Why is the last clause (“and the target’s Location must have no Routes to Outside Locations”) necessary?

That clause is to keep what felt like the original intent of the rule. Under the current version, you can’t grapple from Pork Shed to Tent. Under the new version, you can’t grapple from Pork Shed to Tent.

It’s specifically intended to fix cases where someone is in a position where they couldn’t previously be grappled, ever.

Come to think of it though, there’s no in-universe explanation so I’ll drop that clause.

Works for me. Greentick

What nuance is this giving us over just removing the words “The actor must be Outside and” from the existing restriction?

Literally none. I just sought to keep the new version somewhat similar to the old version, but I’d have no objections to a new version of this proposal that removed that part of the restriction.

I’m fine with Grappling where it is.

Course you are, you’re in the cellar

Mi cava es su cava.