimately, I find most houserules not worth the effort and confusion.

 

[DND_Reborn]

{snip}

I've thought about such a houserule myself, but ultimately, I find most houserules not worth the effort and confusion.

That is my greatest concern with adapting a house-rule.

 

[robus]

I understand where the OP is coming from but there are a decent number of creatures that auto-grapple on a successful attack and they’re certainly not always proficient in athletics, so what would happen with those cases?

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

Sounds like a solution in search of a problem to me, frankly. Is there some reason you want to change this (other than simply making it more consistent)? Is there some way that you feel this would improve the game?

Consistency is it. The more consistent the rules are, the less to teach new players and the less cognitive load at the table. Also, it bugs the Sheldon part of my brain.

Monster grapples are all "on a successful attack, the monster does damage and also grapples you, then as an action on your turn you can make an ability check against a fixed DC.", which is more consistent with web than with PC grappling rules.

 

[theapoapostolov]

Some comments on the "Consequences of failure" made me think. in 5E, saving throws are generally reactive (an instinctive response to something) and ability checks are generally proactive (you are trying to do something). Grapple checks are called out as breaking this consistency.

Is there a design intent behind this? The way I see it, because grapple is a precondition to other abilities and effects, the designers wanted everything to be graspable within reason, which includes a luck window of 19 rather than ~9.5. A luck window, modified by proficiency and few points of attribute modifiers is still more luck than skill, thus being a "luck roll" like all opposed checks in the game.

Now, the real broken thing is using the "luck roll" mechanics for shoving, knocking prone and - worst of all! - disarming. These actions have actual consequences beyond the standard prerequisite condition and but still completely disregard skill and modifiers in favor of the roll. In my own house rules here I use check vs DC the same way you propose.

Pathfinder 2e is solving the issue by making Grappling an Athletics vs 10+FORT (a Fortitude DC) but PF2 has a much better system for tiered proficiencies where even your saves can be leveled and improved with feats. There's more design space to work with.

 

[theapoapostolov]

Grappling
When 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. If you are proficient in Athletics then the saving throw DC is 8 + your proficiency bonus + your Strength modifier, otherwise it is 8 + your Strength modifier.

The target of your grapple must be no more than one size larger than you and must be within your reach. Using at least one free hand, you try to seize the target by making a grapple check instead of an attack roll: The target must make a Strength or Dexterity saving throw (its choice). On a failed save, the creature is grappled. The creature fails automatically if it is incapacitated. The grappled 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 (its choice) against your grapple save DC.

How do you handle advantage and disadvantage on the resisting target? Statements such as "you have advantage on checks to resist a grapple" would need to affect the DC, and although they can be converted to disadvantage to the grappler he may already have disadvantage from a different effect. I lean towards statistical average +3 to DC (not +5 as this is an optimal advantage and is overpowered).