Cestus / Gauntlet and Ranged Weapons

[MrConradTheDuck]

So, in one of his more recent displays of annoying cheesiness, my player has decided he's "Always wearing a cestus" and that he can attack in melee, make AOO's while wearing it even though in the same turn he used his bow (his primary weapon is a ranged weapon) Now though I find it stupid, incredibly so, I'm looking for rules on whether or not it's legal if it is I'm fine, if not then I'd like to know.

[graystone]

LOL He's NOT being cheesy in the least. Not even slightly. Or stupid. It's legal. And not even remotely overpowered or cheesy. I think your cheese meter might be off a bit.

[TGMaxMaxer]

Nope, not the least cheesy. It is one of main two ways (the other being Spiked Armor) to constantly threaten and get AoO's while using a 2handed weapon.

Polearm users also use the same tactic to threaten at 5ft while holding a reach weapon.

[MrConradTheDuck]

So, built in weaknesses to these weapon types is to be ignored? Why even mention that these weapons have these flaws if they're to be glazed over without a second thought?

[TGMaxMaxer]

Because it is sub-par to make it actually effective. Switch hitters are focused on one thing, with only enough focus in the other to be barely competent.

To actually do anything with it, you have to enchant two weapons, take feats for two weapons, etc.

[graystone]

MrConradTheDuck wrote:

So, built in weaknesses to these weapon types is to be ignored? Why even mention that these weapons have these flaws if they're to be glazed over without a second thought?

Let me ask you this. Does his feats apply equally to his gauntlet as it does his bow? If not, you've run into a flaw. Now look at the damage dice and attack bonuses. Less for the gauntlet right? That's a flaw. Is it enchanted the same as the bow? Nope, and that's a flaw.

The super 'cheesy' workaround you see is using a suboptimal weapon with suboptimal feats and suboptimal enchantments to help shore up a weakness. Is the player that takes Iron will because they have a weakness in will saves super cheesy for trying to fix that? Is he as good as someone that has a high wis and good will saves? Nope but he's not as bad as he was before.

[Manwolf]

graystone wrote:

MrConradTheDuck wrote:

So, built in weaknesses to these weapon types is to be ignored? Why even mention that these weapons have these flaws if they're to be glazed over without a second thought?

Let me ask you this. Does his feats apply equally to his gauntlet as it does his bow? If not, you've run into a flaw. Now look at the damage dice and attack bonuses. Less for the gauntlet right? That's a flaw. Is it enchanted the same as the bow? Nope, and that's a flaw.

The super 'cheesy' workaround you see is using a suboptimal weapon with suboptimal feats and suboptimal enchantments to help shore up a weakness. Is the player that takes Iron will because they have a weakness in will saves super cheesy for trying to fix that? Is he as good as someone that has a high wis and good will saves? Nope but he's not as bad as he was before.

+1 to that.

Also, nobody has mentioned yet, if he doesn't have Point Blank Master then he still provokes AoO if he's threatened and uses that bow, cestus or not.

[blackbloodtroll]

No "built in weakness" being overcome.

No "cheese".

Nothing coming close to overpowered.

Not stupid.

Makes sense thematically.

Works completely RAW, and RAI.

I think you have a very, very, eschewed view, on all this.

Really, you can't imagine holding a Bow with one hand, and punching with the other?

Legolas did it, Hawkeye did it, Green Arrow did it, and in a number of the many movies, Robin Hood did it.

[Korak The Boisterous]

Hell, I'm a monk and am running around with one just to have piercing damage. it's useful and not at all overpowered.

[blackbloodtroll]

Next thing you know, PCs will attack with Longswords, and get a bonus to AC from a Shield in their other hand.

COMPLETELY BROKEN!

ಠ_ಠ