Yet another deliquescent gloves question. Sorry


Rules Questions


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Would deliquescent gloves work with flame blade and produce flame?

Deliquescent gloves-...The wearer's melee touch attacks with that hand deal 1d6 points of acid damage. If the wearer uses that hand to wield a weapon or make an attack with an unarmed strike or natural weapon, that attack gains the corrosive weapon special ability.

Flame blade-A 3-foot-long, blazing beam of red-hot fire springs forth from your hand. You wield this blade-like beam as if it were a scimitar.

As for produce flame, I know it would work along with the melee touch attack, but would it work when thrown. ...Alternatively, you can hurl the flames up to 120 feet as a thrown weapon. When doing so, you attack with a ranged touch attack (with no range penalty) and deal the same damage as with the melee attack.


I'd rule that it would apply to both scenarios, as the benefit applies you're using the hands to wield a weapon. Though many people will argue that since they're not actual weapons (and only lets you wield them like one), it wouldn't be applicable, and it's a fair interpretation, but it's not one I'd go with.

YMMV.


"As a thrown weapon" is a subset of "as a weapon". So is "as if it were a scimitar".

So yes.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

You get the +1d6 on the Produce Flame attack at my table.


Wait, what? The standard 'as if' language means that it actually isn't 'a weapon', it's just wielded like one.

Wielding a flame blade 'as if' it were a weapon doesn't mean that it actually is a weapon, unless you think you can slap greater magic weapon on it, or bless weapon. Otherwise, the spell would say: this blade-like beam is a weapon.

Furthermore, the gloves seem to intentionally not mention anything about applying the damage to thrown weapons. Fiery shuriken anyone?

Houserules aside, are people actually claiming that the Pathfinder rules (since that's the forum we're in) support using the gloves for spells that aren't weapons, but are treated 'as if' they are for certain purposes?


I vote yeah.
Works for the above thoughts with produce flames.


If inspire courage works on it the gloves should work, too. And inspire courage works for weapon-like spells, which both produce flame and flame blade are.
And as to ranged weapons: the deliquescent gloves work for thrown weapons or projectile weapons, too. They grant the corrosive ability to weapons wielded and bows give their abilities to arrows you fire.


Inspire courage has a PC or a NPC as a target, you can't compare something that has an object as a target to something that has a creature. Is like saying you can use Baleful Polymorph on a bed because you can use Polymorph any object on it.

And no, inspire courage works on spells that require an attack roll, such as scorching ray, but not to fireball; so we can not generalize on its basis.

Thus being said, the item specifies which attacks gain the corrosive weapon special ability, and its an exhaustive list: melee attacks made with *that* hand, unarmed attacks and natural attacks made with *that* hand, and the last, attacks made with weapons wield with *that* hand.

A)
Flame Blade is not a weapon. Is a spell wielded as a weapon So I'm not sure if it will qualify for it as _Ozy_ already stated. I would say it does not qualify, although I'm not adamant on this.

B)
About the second question, I would say no. Only melee attacks made with the glove or a weapon in contact -wielded- with the glove's hand, gain the corrosive ability. If they wanted that missile or thrown weapons gained the ability as well, they would have included it in the description of the item as they stated for corrosive, flaming or elemental bows. It's the attack that gains the corrosive ability, not the weapon.

Imagine you casted Spectral Hand, Shocking Grasp and had those gloves on, it's just logic that if you use Spectral Hand to deliver the Shocking grasp, it does not benefit from the corrosive, but if you melee touch attack a close enemy and hit it with the glove's hand, it will cause the Shocking grasp damage plue 1d6 of acid.


@Numarak: Nobody claimed it would add the bonus to fireball? So why do you bring that up? Is that a try to put words in other people's mouths?

I said inspire courage works with weapon-like spells. Fireball is not one of those.

An attack with a flame blade or a melee attack with produce flame is a melee touch attack. Deliquescent Gloves state adding 1d6 acid damage to melee touch attacks with that hand.
So I'm wearing the Deliquescent Gloves and hold a flame from produce flame in that hand. Now I touch someone with that hand. Both effects, the gloves and the spell trigger because I did what is needed to trigger them: Make a melee touch attack.

Even if you disallow flame blade the produce flame version should be clear as both need you to do a melee touch attack with the hand.


Numarak wrote:

Inspire courage has a PC or a NPC as a target, you can't compare something that has an object as a target to something that has a creature. Is like saying you can use Baleful Polymorph on a bed because you can use Polymorph any object on it.

And no, inspire courage works on spells that require an attack roll, such as scorching ray, but not to fireball; so we can not generalize on its basis.

Thus being said, the item specifies which attacks gain the corrosive weapon special ability, and its an exhaustive list: melee attacks made with *that* hand, unarmed attacks and natural attacks made with *that* hand, and the last, attacks made with weapons wield with *that* hand.

A)
Flame Blade is not a weapon. Is a spell wielded as a weapon So I'm not sure if it will qualify for it as _Ozy_ already stated. I would say it does not qualify, although I'm not adamant on this.

B)
About the second question, I would say no. Only melee attacks made with the glove or a weapon in contact -wielded- with the glove's hand, gain the corrosive ability. If they wanted that missile or thrown weapons gained the ability as well, they would have included it in the description of the item as they stated for corrosive, flaming or elemental bows. It's the attack that gains the corrosive ability, not the weapon.

Imagine you casted Spectral Hand, Shocking Grasp and had those gloves on, it's just logic that if you use Spectral Hand to deliver the Shocking grasp, it does not benefit from the corrosive, but if you melee touch attack a close enemy and hit it with the glove's hand, it will cause the Shocking grasp damage plue 1d6 of acid.

To redact what the Deliquescent Gloves RAW is:

Deliquescent Gloves wrote:
If the wearer uses that hand to wield a weapon or make an attack with an unarmed strike or natural weapon, that attack gains the corrosive weapon special ability.

Are you wielding a bow when you make attacks with it? Yes? Then attacks you make with it gain the Corrosive property. End of discussion. The RAW doesn't give a flying #^!& if the weapon is melee or ranged, it cares if the hand(s) wearing the Deliquescent Gloves is wielding a weapon or not. Also consider the wording of Flame Blade, in that it says you "wield this blade-like beam as if it were a scimitar".

Quite frankly, I could instead substitute the Flame Blade spell for any weapon-like object, like a cooking pot or a table; people would argue that it's Improvised Weapons, meaning they're not actual weapons, so they wouldn't benefit from the Gloves, and that argument is just plain stupid.

Lastly, look at this FAQ:

Rays FAQ wrote:

For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so you don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.

The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.

I would constitute the benefit of Deliquescent Gloves would be an effect that affects weapons (since it gives the weapon you wield the Corrosive property, and affects only weapons), meaning the Deliquescent Gloves by way of this FAQ, would apply to Flame Blade.


Numarak wrote:


B)
About the second question, I would say no. Only melee attacks made with the glove or a weapon in contact -wielded- with the glove's hand, gain the corrosive ability.

This has already been covered in another thread. The gloves are not limited to melee attacks. They confer 1d6 acid to thrown weapons and the ammunition of ranged weapons.


So, are people claiming that greater magic weapon and keen edge work on flame blade as well?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Merm7th wrote:
This has already been covered in another thread. The gloves are not limited to melee attacks. They confer 1d6 acid to thrown weapons and the ammunition of ranged weapons.

+1

We also know that any effect that adds to your weapon attacks will add to your spell attacks.

You may not be able to bless weapon or greater magic weapon a Product Flame weapon, but you do add things like Point Blank Shot and the gloves +1d6 damage to them.


Merm7th, can you link to that thread?

Because the opening line of the gloves is "The wearer's melee touch attacks...". Generally, that means that everything that follows applies to melee attacks only.


Ehh... Flame blade burns a hole in the gloves, ruining them?

Scarab Sages

Gwen Smith wrote:

Merm7th, can you link to that thread?

Because the opening line of the gloves is "The wearer's melee touch attacks...". Generally, that means that everything that follows applies to melee attacks only.

I found this with Michael Brock on the subject.


_Ozy_ wrote:
Wait, what? The standard 'as if' language means that it actually isn't 'a weapon', it's just wielded like one.

Right. Wielded as if it was a weapon. And the Gloves specifically call out "wielding a weapon" as the requirement to gain the bonus.

_Ozy_ wrote:
Houserules aside, are people actually claiming that the Pathfinder rules (since that's the forum we're in) support using the gloves for spells that aren't weapons, but are treated 'as if' they are for certain purposes?

If it specifically includes the phrase "wielded as a weapon", possibly with some subset of "weapon" (scimitar, thrown weapon, etc.), then yes. The "wielded" line is important. Rays are like weapons for many things, but they are not wielded as weapons.

_Ozy_ wrote:
So, are people claiming that greater magic weapon and keen edge work on flame blade as well?

Nope. Different requirements. The Gloves call out "wielding a weapon", and Flame Blade is wielded as a weapon. But for Magic Weapon, it's "Target: weapon touched", which means the spell would need to explicitly say that Flame Blade is a scimitar.

Pretty significant difference.


Yup, I've been convinced. Thanks guys.

Shadow Lodge

kestral287 wrote:
_Ozy_ wrote:
So, are people claiming that greater magic weapon and keen edge work on flame blade as well?

Nope. Different requirements. The Gloves call out "wielding a weapon", and Flame Blade is wielded as a weapon. But for Magic Weapon, it's "Target: weapon touched", which means the spell would need to explicitly say that Flame Blade is a scimitar.

Pretty significant difference.

Incorrect, though understandably so. Darksol quoted the relevant FAQ:

FAQ wrote:

Ray: Do rays count as weapons for the purpose of spells and effects that affect weapons?

Yes. (See also this FAQ item for a similar question about rays and weapon feats.)

For example, a bard's inspire courage says it affects "weapon damage rolls," which is worded that way so don't try to add the bonus to a spell like fireball. However, rays are treated as weapons, whether they're from spells, a monster ability, a class ability, or some other source, so the inspire courage bonus applies to ray attack rolls and ray damage rolls.

The same rule applies to weapon-like spells such as flame blade, mage's sword, and spiritual weapon--effects that affect weapons work on these spells.


But are rays wielded?

That's the core question, because the Gloves have a slightly different requirement.

EDIT: Never mind, thought you were answering a different part of my point. That's... amusing, actually.


kestral287 wrote:

But are rays wielded?

That's the core question, because the Gloves have a slightly different requirement.

EDIT: Never mind, thought you were answering a different part of my point. That's... amusing, actually.

Rays are not wielded like a standard weapon, whereas Flame Blade and Produce Flame are; neither are Unarmed Strikes or Natural Weapons, but they are cited as separate entities that would receive the benefit.

Additionally, it would require that the 'weapon' be wielded in a hand that wears Deliquescent Gloves; since you can't wield a Ray, much less have it in your hand, it wouldn't apply

Although the FAQ elaborates that Rays and Weapon-Like Spells would count as weapons for effects that are dependant upon such, Rays would be excluded from the benefits of Deliquescent Gloves simply because it's not something wielded, whereas Flame Blade and Produce Flame are. If there was a Ray that can be wielded, then there would be a case for it, but until that's proven, I err on the side of RAW.


I would say that the description of the gloves either states outright or at least implies that it only works with melee attacks, not thrown weapons.

That said, whether it works at all with the flame blade is up to DM's interpretation, but I'd personally say yes it would.

Scarab Sages

Joesi wrote:

I would say that the description of the gloves either states outright or at least implies that it only works with melee attacks, not thrown weapons.

That said, whether it works at all with the flame blade is up to DM's interpretation, but I'd personally say yes it would.

YMMV, but for PFS it works on any weapon you wield including ranged.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Yet another deliquescent gloves question. Sorry All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.