Grapple SM question

[blahpers]

So SM difference affects melee rolls to hit. For example, if Utahraptor (SM +2) attempts to stomp a snake alien (SM -4), my Brawling roll gets a -6 to hit. This is weird, as it doesn't seem to scale well (move Utahraptor up to Amphicoelias at SM +8 and explain how it can't stomp that damn snake without a -12 penalty), but that's another issue that's been beaten to death, and this question is about rules as written.

The rules for grappling say that larger creatures get a bonus when grappling smaller creatures equal to the difference in size modifier. This would give Utahraptor a +6 bonus to grapple the snake with its claws, feet, or jaws (ignoring Born Biter for simplicity's sake).

My question is, do these stack--that is, is grappling considered an attack for the purposes of the first rule? If so, that means that the grappling bonus for size always cancels out the attack penalty for size, and that makes it seem kind of silly to define an effective zero modifier as "+X, then -X". If not, then are there other "attacks" where the large size penalty does not apply?

* On the beaten to death issue, I have a personal opinion: Relative SM shouldn't modify attack rolls at all--it should modify dodge rolls, with dodge being disallowed or rapidly penalized when the cross-section of the attack is larger than a step or two for the target and they aren't on All-Out Defense. Even on AOD, if the cross-section is larger than the target can move in the attacker's turn (a second, unless Altered Time Rate is involved), then nix the dodge. In short: nobody ever has trouble kicking a dead cat.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

Relative SM: doesn't it depend on the weapon size? Your stomper's foot might come out at a petty SM-5 which works out to -1 to hit.

No, weapon sized does not come into it, until the weapon because big enough relative to the target that it effectively an Area attack.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

No, weapon sized does not come into it, until the weapon because big enough relative to the target that it effectively an Area attack.

Which is automatic if there's 7 or more SM difference between the two of you. And seems to extend to "I'm wielding a weapon for someone 7 SM larger than me, because I'm a super hero. I smash you now."

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

Grab: can't find anything about SM difference adding to your chance to hit, only to your effective skill for after you've got a grip.

I've listed every single rule in GURPS 4e that I can find relating to Size Modifier, with a page reference. http://ottgaming.grimoire.ca/Borderlands/Size_Modifier

That is #7 under positives for being bigger: "Easier to hit when you grapple (relative SM +1 or more, B402) "

[MagiMaster]

The rules are ambiguous as to whether the +1 per relative SM for grappling is in addition to the general -1 per relative SM for melee, or if it replaces it.

[munin]

I asked Kromm about this in a private PM a couple years ago:

munin: If an SM +3 giant tries to grapple an SM -2 halfling, does the +5 bonus (B402) stack with the -2 penalty (B19), producing a total +3 bonus? If the SM -2 halfling tries to grapple the SM +3 giant, he'd get +3 to hit (B19) and no penalty to grapple (B402), also producing a +3 bonus?

Kromm: Don't double-count. The rule for grappling supersedes the general rule for attack rolls. Only apply it. Do not then apply a second SM-related rule.

munin: Intuitively, ignoring a target's ability to dodge, it should be harder to grab a small target than to grab a large target...

Kromm: Grappling isn't grabbing. Grappling is actual wrestling moves. For that, being much larger is clearly an advantage. Grappling someone your size or bigger, you can't engulf the target. Grappling a mouse, you can. That's what the bonus represents.


However, back in 2005 Kromm posted this:

Originally Posted by Kromm

... SM applies as usual when grappling; if you try to grapple a mouse, you suffer its SM on your attack roll just as you would on any attack roll, and you grapple at -9 or so...

In explaining the difference to me by PM, he said this:

Kromm: The problem is that there's a big difference between engulfing your foe with your entire body (as in wrestling, where a human would have an overwhelming advantage) and just snatching something small in one hand (where a human would have a disadvantage). I think the game differentiates these cases poorly. It would be simple enough, though, to use one modifier in the first case and another in the second. Of course, this would be a GM call.

[MagiMaster]

Rereading Large Area Injury (B400), it doesn't mention whether or not this changes the attack roll for the attacker in any way (other than disallowing targeted attacks). Wouldn't you get some kind of bonus if you're aiming for something bigger than Torso? Would you just treat it as attacking their hex? Also, would the defender have to defend as if it were an area attack?

[blahpers]

Originally Posted by munin

I asked Kromm about this in a private PM a couple years ago:

munin: If an SM +3 giant tries to grapple an SM -2 halfling, does the +5 bonus (B402) stack with the -2 penalty (B19), producing a total +3 bonus? If the SM -2 halfling tries to grapple the SM +3 giant, he'd get +3 to hit (B19) and no penalty to grapple (B402), also producing a +3 bonus?

Kromm: Don't double-count. The rule for grappling supersedes the general rule for attack rolls. Only apply it. Do not then apply a second SM-related rule.

munin: Intuitively, ignoring a target's ability to dodge, it should be harder to grab a small target than to grab a large target...

Kromm: Grappling isn't grabbing. Grappling is actual wrestling moves. For that, being much larger is clearly an advantage. Grappling someone your size or bigger, you can't engulf the target. Grappling a mouse, you can. That's what the bonus represents.


However, back in 2005 Kromm posted this:



In explaining the difference to me by PM, he said this:

Kromm: The problem is that there's a big difference between engulfing your foe with your entire body (as in wrestling, where a human would have an overwhelming advantage) and just snatching something small in one hand (where a human would have a disadvantage). I think the game differentiates these cases poorly. It would be simple enough, though, to use one modifier in the first case and another in the second. Of course, this would be a GM call.

Aww, Kromm. Why you no resolve ambiguity?

So, at small differences the size penalty does not apply, but at large differences it does apply, with no defined way of telling which is which nor a gradual progression from one to the other?

Something tells me they didn't think this one through. Gonna have to house rule it or something. Large area rules don't seem to help, and area attack seems strange (and it merely dodges the ambiguity rather than resolving it)

Thanks for the advice.