I ran a session yesterday in which a player wanted to grapple enemies and pin them to the ground and noticed that there were no rules for grappling.

I house ruled this as:

Grappling

Cost: AP 2

Effect: Make an opposed Weapon Skill check. If you succeed, the enemy cannot take any actions until he is no longer grappled. On the grappled enemy's turn, he may spend 1 AP to make an opposed Strength or Weapon Skill check (grappled enemy's choice) with the grappler. If he succeeds, he is no longer grappled.

When you make a successful grapple with an opponent, you may spend 1AP to try and knock him Prone. This requires a successful Opposed Strength check at +10 for the grappler.

I know that it needs to be cleaned up, but I'm posting this from work at the moment, and will revise it when I get home. Hoping to see something official in the eratta.

In our games, grappling was probably the single most difficult and time-consuming mechanic. For me, it wouldn't be a bad thing if they drop the whole concept in this edition.

I do see why some folk would like to use it (especially for certain weapons that entangle people), and think your House Rule is in line with the DH1 mechanic, but it is pretty powerful. I speak having played psykers with low Strength and Weapon Skill, for whom getting grappled is pretty much 'combat over' (and, on occasion, 'burn a Fate Point').

Perhaps, if it is included in the new system, there would need to be more options for escaping a grapple. How about wriggling out of it, rather than just strength-based options?

Why would you ever grapple a human? In this game they tend to explode when they die.

Grappling countered people with high evasion, if you were grappled you couldn't evade at all. It was better in DW and BC though.

Grappling in DH1 was overly complex. I can't say I'm sad to see it gone.

If there's an overwhelming cry for it, maybe add a path in the melee talent tree to improve unarmed combat attacks. Having a complex subsystem for grappling needlessly complicates an already complicated game.

Use a web pistol.

If you want grapple rules, i'd suggest starting with the Snare special rule (p137). Use RAW or perhaps a minor tweak and have the test to break or wriggle free opposed to the grappler's skill?

Grappling isn't really an optional thing. You can't just say "I'm glad it's gone because it was a pain for x characters." Grappling is something that happens regardless of whether you want it to or not. What if I want to catch someone before they make it to a gravcar, or take someone down in a non-lethal way because I need to question him.

Work arounds and hacks aren't the answer, grappling rules need to be in the book. Sure the might need streamlining from more complex rules, but it's not really something you can just pretend never happens.

Yeah, I'm with Zethnar.

A game that focuses on investigation clearly has a need to capture individuals. Obviously this can sometimes be done as easily as convincing them by shoving a gun in their face, but sometimes you need to capture them. Grappling is how you do that if you don't have shock mauls ready.

I could see a cheap and easy hack where Grappling is some sort of 3-4 AP attack made using WS, and gives Snare(1/2 * SB) on the target.

There needs to be non-lethal takedowns, sure. There already exists Sapping and Concussive weapon special qualities - all you need is some way to apply those to unarmed combat to clobber someone unconscious. The grappling rules as they exist in DH1 are a mess, not a 'pain for x characters'. There were a bunch of unarmed talents in OW, right? Add those in and you've got your non-lethal takedowns. Done.

The attacker could use Athletics to attack opposed by the defenders Acrobatics or Athletics skills.

The grappling rules as they exist in DH1 are a mess, not a 'pain for x characters'. There were a bunch of unarmed talents in OW, right? Add those in and you've got your non-lethal takedowns. Done.

I'm not saying the rules from DH1 need to be ported straight across, just that grappling needs to be covered somehow by the new core rulebook. I don't have access to OW as I wasn't particularly interested in any of the games beyond Rogue Trader, so I don't have the option of just grafting them in from somewhere else.

Again though, that is just a hack to get some kind of grapple rules into the game. I shouldn't have to make my own additions for something which should be considered a core element of combat.

Any long term player of RPGs will tell you that grappling rules are an absolute must for nearly every RPG. Its also probably the stickiest widget in almost every system. I actually think at least a couple pages should be dedicated to grapple - tackling, immobilizing, arm locks...its the kind of thing you do in Dark Heresy. How else are you going to interrogate/torture a cultist for information? (assuming you don't have telepathy)

I disagree wholeheartedly. A couple of talents that allow you to inflict (Stunned/Immobilized/Prone/whatever) on a successful opposed check is simple and gets straight to what a grappling system tries to solve. A multi-page subsystem for unarmed combat is a needless complication. Why have two sets of rules for combat?

Here is a fairly common occurrence: An Arbite Seeker and an Imperial Guard warrior pursue two suspects through a hive and the suspects split up. The Arbite Seeker who is a master of Takedowns easily incapacitates his target but unfortunately the suspect knows nothing. The warrior catches up to the other suspect but he has no talents for grappling at all, just a good weapon skill and strength. He has to capture the suspect but now there are NO rules for him to grapple.

Now lets say we go with WS to hit with a melee and Opposed S to hold on (which is pretty much the old system).

First of all in this system the untrained Warrior is more capable (due to high S) than the trained Seeker.

Second of all if the suspect is, lets say, a major villain without a high S (such as a cult leader, governor, or

even most assassins, psykers, and tech priests) its quite likely he will never get away.

Third, most S tests are failed (30-40% success) and many times this type of test becomes a contest of fail.

Fourth, how long does it take to break away? If its a lot of APs grappling is like a cheap stasis grenade (frustrating when a pathetic human grapples a chaos marine). If its no APs grappling can be ineffectual.

Fifth, what if the Warrior needs to arm lock/sleeper hold/head butt the suspect? He can't do it unless he has the right talent?

I'm all for grappling rules, but keep them brief. They don't need to be more than a small set of rules that focus on simply incapacitating enemies using your hands/arms/body. Preferably making use of more than just Strength, but still, an expansive system isn't needed by any means. Abstraction isn't always a bad thing.

What, mechanically, do you think the difference should be between an arm lock and a strangle hold?

I can't help but read your whole post as an argument against having a grappling subsystem. If Player Character B (the Guardsman) chases down and engages the plot-critical major villain and overpowers him with his high strength, that should be the end of it. Congratulations, you caught the bad guy, here's the plot information he had (or similar).

If you absolutely need unarmed combat to be a thing, a talent or two that improves unarmed damage and inflicts fatigue or status effects should be all you need (these are in Only War, to my recollection). There's no reason fists should follow a completely different set of rules in combat than anything else.

Any long term player of RPGs will tell you that grappling rules are an absolute must for nearly every RPG. Its also probably the stickiest widget in almost every system. I actually think at least a couple pages should be dedicated to grapple - tackling, immobilizing, arm locks...its the kind of thing you do in Dark Heresy. How else are you going to interrogate/torture a cultist for information? (assuming you don't have telepathy)

I've never once had someone use grappling in 10 years of gaming. So yea, I disagree, because it's just as easy to knock someone out with non-lethal damage (using talents, like in the original game, like Takedown, etc), and then question them after waking up. Plus pretty much every set of grappling rules I've ever read have been broken.

But what sources of non-lethal damage do we have here?

Shock Mauls are hard to get for what they should be (its -20 avl right now). And they're kinda tricky to wield "usefully" as they're now basic weapons. They used to just be scarce (which I guess would be -10 in this system).

But besides Shock Mauls, what tools do PCs have for either inflicting Fatiuge on an enemy that doesn't include attacking them, or what means do PCs have of trapping enemies (besides webbers). Web grenades I guess, but that seems to be an odd grenade type (especially being more common than stun grenades).

My players and I grapple all of the time. I don't think I've ever had a campaignwhere someone hasn't tried to pin someone or get them in a headlock at least once. I agree that grappling rules have never been perfect, there needs to be some mention of them if only to say,"grappling in hand to hand combat should be handled through GM caveat."

It comes down to this: If I want my character to be able to take someone alive and he's reasonably trained in hand to hand combat I shouldn't have to resort to a grenade or a net gun nor should I be considered SOL if I didn't have the forethought to buy Takedown.

Any long term player of RPGs will tell you that grappling rules are an absolute must for nearly every RPG. Its also probably the stickiest widget in almost every system. I actually think at least a couple pages should be dedicated to grapple - tackling, immobilizing, arm locks...its the kind of thing you do in Dark Heresy. How else are you going to interrogate/torture a cultist for information? (assuming you don't have telepathy)

I've never once had someone use grappling in 10 years of gaming. So yea, I disagree, because it's just as easy to knock someone out with non-lethal damage (using talents, like in the original game, like Takedown, etc), and then question them after waking up. Plus pretty much every set of grappling rules I've ever read have been broken.

It comes down to this: If I want my character to be able to take someone alive and he's reasonably trained in hand to hand combat I shouldn't have to resort to a grenade or a net gun nor should I be considered SOL if I didn't have the forethought to buy Takedown.

I agree completely.

It's one of the criticisms I have of the Talent system: If you don't have a specific talent, then you can't even attempt the action the Talent makes available. For certain exotic actions or traits, that's fine! But in other situations I find that these rules restrict role-playing more than they facilitate it.

Don't have Takedown? Guess you can't use non-lethal force on him. Don't have Public Speaking? Guess you can't scare more than one person in the group of scum coming at you, even if you're waving your bolter around. Etc Etc.

It comes down to this: If I want my character to be able to take someone alive and he's reasonably trained in hand to hand combat I shouldn't have to resort to a grenade or a net gun nor should I be considered SOL if I didn't have the forethought to buy Takedown.

I agree completely.

It's one of the criticisms I have of the Talent system: If you don't have a specific talent, then you can't even attempt the action the Talent makes available. For certain exotic actions or traits, that's fine! But in other situations I find that these rules restrict role-playing more than they facilitate it.

Don't have Takedown? Guess you can't use non-lethal force on him. Don't have Public Speaking? Guess you can't scare more than one person in the group of scum coming at you, even if you're waving your bolter around. Etc Etc.

Overwatch.

Unless you have Overwatch, you cannot look in a general direction and shoot when someone pops their head out.

So. Much. Wat.