I have a player who had a set of spiked gauntlet crafted with a +1 weapon enchancement (not AC).
Would you permit a +1 bonus to a grapple CMB's? If not, why not?
I'm almost certain I will grant it, but I am checking to see if I'm overlooking anything
I have a player who had a set of spiked gauntlet crafted with a +1 weapon enchancement (not AC).
Would you permit a +1 bonus to a grapple CMB's? If not, why not?
I'm almost certain I will grant it, but I am checking to see if I'm overlooking anything
I would actually force the character to choose between +1 to atk/dmg and +1 to Grapple CMBs. Otherwise, it's literally and mathematically more powerful than a regular +1 enchant.
I would actually force the character to choose between +1 to atk/dmg and +1 to Grapple CMBs. Otherwise, it's literally and mathematically more powerful than a regular +1 enchant.
Really? Could you elaborate?
Any traditional weapon with a magical enchancement (i.e. +1) adds to your CMB as well as atk/dmg.. provided that using a weapon is relevant to the manuever being performed.
For example a +1 sword grants you a +1 to disarm, as well as +1 to atk/dmg.
I would actually force the character to choose between +1 to atk/dmg and +1 to Grapple CMBs. Otherwise, it's literally and mathematically more powerful than a regular +1 enchant.Really? Could you elaborate?
Any traditional weapon with a magical enchancement (i.e. +1) adds to your CMB as well as atk/dmg.. provided that using a weapon is relevant to the manuever being performed.
For example a +1 sword grants you a +1 to disarm, as well as +1 to atk/dmg.
Ah. Interesting, I hadn't noticed that about magical weapons. Then I'd say of course, give him the +1 to CMB.
I would actually force the character to choose between +1 to atk/dmg and +1 to Grapple CMBs. Otherwise, it's literally and mathematically more powerful than a regular +1 enchant.Really? Could you elaborate?
Any traditional weapon with a magical enchancement (i.e. +1) adds to your CMB as ...
For example a +1 sword grants you a +1 to disarm, as well as +1 to atk/dmg.
How so? My book only includes BAB + str + size mod.
I would probably give the bonus, but if the character didn't have Improved Unarmed Strike feat I'd consider giving the character a -4 penalty - the same as for dealing lethal damage without the feat.
I think this would be similar to someone using a trip weapon to trip who is not proficient with the weapon.
|
Except that Improved Unarmed Strike isn't proficiency with unarmed strikes, its just making your unarmed strikes better. Unarmed Strike proficiency (which wizards seem to be the only class in the game that doesn't come with it lmao) = gauntlet proficiency.I would probably give the bonus, but if the character didn't have Improved Unarmed Strike feat I'd consider giving the character a -4 penalty - the same as for dealing lethal damage without the feat.
I think this would be similar to someone using a trip weapon to trip who is not proficient with the weapon.
Sorry Kyrt, you're wrong..
Anybody but a druid, monk, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of simple weapons and possibly some martial or even exotic weapons. All characters are proficient with unarmed strikes and any natural weapons possessed by their race. A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls.
How so? My book only includes BAB + str + size mod.
Check your book on page 199, left hand column under the heading of "Performing a Combat Manuever", third paragraph.
Or from the Pathfinder PRD
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.
It doesn't jump out at you, if it hadn't been for the preview of Valeros on the Blog, I might have skimmed past it. Though clearly, the weapon has to be applicable to the manuever. Hence my question about gauntlets and grappling...
I forgot about gauntlets dealing lethal damage, so I'd say yes to usung the bonus.
My only argument against it now might be that the weapons list has disarm and trip weapons but doesn't list grapple under gauntlets.
How so? My book only includes BAB + str + size mod.Check your book on page 199, left hand column under the heading of "Performing a Combat Manuever", third paragraph.
Or from the Pathfinder PRD
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.It doesn't jump out at you, if it hadn't been for the preview of Valeros on the Blog, I might have skimmed past it. Though clearly, the weapon has to be applicable to the manuever. Hence my question about gauntlets and grappling...
So to clarify if I wanted to trip(example only) someone the weapon chart would have to list that weapon as a trip weapon, or I only get my BAB, not my entire attack bonus?
Edit: changed "full attack bonus" to "entire attack bonus"
|
Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effectsIt doesn't jump out at you, if it hadn't been for the preview of Valeros on the Blog, I might have skimmed past it. Though clearly, the weapon has to be applicable to the manuever. Hence my question about gauntlets and grappling...
I had a question directly related to this exact sentence! If we are allowed to add feat and magic effects from weapons used then, for example, a Fighter when sundering could add their Weapon Focus feat, Magic Item Bonus, and Weapon Mastery bonus to their Sunder CMB. That really starts to add up:
Fighter 9
+2 Greatsword
+2 Weapon Mastery (Heavy Blades)
+2 Weapon Focus/Greater Weapon Focus
+2 Improved Sunder
So a Fighter with a normal CMB of say +14 jumps up to +22 when Sundering with their Greatsword.
It doesn't list grapple under unarmed strike either, and that's how grapple is always done.I forgot about gauntlets dealing lethal damage, so I'd say yes to usung the bonus.
My only argument against it now might be that the weapons list has disarm and trip weapons but doesn't list grapple under gauntlets.
Yeah, I was just channelling the rules lawyer in my group with that last sentence. Personally I'd give the bonus.
[...]If we are allowed to add feat and magic effects from weapons used then, for example, a Fighter when sundering could add their Weapon Focus feat, Magic Item Bonus, and Weapon Mastery bonus to their Sunder CMB. That really starts to add up:
Fighter 9
+2 Greatsword
+2 Weapon Mastery (Heavy Blades)
+2 Weapon Focus/Greater Weapon Focus
+2 Improved SunderSo a Fighter with a normal CMB of say +14 jumps up to +22 when Sundering with their Greatsword.
I believe so. Throw in a few spells from the cleric and the wiz and have the bard singing in the background and it gets even higher.
I had a question directly related to this exact sentence! If we are allowed to add feat and magic effects from weapons used then, for example, a Fighter when sundering could add their Weapon Focus feat, Magic Item Bonus, and Weapon Mastery bonus to their Sunder CMB. That really starts to add up:
Fighter 9
+2 Greatsword
+2 Weapon Mastery (Heavy Blades)
+2 Weapon Focus/Greater Weapon Focus
+2 Improved SunderSo a Fighter with a normal CMB of say +14 jumps up to +22 when Sundering with their Greatsword.
Yes. Bear in mind you have to be using the appropriate weapon for Weapon Focus and Weapon Training to apply.
And who says Fighters aren't fun?
What is really going to bake your noodle is when you realize you can do a Sunder on an Attack of Opportunity.
Or, as a part of a Full Round Attack intermixing with a regular attack (assuming you get iterative attacks). The -5 still applies of course because that is a reduction of your BAB.. which is part of your CMB. This is also limited to Sunder, Trip, and Disarm.
So to clarify if I wanted to trip(example only) someone the weapon chart would have to list that weapon as a trip weapon, or I only get my BAB, not my entire attack bonus?
Edit: changed "full attack bonus" to "entire attack bonus"
Now that's a good question.
Because the description of Trip doesn't address that.. nor does the Combat Manuever text.
I'd say you have the correct interpretation however.. Because one should be able to trip someone without necessarily using a weapon (ie. stepping in and trying to kick their feet out from under them).
As I recall, the Black Monk in Runelords Chapter 4 does trip attacks without a weapon.
|
I'd say that when your grappling your using a heck of a lot more then just your hands to do it with so any enhancement bonus just to a set of gauntlets doesn't add enough to the whole effect to grant it's enhancement bonus to the whole check. Plus there already exist much more effective items for grapple enhancement, since the enhancement belts all would add to the base CMD and CMB of the character.
Rather then what they want to do I suggest creating some kind of custom magic item that sole purpose is to interact with grappling, coming in for maybe a nicer bonus at a bit more cost.
I'd say that when your grappling your using a heck of a lot more then just your hands to do it with so any enhancement bonus just to a set of gauntlets doesn't add enough to the whole effect to grant it's enhancement bonus to the whole check. Plus there already exist much more effective items for grapple enhancement, since the enhancement belts all would add to the base CMD and CMB of the character.
Rather then what they want to do I suggest creating some kind of custom magic item that sole purpose is to interact with grappling, coming in for maybe a nicer bonus at a bit more cost.
I would say when you're sundering a weapon you're using a whole lot more than your sword to do it. If you give this bonus you need to give the gauntlets the bonus. The gauntlet's are "magically enhanced" to be better. That's why there's a lot more figured in, BAB + STR + special training + magical enhancements. The +1 gauntlets bring it from 20 to 21 because they make it "a little better"
I had a question directly related to this exact sentence! If we are allowed to add feat and magic effects from weapons used then, for example, a Fighter when sundering could add their Weapon Focus feat, Magic Item Bonus, and Weapon Mastery bonus to their Sunder CMB. That really starts to add up:
Fighter 9
+2 Greatsword
+2 Weapon Mastery (Heavy Blades)
+2 Weapon Focus/Greater Weapon Focus
+2 Improved SunderSo a Fighter with a normal CMB of say +14 jumps up to +22 when Sundering with their Greatsword.
Yes. Bear in mind you have to be using the appropriate weapon for Weapon Focus and Weapon Training to apply.
And who says Fighters aren't fun?
What is really going to bake your noodle is when you realize you can do a Sunder on an Attack of Opportunity.
Or, as a part of a Full Round Attack intermixing with a regular attack (assuming you get iterative attacks). The -5 still applies of course because that is a reduction of your BAB.. which is part of your CMB. This is also limited to Sunder, Trip, and Disarm.
Hmm I think the whole "attack action" thing in the sunder description keeps you from doing it on an attack of opportunity. I don't really agree with it because you're just hitting their gear instead of them, it's the exact same thing, but I think by RAW that's how it works. However in 3.5 it was a standard action, but by reading the "attack action" You may be able to combine sunder now with the vital strike tree.
About Sunder & AoO's - The wording really needs to be cleaned up, since saying it's used BOTH as an attack action AND in place of attack is confusing and completely un-needed: Only one or the other is needed.
*If* the (Standard) "Attack Action" ends up being verified (ruling out Sunder AoO's) I will definitely be shaking my head, since this is on top of the ridiculous state of affairs where smacking the Orc with your sword does/doesn't result in an AoO depending on if you were: aiming for their armor (to sunder it) or aiming for their armor (to hit them thru it). Looking to 3.5 for precedence, Sunder WAS just a "melee attack", so I think there's a good chance this was the intended functionality. (Then again, so was Grapple)
but re: the original topic, *I* would definitely allow Unarmed Strike Enhancements to apply vs. Grapple
(or Natural Weapon Enhancements if your Natural Weapons have a special Grapple ability, i.e. Grab)
...The problem is that if you look at Weapon Focus/Spec Feats, Grapple is listed as a *SEPARATE* option - Not withstanding Weapon SPEC: Grapple is a pretty odd choice (and unclear how it would work - +2 damage EVERY Grapple, or only the "Damage Option" for Maintained Grapples?). But if you take it on face value, Grapple would appear to be considered a distinct "attack form" from Unarmed Strike. If Weapon Specific Attack Bonuses from FEATS don't apply to both, a Weapon Enhancement for Unarmed/Grapple would not logically apply to the other, either.
I've submitted the Weapon Focus/Spec Feats as Errata for this issue, but as everybody knows, there's been precious little feedback on any of the submitted "errata". Crossing my fingers on this one.
Personally, I think it would be pretty cheap if you need Imp. Unarmed Strike (leading to Imp Grapple) to Grapple without AoO's, but any Enhancements you have to Unarmed Strike don't apply to Grapple. Even if you consider "There's more to grappling besides your fists", well, for a MONK all of that "more" DOES count as Unarmed Strikes. "Imp Grapple" basically means non-Monks ARE trained in using that "more" (for Grappling at least, if not melee strikes) so I don't think there should be a discrepancy for Monk/non-Monk Grapplers here. As-is, it's pretty much advisable for anybody wanting to take Improved Grapple to just take 1 level of Monk, so forcing them to get separate Magic Item Enhancements if they want to get bonuses to Unarmed Strike AND Grapple (i.e. let their Feats work for them at all Levels) just seems absurd.
I'd say that when your grappling your using a heck of a lot more then just your hands to do it with so any enhancement bonus just to a set of gauntlets doesn't add enough to the whole effect to grant it's enhancement bonus to the whole check. Plus there already exist much more effective items for grapple enhancement, since the enhancement belts all would add to the base CMD and CMB of the character.
Rather then what they want to do I suggest creating some kind of custom magic item that sole purpose is to interact with grappling, coming in for maybe a nicer bonus at a bit more cost.
I think others have replied as well as I could, but you're missing something. The player already had the gauntlets crafted, and wanted them for the same reason anyone wants spiked gauntlets. So.. we're sort of past the point of what is the best thing you can do to get a good CMB.
I was just curious if I should give him a bonus if he gets in a grapple and wants to grapple back.
If you choose to allow the magical bonus of the gauntlets to apply to grapple checks, be sure to point out that both gauntlets must be used. This can be important for spellcasters who need one hand free to cast spells...
Definitely!
If you choose to allow the magical bonus of the gauntlets to apply to grapple checks, be sure to point out that both gauntlets must be used. This can be important for spellcasters who need one hand free to cast spells...
Not having 2 hands free just gives a -4 penalty to Grapples. Just sayin'...
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Unarmed Strike proficiency (which wizards seem to be the only class in the game that doesn't come with it lmao) = gauntlet proficiency.
No, Gauntlet is a Simple Weapon so you need "Simple Weapon Proficiency" to not take the -4 with a Gauntlet even though everyone has Unarmed Strike Proficiency as a given.
Unarmed Strike proficiency (which wizards seem to be the only class in the game that doesn't come with it lmao) = gauntlet proficiency.No, Gauntlet is a Simple Weapon so you need "Simple Weapon Proficiency" to not take the -4 with a Gauntlet even though everyone has Unarmed Strike Proficiency as a given.
He's referring to a different rule, not the nonproficiency. Not having free hands to grapple with gives you a penalty to grapple. I.E. It's harder to grapple while holding a tower shield and a dwarven waraxe than it is bare handed.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Unarmed Strike proficiency (which wizards seem to be the only class in the game that doesn't come with it lmao) = gauntlet proficiency.No, Gauntlet is a Simple Weapon so you need "Simple Weapon Proficiency" to not take the -4 with a Gauntlet even though everyone has Unarmed Strike Proficiency as a given.
You'll have to house rule this (until errata fixes) as RAW are in contradiction since although Gauntlet is listed as a simple weapon, it's treated as an unarmed strike which everyone has proficiency in. My view is the gauntlet exception overrides the simple weapon category YMMV
See the big Monks and Gauntlets thread for much much more.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
although Gauntlet is listed as a simple weapon, it's treated as an unarmed strike which everyone has proficiency in.
"is otherwise an unarmed attack"
!=
"use unarmed strike mechanics"
In other words, the Gauntlet's ability to deal "size based" unarmed damage as Lethal Damage could be considered (by one reading of the RAW) as the sole benefit of the Gauntlet "simple weapon."
I'm torn on this issue. On the one hand, it's clear that tripping someone with a whip involves using the whip, but do you really grapple someone with a punch?