A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon)Natural attacks are not made with weapons, and you only take the -4 penalty on weapons you are not proficient with. Therefore, anyone who gains a natural attack even if they don't have it racially doesn't take the -4. That knocks off point 2.
Likewise, held spells aren't weapons, so there's no non-proficiency penalty there. Even if they're called "weapon-like", that doesn't make them weapons. That's point 3.
Well by the Combat rules those spells are unarmed attacks. Unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so you don't need to be proficient in them, by your explanation, and yet you do have proficiency in them. So while I think it's goofy as heck, can you find a source saying you don't need proficiency? :P
This is purely just to sate my curiosity at this point. ^-^"
Unarmed strikes are weapons - they're specifically called out as such, and they show up on the weapon table. So you do need to be proficient in them (which everyone is, by the rule cited above). Unarmed strikes are also one kind of unarmed attack, but unarmed attacks can be made with a weapon (unarmed strike or gauntlets), natural attacks, or spells. Since the latter two aren't weapons, they don't have non-proficiency penalties. Unarmed attacks made with weapons do require proficiency for those weapons.
Text trumps table every time.
That's a rule from the 3.X FAQ. Show me where it says that in Pathfinder? (:
Unarmed strikes are weapons - they're specifically called out as such, and they show up on the weapon table. So you do need to be proficient in them (which everyone is, by the rule cited above). Unarmed strikes are also one kind of unarmed attack, but unarmed attacks can be made with a weapon (unarmed strike or gauntlets), natural attacks, or spells. Since the latter two aren't weapons, they don't have non-proficiency penalties. Unarmed attacks made with weapons do require proficiency for those weapons.
A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon)Natural attacks are not made with weapons, and you only take the -4 penalty on weapons you are not proficient with. Therefore, anyone who gains a natural attack even if they don't have it racially doesn't take the -4. That knocks off point 2.
Likewise, held spells aren't weapons, so there's no non-proficiency penalty there. Even if they're called "weapon-like", that doesn't make them weapons. That's point 3.
Well by the Combat rules those spells are unarmed attacks. Unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so you don't need to be proficient in them, by your explanation, and yet you do have proficiency in them. So while I think it's goofy as heck, can you find a source saying you don't need proficiency? :P
This is purely just to sate my curiosity at this point. ^-^"
Cool deal Bobson. You've convinced me 100%.
So monks need to sacrifice a feat to gain proficiency in gauntlets. Harsh but probably worth it. Just a feat tax I suppose. Might make multiclass monks even more attractive than they already were though. :o
Cool deal Bobson. You've convinced me 100%.
So monks need to sacrifice a feat to gain proficiency in gauntlets. Harsh but probably worth it. Just a feat tax I suppose. Might make multiclass monks even more attractive than they already were though. :o
They still wouldn't be able to flurry with a gauntlet, since it's not a monk weapon, and the requirement is "unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon". So even less useful, unless your archetype replaces flurry.
Man I really didn't need to read all this (head hurts) so my monk friend will just have to get magic finger tattoos. I know he is not going to ditch a flurry for some enhanced gauntlets also can he have gauntlets on hands attack and next time flurry with non enhanced unweaponized feet, elbow, etc??
I would like to thank all of u for posting I wish there was add to friends thing on here cuz I would add all of you.
They still wouldn't be able to flurry with a gauntlet, since it's not a monk weapon, and the requirement is "unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon". So even less useful, unless your archetype replaces flurry.Cool deal Bobson. You've convinced me 100%.
So monks need to sacrifice a feat to gain proficiency in gauntlets. Harsh but probably worth it. Just a feat tax I suppose. Might make multiclass monks even more attractive than they already were though. :o
Ah, point taken. Thanks again Bobson. You make a good argument, sir. :)
I guess I will need to house-rule this one for my own games, since I have one guy who likes playing monks. I'll let 'em know of this mistake, and just add it to our list of minor changes. :P
Thanks again for setting me strait. ^-^
Poor monks. :(
Poor monks. :(
That boat dropped off the edge of the world with Monk of the Healing Hand. But then that boat grew wings with synthesists, so I am meh.
I would allow them personally because I think it makes sense. That and I love monks.
Pats Bobson on the back, and list his post. :)
my monk friend will just have to get magic finger tattoos. I know he is not going to ditch a flurry for some enhanced gauntlets also can he have gauntlets on hands attack and next time flurry with non enhanced unweaponized feet, elbow, etc??
I would like to thank all of u for posting I wish there was add to friends thing on here cuz I would add all of you.
Can anyone answer my last question?
Sorry. I did not see your post before.
Yes he can attack with his feet, elbows, and so on, but there is no way to add the enhancement bonus to the gauntlets to those attacks.
There is also no way to flurry, and get the guantlet attacks.
Thanks
|
I would allow them personally because I think it makes sense. That and I love monks.
I would allow them too, because I love monks too.
Though personally I'd recommend a more flavor neutral solution first, so that they can have a wider range of aesthetics to choose from(tattoos, armwraps, nothin' on at all) by just having the enhancing method apply to unarmed strike involving the entire body. Whereever the tattoos are, it works for the whole body. Armwraps and legwraps? Infuses the entire body. Did your own rituals with expensive ingredients to enhance yourself directly? Whole thing!
Keeps the monk from being reduced to punch-punch-punch-punch.
Now that the RAW's out of the way, I'll say that I have allowed monks to get unarmed-strike-boosting magic items at weapon prices instead of AoMF prices. I forget if it was flavored as a gauntlet/cestus/brass knuckles, but in general, I'm willing to work with a monk to let it happen. It's a house rule every time, though.
Now that the RAW's out of the way, I'll say that I have allowed monks to get unarmed-strike-boosting magic items at weapon prices instead of AoMF prices. I forget if it was flavored as a gauntlet/cestus/brass knuckles, but in general, I'm willing to work with a monk to let it happen. It's a house rule every time, though.
I like you Bobson. Did I ever tell you that? ^-^
Can u give a monk something to take up the glove slot and enchant it to increase damage output or add effects also Anyway a unarmed strike can be poisoned?
I used the Monks Robe (monk's to hit and damage rate five levels higher than the monk), Amulet of Mighty Fists +5 (which can be enchanted if I remember correctly, I used Bane on Evil Outsider), and the Belt of Physical Perfection (I think it was a +3) for my monk to best maximize the damage output/to hit ratio.
As far as this whole debate of gauntlets being used by monks, why bother? You can't use it with the Flurry of Blows feat because it is not a Monk specific weapon, and monks aren't meant to be damage dealing frontline types anyways. I used mine as a flank buddy for the frontline types, and for quick gorrilla strikes to distract the enemies. Also found that using spring attack coupled with improved disarm or trip REALLY annoys the enemy spellcasters to no end haha.