| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the errata. |
In the Adventurer's Armory, there are three new weapons that seem useful for monks. However, I'm not 100% sure they are, and I'm looking for some clarity.
Brass Knuckles are listed on the chart as an unarmed attack doing 1d3/x2. In the text, however, it says they let you deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks. My thinking is that when weilded by a monk, the monk would get to do his Monk Unarmed Damage instead of the 1d3 (which is the normal unarmed damage for a non-monk). In other words, the brass knuckles merely modify unarmed damage, turning it lethal, rather than doing damage themselves?
Cestus are listed as light melee weapons doing 1d4/19-20/x2 and count as monk weapons. Again, in the text, it says that your unarmed attacks deal "normal" (aka lethal) damage. Does the cestus damage replace the monk's unarmed damage? Since it's listed as a light melee weapon, I suspect not.
The last item is a Rope Gauntlet, an exotic light melee weapon doing 1d4/x2, not listed as a monk weapon, and also apparently converting unarmed nonlethal to lethal damage. Again, I wonder if a monk could instead do his monk unarmed damage with these?
The last two, being listed as melee weapons, I'm thinking probably can't substitute monk unarmed, but brass knuckles could, I think. Which would be a nice way to give a monk some access to magical weaponry without screwing his damage and/or flurry.
These seem more like ways that a non-monk could effectively fight "unarmed". Also, for a monk who wants a magical weapon, the amulet of mighty fists allows you to have any enchantments that a magic weapon would, with the added perk that it does not require you to have an enhancement bonus to get other enchantments. Thus, you could have an amulet of mighty fists which is flaming, but not +1 flaming. A bit more expensive than the equivalent magic weapon, but worth it, considering all the other benefits monks get by using their unarmed strikes, and considering the fact that a +1 flaming brass knuckles would cost 4k + masterwork weapon price, whereas a flaming amulet of mighty fists costs 2500.
but worth it, considering all the other benefits monks get by using their unarmed strikes
Just curious, what would this be?
I really like the weapons, and i would allow (as a DM) to use em as a monk to enchant his "fist".In my game they would use the damagedice of the monk and transfer all the enchantments on all his unarmed strikes.
But, i think this is a dm-call and you should talk with yours about it...
|
Unless the weapon specifically says that you use the monks unarmed damage, then you don't. You'd use the damage listed for that weapon, just like you would for a longsword or a kama.
Monk weapons allow the monk to use fob with them, and add his full strength bonus to the offhand attacks. The major benefit of using weapons instead of fists is with enchanting them. There've been a few long threads about enhancing a monks unarmed strike in this way.
Your dm will have to decide whether or not it's an appropriate option to include in your campaign. In my personal opinion, allowing a monk to enhance his fists to a max of +10 *as with standard weapons* throws the balance off.
Go go brilliant energy, +5, and flaming.
Specifically with the chance to hit a mob and deal damage on the many iterative attacks granted by FOB, when considered with the other benefits granted to monks. I think that the farther you go up in levels, the more the monk would over-perform other 1-off classes like the bard or the rogue. Possibly the druid, now that he's super MAD :D
As for the benefits of the unarmed strike...
Using the unarmed strike, monks can't ever be disarmed, can fight without penalty while holding items in their hands, deal higher base damage as they level than other weapons*highest base dmg on a light weapon is 1d6, the monk goes up to 2d10*, can enjoy the full range of two-weapon-fighting feats without having to qualify for any of them, can channel stunning fists through them,can switch between lethal and non-lethal without penalty, can bypass damage reduction through Ki Pool with them, and probably a few more I can't think of.
But again, it's something to discuss with your gm. Some don't have a problem with it at all :)
Go go brilliant energy, +5, and flaming.
You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.
|
|
Generally speaking, when you use a monk weapon, you use the damage of the weapon itself and not the monk's unarmed strike. The main benefit of using such a weapon is that you can still get your Flurry of Blows, along with enchantments on the weapon that might not be possible on your unarmed strikes, along with special materials.
However in the event that the weapon doesn't have its own damage and states something like "makes your unarmed damage lethal" then it would simply take your unarmed strike damage (which a monk *can* do non-lethally) and makes it lethal... for a monk that damage is more than for someone else.
|
|
However in the event that the weapon doesn't have its own damage and states something like "makes your unarmed damage lethal" then it would simply take your unarmed strike damage (which a monk *can* do non-lethally) and makes it lethal... for a monk that damage is more than for someone else.
There is that as well. It just seems to be useless for a monk, since they can already switch their unarmed damage between lethal and nonlethal whenever they want (as you mentioned). I suppose it could help in that you could enchant it like a weapon to get some bonuses, instead of having to use the amulet of mighty fists?
|
Go go brilliant energy, +5, and flaming.You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.
nah, you just KICK the crap outta those ones. punch living things, kick non living. simple. :P
However in the event that the weapon doesn't have its own damage and states something like "makes your unarmed damage lethal" then it would simply take your unarmed strike damage (which a monk *can* do non-lethally) and makes it lethal... for a monk that damage is more than for someone else.There is that as well. It just seems to be useless for a monk, since they can already switch their unarmed damage between lethal and nonlethal whenever they want (as you mentioned). I suppose it could help in that you could enchant it like a weapon to get some bonuses, instead of having to use the amulet of mighty fists?
Exactly where this would be most useful. A +5 speeding, wounding weapon like this would offer much more to the monk than an amulet, and would end up being cheaper per + too.
FWIW, I think that monks should be able to use fist weaponry.
House rule #37: some items (brass knuckles, cestus, gauntlets, rope gauntlets, and other such things... ninja claws? iron boots? steel cap?) aren't weapon by themselves. Instead, they improve the wielder's unarmed damage by one size category. I also allow the Improved Unarmed Strike to raise this damage by one step (already included in the monk's unarmed damage progression). A level 1-3 monk using such an item on one of his limb would be able to do 1d8 damage with that limb. A non-monk character would be able to do 1d6 (instead of the regular 1d3 for Medium caracters making an unarmed strike + the size increment from IUS). The item could also be made of special material and hold magical weapon enhancements. I also imagine the spiked gauntlets as little spikes on a regular gauntlet, not Wolverine-like claws, and thus include them in the list of items enhancing unarmed strikes (like a Morningstar, they'd do Piercing AND Bludgeoning damage).
Monks can deal lethal damage unarmed, to be repetitive in case it wasn't "heard" the first time. They don't need fist-weapons in that particular respect.
I have a feeling the intended purposes of the knucks, cesti, and gauntlets were meant to provide non-monk characters a means of being able to fist-fight without a mess of feats to keep them from provoking AOOs, etc. and to have weapons that fighters could train in (I imagine all of these count as "close" weapons). It's a way of making barroom brawls and press-gang attacks a little more dangerous.
I would probably go with a RAW interpretation and say that since the description does not specifically indicate the fist-weapons can be applied to monks' unarmed strikes, they cannot be. Doing so would bring up all kinds of other complications, like can you enhance a monk's cestus attack with ki and so on. And being able to have a fully enchanted fist weapon, a freed amulet slot, and the ki abilities related to unarmed strike might be considered by some to be a little broken.
If someone wanted to houserule it in for their purposes, I certainly could see why, however.
For any character (monk, fighter with IUS, etc.) already able to strike with unarmed strikes lethally without these implements, they are quite useless. No monk would choose to use a weapon bringing his 1d6+ attack back to 1d4 with no advantage at all. Hence my earlier proposal (which, I agree, is a house-rule, not RAW).
My interpretation of Ki Strike is that it can only be chanelled through an empty hand, and thus wouldn't be compatible with fist implements (or any manufactured weapon, in fact) except specific enchantments. With this in mind, I don't think the monk would be that broken when compared to a TWF fighter of the same level.
|
nah, you just KICK the crap outta those ones. punch living things, kick non living. simple. :PGo go brilliant energy, +5, and flaming.You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.
That's actually not possible, they all count as unarmed strikes, thus they are all brilliant energy. Doesn't matter if you describe it as a kick a punch, a headbut, or an erection ram. It's all an unarmed strike and if you make your unarmed strike brilliant energy by whatever means, they are all modified, unless you have a lenient DM.
For any character (monk, fighter with IUS, etc.) already able to strike with unarmed strikes lethally without these implements, they are quite useless. No monk would choose to use a weapon bringing his 1d6+ attack back to 1d4 with no advantage at all.
Well, the cestus has a better critical range, so it's not quite "no advantage at all". But yes, the monk is probably better off using an unarmed strike in many cases.
Note: I like Monte Cook's solution of having a feat that allows a monk to magically enhance his fists. No fuss, no muss.
That's actually not possible, they all count as unarmed strikes, thus they are all brilliant energy. Doesn't matter if you describe it as a kick a punch, a headbut, or an erection ram. It's all an unarmed strike and if you make your unarmed strike brilliant energy by whatever means, they are all modified, unless you have a lenient DM.nah, you just KICK the crap outta those ones. punch living things, kick non living. simple. :PGo go brilliant energy, +5, and flaming.You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.
While I agree that kicks, punches, head butts, etc.. are all unarmed attacks, I disagree that if you enchance/enchant a single limb, then all the rest are enchanted as well.
A monk can mix up their attacks between weapons in hand with attacks wtih no weapon in hand, as they will. Your interpretation would seem to disallow that.
|
|
That's actually not possible, they all count as unarmed strikes, thus they are all brilliant energy. Doesn't matter if you describe it as a kick a punch, a headbut, or an erection ram. It's all an unarmed strike and if you make your unarmed strike brilliant energy by whatever means, they are all modified, unless you have a lenient DM.nah, you just KICK the crap outta those ones. punch living things, kick non living. simple. :PGo go brilliant energy, +5, and flaming.You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.While I agree that kicks, punches, head butts, etc.. are all unarmed attacks, I disagree that if you enchance/enchant a single limb, then all the rest are enchanted as well.
A monk can mix up their attacks between weapons in hand with attacks wtih no weapon in hand, as they will. Your interpretation would seem to disallow that.
I'm talking RAW you're either talking RAI or houserules.
I'm talking RAW you're either talking RAI or houserules.
Could you point out which rules you are basing your interpretation on? I may be a bit brain dead, as I can't seem to recall or find the RAW that you are using for this.
|
|
Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet.or
Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts
It's all listed as unarmed strike, there are no rules for separating fists from feet, therefor when you enchant your unarmed strike you are enchanting anything with which you can make an unarmed strike.
This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons.
Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks. See Table: Melee Weapon Special Abilities for a list of abilities. Special abilities count as additional bonuses for determining the market value of the item, but do not modify attack or damage bonuses. An amulet of mighty fists cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +5. An amulet of mighty fists does not need to have a +1 enhancement bonus to grant a melee weapon special ability
Once again, it only affects your unarmed strike, not specifically your fists.
Anything that specifically enhances unarmed strikes with fists only is a houserule.
I don't have this book yet.
Are there some alternative "historical" weapons and armors?
or an erection ram
I think I saw that movie. College buddy had it... wacky kung-fu film.
The OP seems to be asking multiple questions here and many have chimed in on monks using magical weapons. But the OP also seems concerned with letting monks deal lethal damage:
In the Adventurer's Armory, there are three new weapons that seem useful for monks.
Brass Knuckles let you deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks.
Cestus deal "normal" (aka lethal) damage.
Rope Gauntlet, converting unarmed nonlethal to lethal damage.
I would like to point out that, at least for monks, this is not an issue. They can choose lethal or non-lethal damage with every attack, even with just their bare hands. This is also true of anyone using Improved Unarmed Strike.
So the only people who need any weapon on this list for the purpose of dealing lethal damage are those who have not taken Improved Unarmed Strike.
Just in case that was unclear.
|
|
so if a monk has a brilliant energy amulet of mighty fists, do his boots and rings fall of since his limbs pass threw non living matter? does he sink into the ground up to his knees (since thighs arent considered a weapon)? damn. hope you dont gotta eat or drink. cant pick anything up unless its alive. you cant even take the amulet off yourself, since your fingers would pass right threw it. great way to curse a monk :P
|
|
You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.
Meh, either activate it or don't. Versus constructs, don't.
Though... if you houseruled that it affected the monks whole body, you could use it to fall to the center of the earth... ish. Maybe. Don't forget your necklace of adaption though :D
|
|
so if a monk has a brilliant energy amulet of mighty fists, do his boots and rings fall of since his limbs pass threw non living matter? does he sink into the ground up to his knees (since thighs arent considered a weapon)? damn. hope you dont gotta eat or drink. cant pick anything up unless its alive. you cant even take the amulet off yourself, since your fingers would pass right threw it. great way to curse a monk :P
Actually the amulet would just fall off as its non-living matter, congradulations you've just created the most expensive non-wearable necklace ever :D
You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.Meh, either activate it or don't. Versus constructs, don't.
Brilliant energy is not an activatable weapon enchantment. It's always-on.
This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons.
Once again, it only affects your unarmed strike, not specifically your fists.
Anything that specifically enhances unarmed strikes with fists only is a houserule.
How do you line that up with the spells Magic Fang and Greater Magic Fang?
Magic fang: gives one natural weapon or unarmed strike of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage roll
Greater Magic Fang: Alternatively, you may imbue all of the creature’s natural weapons with a +1 enhancement bonus.
Please note that your amulet of mighty fists requires greater magic fang to create.
|
|
o_O
pg 550 table 15-29 estimating magic item gold piece values
command word activation is cheaper than use-activated or continuous.
Seems to me that if you're crating a custom magic item, or having one crafted for you, then switching between trigger-types to reduce costs is a viable option.
Heck, I don't think it's game-breaking to require the monk to spend his first action 70+% of the time to activate his brilliant energy whatevers.
Then again, we're already talking about house-rules for the monk to enchant himself :/ So we're already getting a little goofy.
Fun thought:
Brilliant energy sword floating inside a golem when the sword is dispelled.
Golem with amulet of brilliant energy.
Oh. Stone golem with some oozes strategically placed, and now you have a riding compartment inside the golem for the monk. That's a fun enough idea that I might have to oust one of my upcoming npcs for this :p.
Though, for those of you talking about using the brilliant energy on the amulet of might fists, the bonus is provided to attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons.
Notice that it says nothing at all about providing the bonus at any other time.
So the only part that would be brilliant energy would be the weapon, and only as you're attacking with it. I.E. your fist, then your foot, then your spine, so on and so forth. There's no threat of it falling off of you if you use it. Plus, at least then you can take it off before you fight the golem :/
|
|
Brilliant energy is not an activatable weapon enchantment. It's always-on.You really, really don't want to enchant your only weapon with brilliant energy. Nonliving things are 100% immune to brilliant energy weapons. That means you have no offense at all against undead or constructs.Meh, either activate it or don't. Versus constructs, don't.
Well, technically it's only on as long as you wear the amulet, so it's more versatile than a weapon enhancement in that respect.
|
|
This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons.
Once again, it only affects your unarmed strike, not specifically your fists.
Anything that specifically enhances unarmed strikes with fists only is a houserule.
How do you line that up with the spells Magic Fang and Greater Magic Fang?
Magic fang: gives one natural weapon or unarmed strike of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage roll
Greater Magic Fang: Alternatively, you may imbue all of the creature’s natural weapons with a +1 enhancement bonus.
Please note that your amulet of mighty fists requires greater magic fang to create.
What do you mean, I don't understand the question. You have magic fang cast on you, you either improve unarmed strike, or a natural weapon. What are you asking?
It's the same thing. If you choose unarmed strike as the recipient anything you use be it headbutt or regular butt attack or fist is enhanced. Are you saying that when someone casts magic fang you make them specify which limb they are casting it on and only make attacks with that limb?
In the Adventurer's Armory, there are three new weapons that seem useful for monks. However, I'm not 100% sure they are, and I'm looking for some clarity.
Aside from enchantment potential and flavor I think the one redeeming aspect of these weapons is that they may allow the monk to bypass DR (adamantine, silver, cold iron...) at low levels.
How do you line that up with the spells Magic Fang and Greater Magic Fang?
Magic fang: gives one natural weapon or unarmed strike of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage roll
Greater Magic Fang: Alternatively, you may imbue all of the creature’s natural weapons with a +1 enhancement bonus.
Please note that your amulet of mighty fists requires greater magic fang to create.
What do you mean, I don't understand the question. You have magic fang cast on you, you either improve unarmed strike, or a natural weapon. What are you asking?
It's the same thing. If you choose unarmed strike as the recipient anything you use be it headbutt or regular butt attack or fist is enhanced. Are you saying that when someone casts magic fang you make them specify which limb they are casting it on and only make attacks with that limb?
Magic Fang improves one natural weapon or unarmed strike. Please note the singular. Not all of the unarmed strikes are improved, just one (say your left hand). A monk could do his flurry of blows only using that left hand, but it would still only be the left hand that was enhanced.
This leads me to interpret that if you find a way to enhance a limb, say with brilliant energy, then you can still use all of your other limbs in regular combat against any foe.
So, what I am saying is that I agree that someone using improved unarmed strike can attack with any part of their body. But if they enhance any specific limb, only that limb is enhanced. In the same way if a monk uses an adamantine vorpal kama in one hand, then only attacks made with that hand/weapon bypass adamantine.
Under Gauntlet:
This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack.
...
From these I've thought (in 3e and it hasn't changed in PF) that a monk using a gauntlet would still deal unarmed strike damage. The listed damage on the table is trumped by the text. It represents the default unarmed strike damage, while the monk is a special case.
The wording on brass knuckles and cestus seem to fall into the same category here.
You'll note that unarmed strike is listed on the table as well with a set damage. Monks are the exception here.
-James
That is not quite true.
This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack.
The italized text basically means that you provoke attacks of opportunity when attacking with gauntlets, unless you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. As the rules state "This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes". That is the sole effect of the gauntlets.
For comparison read the spiked gauntlet entry.
An attack with a spiked gauntlet is considered an armed attack.
Unlike gauntlets spiked gauntlets are actual weapons, like cesti and brass knuckles.
When attacking with ANY kind of weapon, the monk's unarmed damage does not trump weapon damage.
|
|
Magic Fang improves one natural weapon or unarmed strike. Please note the singular. Not all of the unarmed strikes are improved, just one (say your left hand). A monk could do his flurry of blows only using that left hand, but it would still only be the left hand that was enhanced.
This leads me to interpret that if you find a way to enhance a limb, say with brilliant energy, then you can still use all of your other limbs in regular combat against any foe.So, what I am saying is that I agree that someone using improved unarmed strike can attack with any part of their body. But if they enhance any specific limb, only that limb is enhanced. In the same way if a monk uses an adamantine vorpal kama in one hand, then only attacks made with that hand/weapon bypass adamantine
Except there is no such thing as types of unarmed strike. Otherwise weapon focus (unarmed strike) would have to choose weapon focus (fist), weapon focus (knee), weapon focus (ass). Whereas there are different types of natural attacks. Which is why you are specifying which type of natural attack. You can't have it both ways. Well I suppose you can, there's nothing wrong with it, as long as you specify that its you changing it because that's the way you prefer it.
|
|
lastknightleft is correct. The difference is between weapon focus and the greater magic fang spell.
Weapon Focus, as written, applies to *all* weapons of the type taken. You could take Weapon Focus (claw), have a billion claws, and it would apply to all of them. Greater Magic Fang specifically only applies to a single attack.
Unarmed Strike is a single weapon. The flavor may describe it as a number different weapons, but in mechanics, it is one weapon. This is why greater magic fang applies to all attacks with it. Note that while a monster might have '2 claws, 1 bite' as its attacks, you never ever see '2 unarmed strikes'. It is always 'unarmed strike'. You might see 2 'slams', but those are not unarmed strikes.
An unarmed strike is a very unique exception to the rules. In any case, greater magic fang will apply to all attacks made with it.
To add to the mix- I know the Rope thingies allow you to do slashing damage (there by changing the damage type) but does Cestus allow a change to piercing too? Could just be a non-Feat way for Monkees to get different damage types?
... The line you, yourself, quoted is saying that gauntlets let you deal lethal damage with unarmed strikes...
And that is all that it does. It does not prevent its wearer from being attacked with AoO when making unarmed attacks. Gautlets allows the wearer to deliver 1d3 lethal damage. Thats all they do.
They are of no use whatsoever to a monk.The brass knucles are much like gauntlets, while cesti are more akin to spiked gauntles, since the wearer actually makes armed attacks (rather than unarmed attacks with them.
|
In organized play (AKA by RAW) I would have to say the knuckles do damage as listed always.
In my home game I would probably allow brass knuckles to be used as a monks "unarmed strike" and use the monk's progressions with one caveat, the monk's attacks are no longer considered 'natural attacks'. So you could enhance the weapon but it wouldn't stack with spells or items that enhance natural weapons.
In other words you can use the knuckles, enhance them magically, but you can't double dip.
Where in the description does it state that "monks override the listed damage for unarmed strikes with this weapon"? If it doesn't state that then you are clearly just assuming that's the way it works because that's the way you want it to work. You can argue up and down about it all day but that doesn't make it RAW.
Except it does stat you deal your unarmed damage with it. To say otherwise when it is presented in front of you in the text is being willfully ignorant.
From the Cestus weapon description:
"The cestus is a glove of leather or thick cloth that covers the wielder from mid-finger to mid-forearm. It is reinforced with metal plates over the fingers and often lined with wicked spikes and fangs along the backs of the hands and wrists. While wearing a cestus, you are considered armed and your unarmed attacks deal normal damage rather than nonlethal damage. If you are proficient with a cestus, your unarmed strikes may deal bludgeoning or piercing damage. When using a cestus, your fingers are mostly exposed, allowing you to wield or carry items in that hand, but the constriction of the weapon at your knuckles gives you a –2 penalty on all precision-based tasks involving that hand (such as opening locks)."
Bold for emphasis. Also note the increased critical range. Text > tables.
Actually gauntlets can be enchanted and made from special materials. The attacks they do are unarmed strikes, just with a different mechanic.Likewise brass knuckles from its wording as well.
Gauntlets are a type of weapon. The mechanics of gauntlets are identical to other unarmed attacks except for the fact that they do 1d3 lethal damage.
To make things even worse for the gauntlet-monk, monks are not even proficient with gauntlets. Even if a monk somehow got it into his head to become proficient with gauntlets, he would never be able to use FOB with them anyway since they are not monk weapons.
The damage it lists is the normal unarmed strike damage for the given size.Monks override that listed damage for unarmed strikes, and hence override other 'weapon' attacks that modify unarmed strikes.
Nowhere do the rules state that monk unarmed damage supercedes the normal weapon damage of any weapon the monk wields.
While wearing gauntlets a monk can indeed choose to kick, elbow, knee or headbutt an enemy and thus do his normal unarmed strike damage, but would then forfeit any special abilities tied to the gauntlets. As soon as the monk choses to strike with his gauntlets, he not only does so at a -4 non-proficient penalty, and without FOB but deals only 1d3 damage.
Actually gauntlets can be enchanted and made from special materials. The attacks they do are unarmed strikes, just with a different mechanic.Likewise brass knuckles from its wording as well.
Gauntlets are a type of weapon. The mechanics of gauntlets are identical to other unarmed attacks except for the fact that they do 1d3 lethal damage.
To make things even worse for the gauntlet-monk, monks are not even proficient with gauntlets. Even if a monk somehow got it into his head to become proficient with gauntlets, he would never be able to use FOB with them anyway since they are not monk weapons.
The damage it lists is the normal unarmed strike damage for the given size.Monks override that listed damage for unarmed strikes, and hence override other 'weapon' attacks that modify unarmed strikes.
Nowhere do the rules state that monk unarmed damage supercedes the normal weapon damage of any weapon the monk wields.
While wearing gauntlets a monk can indeed choose to kick, elbow, knee or headbutt an enemy and thus do his normal unarmed strike damage, but would then forfeit any special abilities tied to the gauntlets. As soon as the monk choses to strike with his gauntlets, he not only does so at a -4 non-proficient penalty, and without FOB but deals only 1d3 damage.
While I think you are accurately describing the rules, this seems wildly out of step with what occurs in RL (or at least my understanding of physics). Someone who punches with spiked leather glove (designed for punching) does not suddenly do less damage. BUT to be fair, what is at fault here is the monk damage mechanic, not the cestus itself.
Well, at the risk of triggering a chorus of "3.5 rulings don't count!", I'm pretty sure a monk wearing gauntlets, proficient or not, still receives his or her improved unarmed strike damage.
Can a monk use a +5 gauntlet in an unarmed attack,
gaining all of her class benefits as well as the +5 bonus on
attack rolls and damage rolls from the gauntlet?Gauntlets are indeed a weapon. If a monk uses any weapon
not listed as a special monk weapon, she does not gain her
better attack rate. She would, however, gain the increased
damage for unarmed attacks.