I'm not sure I have a great answer, but I would say you benefit from neither Furious or Courageous. You are wielding the bow to the exclusion of the cestus (you're merely wearing it) which means you don't receive the bonuses because it requires you to be wielding the weapon.
Furious: This ability can only be placed on a melee weapon. A furious weapon serves as a focus for its wielder's anger. When the wielder is raging or under the effect of a rage spell, the weapon's enhancement bonus is +2 better than normal. If the wielder has a rage power that gives a skill bonus while raging (such as raging climber, raging leaper, or raging swimmer), the wielder gains an enhancement bonus to that skill whenever the weapon is wielded or held in hand, even when not raging; this bonus is equal to the enhancement bonus of the weapon (including the +2 when the wielder is raging).
Courageous
This special ability can only be added to a melee weapon. A courageous weapon fortifies the wielder's courage and morale in battle. The wielder gains a morale bonus on saving throws against fear equal to the weapon's enhancement bonus. In addition, any morale bonus the wielder gains from any other source is increased by half the weapon's enhancement bonus (minimum 1).
Of course, this all depends on how you understand the concept of wielding, which is tricky at best. However these abilities are both specifically listed as melee only, allowing them to fucntion while using a ranged weapon, and further allowing you to receive bonuses from effectively two weapons (without TWF) seems entirely too good to be allowed.
But perhaps someone else will have futher enlightenment and more rules.
I would not allow this.
No.
Wield does not mean "hold". Wield means to use.
If you want to gain abilities from the Cestus you have to smack (or try to smack) things with it.
Furthermore- unless an enchantment says otherwise it only applies to the weapon so enchanted.
+5 Cestus only gives +5 when swinging the Cestus. +5 Fiery Cestus only grants +1d6 fire damage to attacks made with the cestus.
-S
No. You need to be USING the weapon with those enchantments in order to benefit from them. Otherwise it's like saying you have a keen falchion on you and you gain keen on the rusty shortsword you picked up from the goblin just because that keen falchion is on your back.
Wielding = holding and actively using in order to gain the benefits of said weapon and the weapon's enchantments.
If I recall correctly I can still attack with my Cestus when wielding a bow, for AOs.
For the record on this: Since you are using both hands to wield the bow, I do not consider you wielding (and thus threatening) with the Cestus. Thus no AoO's.
|
If I recall correctly I can still attack with my Cestus when wielding a bow, for AOs.For the record on this: Since you are using both hands to wield the bow, I do not consider you wielding (and thus threatening) with the Cestus. Thus no AoO's.
This would be correct. HOWEVER, they could let go of their bow with the cestus hand after their attacks in order to take AoOs with the Cestus. This would still preclude them from taking AoOs during their full-round (which is rare, but possible). If the Cestus hand is the hand that operates the string then this is perfectly reasonable.
Either way, not a particularly impressive strategy.
I don't know if I agree here. You say wield=use?
So if I'm a Barbarian who was using my courageous greatsword last round, this round I take a double move, or total defense, or make a grapple check to escape a grapple, etc.. , my con is instantly lowered? I could theoretically go unconscious from this? Theoretically, I could then immediately *die* from this if I don't have Raging Vitality? This doesn't seem right to me.
I've heard elsewhere that wield means; ready to use. You could use it, if you wanted to. I don't see how holding a bow means your Cestus is not ready to use. You could easily keep the bow in one hand, and be able to use the Cestus with your other. IRL archers dont have two hands on their bows *all the time*, they're drawing the bow, releasing the shot, reaching into their quivvers and getting more arrows. Any time except the exact second that you're actually in the process of firing the bow, -including in any time between attacks in a full attack- your Cestus is ready to use. I would say you get the benefits.
awp832 -- If you draw a parallel with wizards' arcane bonds, which also require the weapon to be "wielded," if you so much as drop a hand off your greatsword to scratch your nose, you'd lose the bonus. I'm not sure I'd go so far -- that's a pretty restrictive (and disliked, afaik) mechanic -- but there's precedent. While grappled, you'd lose the bonus since you only have one arm free. However, you'd be fine with a double move as long as you kept both hands on the sword throughout. It seems an awkward and potentially dangerous enchantment for a two-handed weapon. Raging Vitality wouldn't help, since it's the connection with the weapon that is lost, not the ability to rage.
As to the cestus, well, pathfinder needs an official definition for what it is to wield something. The above situation with wizards means that you don't have to be making an attack with the weapon to be considered wielding it, only holding it properly for attacking. In addition, the text for aligned weapons states that when they're used by a character of the opposite alignment that the negative level "remains as long as the weapon is in hand and disappears when the weapon is no longer wielded," implying it's the same thing.
That said, although it's slightly cheaper than a belt of physical might, in combination with that item... well... there's shades of defending armor spikes there. I wouldn't be surprised at house rules or even a FAQ ruling against it.
this simultaneously makes makes me commend the OP for being hella creative while also setting my cheese alarm off in just basically the biggest way so I will not attempt to adopt this idea
still, smart stuff
IMHO it should be a Furious Courmageous Cestus of Dueling. Just saying
I don't know if I agree here. You say wield=use?
So if I'm a Barbarian who was using my courageous greatsword last round, this round I take a double move, or total defense, or make a grapple check to escape a grapple, etc.. , my con is instantly lowered? I could theoretically go unconscious from this? Theoretically, I could then immediately *die* from this if I don't have Raging Vitality? This doesn't seem right to me.
I've heard elsewhere that wield means; ready to use. You could use it, if you wanted to. I don't see how holding a bow means your Cestus is not ready to use. You could easily keep the bow in one hand, and be able to use the Cestus with your other. IRL archers dont have two hands on their bows *all the time*, they're drawing the bow, releasing the shot, reaching into their quivvers and getting more arrows. Any time except the exact second that you're actually in the process of firing the bow, -including in any time between attacks in a full attack- your Cestus is ready to use. I would say you get the benefits.
Yes, it's to use. Look at the literal definition and this was also discussed by the developers (it was Sean) who said it's pretty common sense what wielding is and to use the dictionary definition which I have provided.
/wēld/
Verb
Hold and use (a weapon or tool).
Have and be able to use (power or influence).
Synonyms
manage - handle - operate - sway
If your Cestus is sitting in its sheath at your hip you are NOT using it and not able to take advantage of its magical properties.
As I said before, using the theory that if you have a magical weapon such as a keen flaming falchion sheathed upon your back and pick up a rusty old shortsword from the dead goblin, you do NOT get the keen flaming properties to be applied to your shortsword.
If you are using a courageous greatsword and drop it, you lose all the effects that it was giving you. If you have it in your hands and are actively using it (and holding it in your hand) you keep your magical enhancements that it's been providing.
How about this then?
SkR says if you can make an AoO with a weapon, you are wielding it. You can make an AoO with that Cestus.
Incidentally, I don't think you looked up what a Cestus is. A Cestus could be stored, but not sheathed. A Cestus is like a glove or gauntlet.
3milechild: What I meant was; suppose that wield=use for a second. I am at 9 hp, I am raging. I am a L10 barbarian using a courageous sword to increase my con bonus by 1, I do not have Raging Vitality. I take say, the run action. I'm not using my sword. My con decreases by 2 because I am no longer wielding my courageous sword. Now I am at -1. Now because I dont have raging vitality, my rage ends, I lose another 20 hp. I am dead.
If I recall correctly I can still attack with my Cestus when wielding a bow, for AOs.For the record on this: Since you are using both hands to wield the bow, I do not consider you wielding (and thus threatening) with the Cestus. Thus no AoO's.
Since you can wear a cestus and hold/manipulate objects in your hand at the same time, and since adding or dropping a hand from a two-handed weapon is a free action, I don't see why you couldn't use a cestus to threaten AoOs when using a bow.
You wear the cestus on your string hand. Each round, you fire your bow, free action let go of the string (which you have to do anyway), make AoOs with the cestus. Start of the next round, free action to put your hand back on the bow string, fire, free action to release the bow string.
Now, I would say that you could not make AoOs with a cestus if you have a readied action with the bow, because I assume you are holding an arrow nocked at least, and possibly drawn. But unless you are actually in the process of firing, your string hand is free.
Even if this is somehow allowable because of ambiguity in the rules, I think most poeple in here agree that something like this should most certainly not be allowed. The problem all revolves around the inherent ambiguity in the word "wield". Yes Sean said that wielding usually means that you can make an AoO with the weapon. If you use a free action at the end of your turn to take your hand off your bow and hold the bow in your other hand you could make an AoO with it after your turn. However, there is also this:
I'm not going to nitpick over the wording of every single ability in the book and dissect whether they mean "wield," "bear," "carry," or "use." Considering that some of these items we inherited from 3.5, and most were neither written by nor developed by me, I doubt there is 100% consistency in the use of these terms. I've told you what the intent is, your GM is not a robot, use your human brain, make a call.
I believe most people agree that you should not be able to "double dip" bonuses in this manner that the OP is suggesting, all because of dubious and difficult method of defining the word "wield".
Yeah the problem is the people who want to double-dip and not use common sense. It dirties the waters for everyone involved in the game when those people try to create loopholes to get something they shouldn't and what wasn't intended in the first place. They just want to be greedy. Just play the game and have fun, stop trying to make things up is what I think.
Edit:
For some reason I had that a cestus was a blade of some sort in my mind, so I apologize for the confusion on my part. Anyhow I stand by what I said with this in regards to it not granting anything to the bow-wielding barbarian even though you are wearing it.
Basically the way it works is this:
Fighting with only the cestus you are granted it's abilities/enhancements since you are in fact wielding it and fighting with it. It's not like a worn object that grants permanent enhancements when worn, it has to be USED for combat in order to receive those since it is a weapon even though it is on your hand.
The Cestus states that if you are wearing it you can use a bow, but because of how the thing is crafted that you take a -2 penalty to precision based tasks which would also include firing an arrow from a bow.
Now, yes you could swing at the guy stomping past you with the cestus, removing your hand from the bow string and grant yourself those temporary bonuses (providing a +3 to all morale bonuses) for just the AoO, but it will not be added when you put your hand back on your bowstring and fire the next arrow. So your bonuses would bump up for a moment and then back down as soon as the AoO is resolved.
It just sounded like the OP wanted to get all the bonuses that are granted strictly for when the cestus is being used for an AoO to when they fire off shots with the bow. That to me is cheese and taking it way too far.
If I'm flying fifty feet above someone and hitting him with Cones of Cold, does the fact he can't reach me to attack with Frost Brand mean that he doesn't get the cold resistance? (I suppose he could attack a square, but isn't that cheesy?) How would you feel about a character, say, hitting a skeleton with a club while holding/wielding a luck blade in their off hand for the saves?
Nordlander: Nah, you don't want to pay for the extra pluses on that weapon. Dueling is on a gauntlet on your other hand, or, if you have a crafter in your party, as an amulet of mighty fists added onto whatever else. (Since AoMF don't need a base +1, and you'll always have your hands on hand.)
awp432: I understand what you meant, but I disagree with the premise. (Outlined my reasons for disagreement above.) I do think you'll be in trouble if something grabs you, though, because you won't be able to wield your greatsword properly while being grappled. Disappointing for the iconic barb-with-greataxe. Quite interesting for a potential Rage Prophet, though.
Yeah the problem is the people who want to double-dip and not use common sense. It dirties the waters for everyone involved in the game when those people try to create loopholes to get something they shouldn't and what wasn't intended in the first place. They just want to be greedy. Just play the game and have fun, stop trying to make things up is what I think.
Edit:
For some reason I had that a cestus was a blade of some sort in my mind, so I apologize for the confusion on my part. Anyhow I stand by what I said with this in regards to it not granting anything to the bow-wielding barbarian even though you are wearing it.
Basically the way it works is this:
Fighting with only the cestus you are granted it's abilities/enhancements since you are in fact wielding it and fighting with it. It's not like a worn object that grants permanent enhancements when worn, it has to be USED for combat in order to receive those since it is a weapon even though it is on your hand.
The Cestus states that if you are wearing it you can use a bow, but because of how the thing is crafted that you take a -2 penalty to precision based tasks which would also include firing an arrow from a bow.
First, I completely agree about any abilities or bonuses on a cestus not applying to any other wielded weapon (in this case a bow). That question was clearly settled.
I was only addressing the question of whether one could wear a cestus while using a bow and then use the cestus to make AoOs. I don't see anything in the description of the cestus that would prevent it (emphasis mine):
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).
It does not say that you take a penalty on attack rolls with items wielded in that hand. Characters could, from this description, wear a cestus (or gauntlets or spiked gauntlets) while wielding two-handed weapons without suffering an attack penalty. The only issue I would have is making sure players are clear on when they are holding the weapon in one hand and attacking with the cestus, basically making sure that they always remember to spend the free actions to take one hand off their weapon and put both hands back on their weapon again.
As far as the -2 task penalty is concerned, I don't agree that pulling a bow string is a "precision-based task", certainly not comparable to opening a lock. In the real world, there is no precision finger work involved: a lot of archers actually use stiff leather finger guards to pull their strings, and fingertip gloves (the more pliable version of the finger guard) make it difficult to use a key and almost impossible to work zipper, and so on. Items specifically designed and worn for shooting bows restrict finger precision more than the cestus would from the description. I can't imaging how the cestus as described would interfere with pulling a bow string.
From a mechanics perspective, firing a bow is an "attack", not a "task". I would never allow a player to apply any bonuses that benefit sleight of hand or disable device to apply to attacks with a bow. It seems only fair that penalties on those skills wouldn't apply to attack rolls.