That configuration does not work. If the character is wielding the reach weapon (which I am assuming is 2-handed), then he cannot also wield the studded gauntlets.
He CAN alternate between the two, for example:
Round 1 - attack with the reach weapon, and then as a free action take one hand off his reach weapon. He is now no longer "wielding" the reach weapon, and as such does not threaten the 3 meter mark. Because he's now "wielding" the studded gauntlet, he does now threaten the 1.5 meter mark.
Round 2 - free action wield the reach weapon, attack at 3 meter mark.
And so forth. But he cannot take the requisite free action to switch between these two configurations when it is not his turn, which would be required to pull off what he is trying.
However, a monk could threaten both ranges since he can use the reach weapon to threaten at 10 feet and then his feet to threaten at 5 feet (unless there's something I'm missing). He still would not be able to threaten with both the reach weapon and the gauntlet however.
However, He could wield the reach weapon for his AOO, and on his turn, switch to the Gauntlets as a free action (removing one hand from the reach weapon) While he could not take AOO with the gauntlets, he can effectively still use them.
"Wield" and "use" mean two different things. If the character is wielding the reach weapon, he can't also be wielding the gauntlets at the same time ( and vice versa), even though he is wearing (using) them.
If the character removes one hand from the reach weapon, he can then "wield" the gauntlet, and thus take AoO with the gauntlet. Removing a hand from a weapon is a free action, and so the character can only switch configurations on his own turn (as you pointed out.)
|
As posters above said, this configuration does not work. Here are two approaches that do work:
#1 Wear Armor Spikes instead of the spiked gauntlets. Mechanically very similar, but this combo works.
#2 Do not worry about threatening adjacent while wielding a reach weapon. Seriously, people spend waaaay too much concern on this issue. I play several characters who wield reach weapons and fish for AoOs. None bother with Armor Spikes. At least 95% of my AoO opportunities have been non-adjacent. Sure, with armor spikes I might have picked up another handful of AoOs, over 20 levels, but they would have been weak, low-damage AoOs. It seems like not threatening adjacent would be a big deal, but, in my experience, it's really not an issue.
The biggest reason to threaten adjacent, and this has come up a few times, is that allies can't use you as a flank-buddy versus adjacent foes.
|
There are multiple ways to threaten when adjacent and with reach, but if both of his hands are holding something then he can't use a gauntlet. That's basic 101 "can't wield two weapons in the same hand" sort of stuff.
He could wear Armor Spikes or train in Improved Unarmed Strike, as others have mentioned, or also wear a Boulder Helmet, Blade Boots, or a Barbazu Beard.
They may not be optimal, but they're functional.
That configuration does not work. If the character is wielding the reach weapon (which I am assuming is 2-handed), then he cannot also wield the studded gauntlets.
He CAN alternate between the two, for example:
Round 1 - attack with the reach weapon, and then as a free action take one hand off his reach weapon. He is now no longer "wielding" the reach weapon, and as such does not threaten the 3 meter mark. Because he's now "wielding" the studded gauntlet, he does now threaten the 1.5 meter mark.
Round 2 - free action wield the reach weapon, attack at 3 meter mark.And so forth. But he cannot take the requisite free action to switch between these two configurations when it is not his turn, which would be required to pull off what he is trying.
That is a nice thought, but not how the game works according to the rules. The only ways to stop using a weapon is to put it away or drop it.
Sadly, not according to the rules. This is part of what is being debated. Dropping a weapon is a free action, putting it away is a movement action.
The OP posted about whether a character can threaten with a ranged weapon and still threaten with spiked gauntlets in the same round and the short answer is no.
Great. I will yield that the character mentioned by the OP may release the reach weapon, cast a spell, and re-grab the reach weapon. Sadly, this thread is not about casting spells.
I'm sure Nefreet and I could brainstorm and come up with several ultra specific, somewhat complicated methods which the answer could be yes.
My brain is going towards, what would happen if he had QuickDraw as a feat and readied the action 'if I threaten someone with my reach weapon, then I will attack with my reach weapon. However, if I threaten someone with my gauntlet, then I will use the free action granted by QuickDraw to put away the reach weapon and attack with my gauntlet.' ...which they would have to say each round (and not attack during their round). This probably defeats your character's intent.
There are many threads discussing this issue. The best threads to read why the character cannot threaten with both are in the synthesist or vestigial arm threads. If Nefreet is correct, then a synthesist summoner with 20 arms can attack with 19 two-handed weapons and 1 spiked gauntlet per round by releasing and gripping each weapon as a free action per round. Doesn't 19 two-handed weapon attacks sound wrong? That is because it is wrong according to the rules.
If you want to read about why Nefreet's position is correct, read the threads about 'what is the definition of wield'. To sum these threads, pathfinders does not define words in their books that are also in the dictionary. Because this word is not defined, the rules about how to wield a weapon is unclear / how these unclear rules interacting with other rules are also unclear.
I agree that the ways you posted are ways to threaten within a 1.5 meter reach...if not also threatening with a reach weapon at the same time. The core rule book is extremely specific about not being able to threaten at 1.5 meters when using a reach weapon.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...then I will use the free action granted by QuickDraw to put away the reach weapon...
Perhaps it's a language thing (I worked out that 1.5/3 metres means 5/10-feet), but there are a couple of things wrong here:-
* Quick Draw doesn't 'grant' a free action, it just changes the action type required to draw a weapon (that is in easy reach) from a move action (which can be combined with moving up to your speed if your BAB is +1 or higher) to a free action. Since free actions can only be taken on your own turn (unless it's a written exception) then even Quick Draw doesn't allow you to draw a weapon outside your own turn
* Quick draw changes the action type required to draw a weapon...but does not change the action type required to sheathe a weapon, which remains a move action. Of course, you can always drop it or shift grip; either is a free action and can only be taken on your own turn
Thank you for the corrections Malachi. I totally agree with you Nefreet.
