Aesatchien's page

i like nimble hand for a toxicologist melee build, since both applying the poison and drawing it is a Interact action

That's a good one to add to the list.

The Nimble Shield Hand feat is a bit confusing to me as to what you can actually do with it.

You are so used to wielding a shield that you can do so even while using the hand that’s holding it for other purposes. The hand you use to wield a shield counts as a free hand for the purposes of the Interact action. You can also hold another object in this hand (but you still can’t use it to wield a weapon). This benefit doesn’t apply to tower shields, which are still too cumbersome.

A quick read makes it seem as if you now might do anything with that shield hand that you could do with a buckler, in that is a now a free hand that can't hold a weapon. However, by RAW it appears it is only granting a free hand for holding objects and for the purposes of an Interact action, which severely limits it compared to a buckler when your other hand is holding a weapon.

Benefits of Nimble Shield Hand vs. Regular Shield (my interpretation based on the Interact action):

• - Clerics could hold their holy symbol, no longer needing Emblazon Armament to cast spells like 3- action heal while using a shield and holding a weapon
• - Open a door
• - Draw/stow/retrieve items
• - Use a potion (because their activation is an interact)
• - Use a wand/read a scroll (because you can hold them in your hand while you use the Cast A Spell action)
• - Gloves of Storing
• - Others?

Benefits of a buckler that you don't get with Nimble Shield Hand (my interpretation):

• - Grab an Edge (reaction)
• - Disarm/Grapple/Trip/Shove use of free-hand
• - Quick Alchemy
• - Casting spells with Material components
• - All the Fighter/Rogue feats that need a free hand
• - Others?

In order for the Nimble Shield Hand to not be so restrictive c.f. what a buckler grants, it would have needed to grant the Free- Hand weapon trait and then modify it to not be able to wield a weapon.
Does the above sound correct?

RAW, you may have a point. However, see this thread for a similar discussion.

Thanks for the link. That's definitely related to what I wanted to see.

RAI, I'm sure the gloves are intended to let the wearer snatch arrows twice a day even if they don't have the Deflect Arrows feat.

I think 90% of players would just do that because that seems the most logical, unless you are applying the rules parsing precision common to games like Magic and that's where the hangup occurs.

It's actually coming up in our current campaign since we're about to take on some ogres, and being able to catch javelins twice per day seems like it will come in very handy.

If the check you're making is for an activity that takes longer than a day, I'd simply have you spend one use of it every day until you're ready to make the check.

That's a decent compromise, especially if crafting on the road.

Sometimes when RAW allows something it seems a bit broad so in cases like this I suppose it has to come down to a houserule to prohibit it. I know there are several re-roll threads but I can't find any clarity on stuff like this. It would be nice to know if this had a common solution or developer guideline somewhere.

Our group hasn't been able to come to a conclusion on this debate. Our Cleric has the Luck domain, so he can in theory re-roll anything and take the 2nd roll. The sorcerer also made a Fortunate Charm to get re-rolls on crafting wondrous items. However, is it permissible to do this in all occasions? Specifically, our DM has an issue with using it on week-long endeavors like Handle Animal or Spellcraft checks on Craft Wondrous Item. Good Fortune is similar to the Fortunate Charm in that respect, since one lets you re-roll any d20 and the other any skill or concentration check. RAW it seems we can use it on anything, so our DM is willing to allow it. (Note - we're not trying to stack them, just seeing if there is some rule that prevents us from using these abilities/items on crafting.)

I'm having a discussion with another player over the interpretation of the description of the Gloves of Arrow Snaring and I'd like help getting a consensus / ruling. You may think I'm an idiot for asking this but it's subtle.

The argument comes down to the following: 1) either the gloves flat out grant you the ability to catch arrows and optionally throw them back twice per day, or 2) they allow you to do this if you already have the Deflect Arrows feat and you are essentially buying only the ability to use the last feat in the Snatch Arrows chain twice per day.

Initially it would seem obvious that you're meant to put them on and catch arrows twice per day regardless of dex and feat prereqs. But is that actually the case? Please play strict attention to RAW to help us on this, because the crux comes from Snatch Arrows explicitly saying that you can only catch ranged attacks when using the Deflect Arrows prerequisite feat. It appears that the critical decision is whether or not the gloves also grant Deflect Arrows (item text says you can use Snatch Arrows feat w/o the prereqs, not that you are treated as having the prereqs, which RAW should be two different things) or you must also have the Deflect Arrows feat to use this item. Is this a case similar to the specific overruling the general, as in an item description supersedes the feat description on a conflict?

I'd also appreciate it if you can reference any other items or rules where a feat in a chain is granted and you get the other feats as well.
Bonus - if a character with claws was wearing them, would they rip, or do all gloves work like Deliquescent Gloves in that they work over claws?

Hmm. I concede the specific overriding the general. However, I don't believe that is enough to reverse my point. On the contrary, I think the rod, staff and wondrous item examples you alluded to prove the general in my favor.

Specifically, your point about other items needing a craft feat plus craft magic weapon without being a weapon isn't correct:
1) Without exception, every rod in UE that requires Craft Magic Weapons and Armor (liberator's, dwarven might, flailing, lordly might, python, viper, thunder & lightning, withering, scepter of heaven) is wieldable and is also a weapon with which you could attack using a d20 (usually a mace or morningstar, but there are other types as well).
2) Ditto every staff in UE that requires craft weapon (aspects, curses, mithral might, power, spiders, heirophant, master, woodlands) are all wieldable as enchanted quarterstaves (or in one case a lance).

3) The wondrous items that need Craft Magic Arms and Armor (horseshoes of crushing blows, talons of leng, the pauldrons, shield cloak, most bracers, gauntlets, mattock, and the maul) are again actually physically hitting the defender or acting as worn armor. The only exception being the bracers of archery, but then again they still enhance your use of a wielded weapon.

So I disagree with your statement that you provided several examples of items requiring a base craft plus craft magic weapons that are not actual weapons/armor themselves. The only possible one is the bracers of archery. The vast majority follow the other pattern, putting both the general case and the specific case (i.e. the amulet of forge fist) in support of the interpretation that you only need craft weapon when the item is a weapon.

Obviously you don't need craft magic weapon to make the AoMF up to +5. To imbue it with the fireball, etc, that is necessary to give it a special melee ability wouldn't tip you over into needing craft magic weapon. The only logic I can see left to your argument is the literal reading of the special melee ability.

I concede you have me on RAW, but I still disagree on RAI.

Sorry to necro this, but I think the right precedent is the Amulet of Forge Fist. It indicates to me that Craft Magic Weapons and Armor is not a necessary feat for putting melee abilities on a wondrous item, and by extension the AOMF and Body Wrap of MS. These wondrous items aren't weapons (you don't roll a d20 to hit with them and they don't deal hit point damage on their own.)

It is a wondrous item from Ultimate Equipment that grants flaming and adamantine to an unarmed strike and natural weapons. It does not require Craft Magic Weapons and Armor.

The Forge Fist Amulet is one of the few examples where, given space limitations, they can explicitly spell out all the requirements because there is no ambiguity regarding which spells are necessary. Why would this item be an exception if adding properties like flaming to a wondrous item required Craft Magic Weapons and Armor?

To me, it is consistent that you can put whatever property you want on a Wondrous Item through the appropriate spell. Note that the Amulet of Forge Fist, AOMF and Body Wrap of MS are not weapons. However, if a wondrous item is actually used to roll a d20 against AC, then I'd concede you need the craft weapon feat to enchant it with a special ability.

I had the same question and also came up with next to nothing.

Using the monsterdb from the d20pfsrd and selecting only where type = animal and senses = darkvision (had to download it and do my own search), we get:

Dragonfish (Small), Giant Moray Eel (Large), Tylosaurus (Gargantuan)

So, with only the 4th level Druid you'll need get a fishbowl to wear on the fighter's head like minion from Megamind and some way to communicate and you're all set.