Grapple SM question

[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?

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by 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?

It would be the same as attacking an area of a size equal to weapon size (or bullet / explosion size for ranged attacks).

[MagiMaster]

So what would the bonus or penalty on that be?

Also, thinking about a flyswatter, is it just allowing you to avoid the pulling-your-punches-to-not-hurt-your-hand-against-the-wall penalty, or is it offering some bonus or enabling some maneuver?

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

Oh, so you only count weapon size relative to the target if the attacker is SM+7 larger?

Honestly, I don't know the RAW, but the simplest way is to figure the SM of the striking surface of the attack (a slapping palm is about SM -7, a flyswatter is SM -6 or so) and always use the greater of the target and weapon size modifier.

[MagiMaster]

That sounds like a reasonable compromise, and not too hard to keep up with either. (So it'd be attack with the maximum of [relative sm] or [absolute weapon sm]. The absolute part still sounds a little funny, but it's probably fine.)

I'm not sure most flyswatters are a full +1 SM over a palm though.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by MagiMaster

That sounds like a reasonable compromise, and not too hard to keep up with either. (So it'd be attack with the maximum of [relative sm] or [absolute weapon sm]. The absolute part still sounds a little funny, but it's probably fine.)

Relative SM of weapon, not absolute.

Originally Posted by MagiMaster

I'm not sure most flyswatters are a full +1 SM over a palm though.

Yeah, I'd agree with that.

A perforated flyswatter probably also gives flies a penalty to Dodge because it's harder for their airflow senses to detect.

[MagiMaster]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Relative SM of weapon, not absolute.

Wouldn't the relative SM of the weapon always be greater than the relative SM of the person?

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Yeah, I'd agree with that.

A perforated flyswatter probably also gives flies a penalty to Dodge because it's harder for their airflow senses to detect.

That makes sense. I think flies would have a pretty good dodge.

[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.

[munin]

Originally Posted by blahpers

... 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?...

No, it's the difference between trying to catch something with your hand ... and trying to catch something by throwing your entire body at it.

RAW, they're both grappling rolls, but Kromm is saying a GM might choose to let relative SM be a bonus for the latter (since being bigger is helpful when you throw your body at something) and a penalty for the former (since the target being smaller makes it harder to "hit" them with a grab), if they feel that better represents what's happening.