I can't think of a reason why you wouldn't be able to do this.
Seems like you could make your TWF/Iterative attacks and any attack could be with one your corrosive short swords or with your 1d6 touch attack. TWF penalties still apply, of course.
The only point of contention would be if the touch attack is due to the gloves. As in using the gloves to get the touch attack as a standard action, which would preclude TWF as it requires a full round attack.
When an item doesn't mention an activation it defaults to standard action per the magic item rules.
Melee touch attacks are one of those exceptions to the normal rules, granted by whatever ability or item bestows them. In this case the gloves. So you wouldn't be able to mix it in with a full attack when TWF'ing.
But the gloves are always-on.
But the gloves are always-on.
Which would mean that they could take standard actions all day long to make this newly acquired touch attack, until they took the gloves off.
1st sentence gives access to ability, no action cost stated. Default to standard action per the rules.
2nd sentence further explains how the wearer can make use of the item when using it with held weapons, unarmed attacks and natural weapons. This indicates a different and additional use, which is completely different than the first, both in function and action cost (as it is now a rider on an attack action) explicitly.
The item does what it says it does, no more and no less. Using the item to make touch attacks in place of other attacks was not stated anywhere as an option or part of it's function. Just that it was a possible way to use the item, with no action cost stated, which means it is a standard action regardless of the item being worn constantly and it's ability being effectively always on.
No, I don't even know where you're getting that.
The gloves say "The wearer's melee touch attacks deal 1d6 damage". It doesn't say this requires any activation at all; just that your touch attacks deal 1d6 damage. a 20th level fighter without these gloves can make 4 melee touch attacks per round (probably for 0 damage each). When he puts on these gloves, he can now make 4 touch attacks per round (now for 1d6 damage each).
Nothing more to it than that.
No, I don't even know where you're getting that.
The gloves say "The wearer's melee touch attacks deal 1d6 damage". It doesn't say this requires any activation at all; just that your touch attacks deal 1d6 damage. a 20th level fighter without these gloves can make 4 melee touch attacks per round (probably for 0 damage each). When he puts on these gloves, he can now make 4 touch attacks per round (now for 1d6 damage each).
Nothing more to it than that.
We will agree to disagree. Strictly speaking with no activation cost stated, the default is a standard action. The absence of an activation cost doesn't allow you to pick one that seems to make sense and use it instead. That is why it is explicitly stated the default is a standard action, so when one isn't included, it becomes that.
I am going with this:
To use a magic item, it must be activated, although sometimes activation simply means putting a ring on your finger. Some items, once donned, function constantly
And this:
Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears.
Yes, there are contradicting quotes there too. I saw them. If they apply, they contradict the text I just quoted, but I don't think t hey apply. Here's why:
If this item is simply "Use-activate" by wearing it, then a wearer can make attacks each round, with a weapon or with (armed) unarmed strikes, and the magic of the gloves affects every attack as described. If they can make multiple attacks, the magic of the gloves affects each attack. This is how I think it works.
If this item works like Skylancer4 suggests, then this is how it works:
Round 1: Use Standard Action to activate the gloves. Do not attack at all.
Round 2: Make JUST ONE attack enhanced by the gloves. If you have more than one attack, the gloves will not apply to any attack after the first.
Round 3: Use Standard Action to activate the gloves. Do not attack at all.
Round 4: Make JUST ONE attack enhanced by the gloves. If you have more than one attack, the gloves will not apply to any attack after the first.
Etc.
So, for an item that costs 10,000gp, you get to give up half your attacks in order to benefit from 1d6 acid damage ONCE EVERY OTHER ROUND.
Comparatively, for just 2,000gp, you can have a corrosive weapon that lets you benefit from 1d6 acid damage ON EVERY ATTACK ON EVERY ROUND and you don't have to give up any attack sat all.
To me, the answer is clear. These gloves are use-activated when you put them on, and while wearing them, they add acid damage to every attack without requiring any additional activation. Arguably, you might need to also know a command word that you must speak to activate them the first time you put them on (or you can use the word to turn them on and off without having to remove the gloves). Much like you can do with magic weapons with the Corrosive (or other elemental) ability.
Incorrect, the touch attack would be the standard action. Similar to how some creatures have touch attacks that cannot be used for every attack of a full attack action.
Melee touch attack resolved as the standard action.
A melee touch attack is just that - an attack where all you care about is touching the opponent. You could always target 'touch' on an opponent, with any attack, and if you beat their touch AC, your attack has 'touched' the opponent - that in no way means you've damaged them. Touching someone with a sword isn't going to do anything. In most cases, touching someone with your hand will also do nothing. If you've got these gloves on, or some other spell giving you ac actual effect on your hand, that's when touching becomes useful.
I have seen dozens of characters with deliquescent gloves and have never see anyone with your interpritation. Where are you getting it from? Also, you're saying the touch attack is a standard action and then likening it to some random creatures that can make a single touch attack as part of a full attack action. Are you serious or trolling?Incorrect, the touch attack would be the standard action. Similar to how some creatures have touch attacks that cannot be used for every attack of a full attack action.
Melee touch attack resolved as the standard action.
Just because something is widely used some way, doesn't mean it is being used correctly. Just that it's use is popular in such a way, and like minded people are playing it in such a way.
It isn't trolling, it is playing it per RAW. Whether you agree with it or not.
There is nothing that states the touch attack takes place of a normal attack. Nothing that states it has an action cost beyond what the written assumed action cost of one standard action for using the item is. The second sentence, has a write up with that information. The first doesn't.
Welcome to how rules work as written, opposed to your take on intent. As written, using the gloves to make a touch attack would take a standard action. This comes from the written rules we have on the subject. I don't know if it is the intent, but it is what we have in form of literal wording.
It isn't like this is the first time the gloves have come up. The most recent time I can think of, being song bird of doom and other discussions about using items while polymorphed. If they are supposed to work the way YOU believe they should, they need in the write up. When something doesn't have an activation cost for it's use, standard action IS the DEFAULT. Go read the the rule, it is there.
If your definition of "trolling" is pointing out the appropriate way to use an item, per the written rules.... Well you need to learn o e way or another.
Back to answering the question, its probably no, because:
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.
This gets into the wielding question again, but I would rule against it.
Also, skylancer, standard action is not exactly the default, standard or no action is:
Unless stated otherwise, activating a use-activated magic item is either a standard action or not an action at all and does not provoke attacks of opportunity, unless the use involves performing an action that provokes an attack of opportunity in itself. If the use of the item takes time before a magical effect occurs, then use activation is a standard action. If the item's activation is subsumed in its use and takes no extra time use, activation is not an action at all.
Use activation doesn't mean that if you use an item, you automatically know what it can do. You must know (or at least guess) what the item can do and then use the item in order to activate it, unless the benefit of the item comes automatically, such as from drinking a potion or swinging a sword.
The gloves are most likely subsumed action activated, as part of the attack action.
When no activation cost is stated it is the default.
Making an attack is a standard action as well in the combat section.
There is absolutely nothing indicating you can swap out every attack of a full attack action for the melee touch attack. Again, this leads to default being a standard action. Way back there was "confusion" on what an attack action was, which is why we ended up with clarifications in FAQs about which combat maneuvers were able to be used in full attack actions.
Melee touch attack from the glove being used repeatedly in full attack action is [b]not[/I] suggested or allowed by anything in in the item write up as it stands currently.
When no activation cost is stated it is the default.
Can you cite this? The citation provided by Calth does not support your assertion.
You can read it in the magic item activation rules. The default is command word activated, which is where it states as much.
Incidentally Corrosive is command word activation as well.
When the rules intend for something to be used in a way, they tend to spell it out as such. Using the gloves in the way most seem to think they should isn't a far stretch, but it is still adding more to what the item states it does. If it was intended to work that way, we would have language to that effect (IE 'when making an attack with an unarmed strike the user may instead make a melee touch attack to deal...'), we don't have that.
We have no activation cost item, melee touch attack.
Which breaks down to standard action, melee touch attack as per the default activation rules.
RAW as written indicate that these gloves do not need a standard action to be activated. Calth has the appropriate citations to support this.
Only IF you ignore the default activation rules and assume it is a use activated item. They quoted the rules most pertinent for their argument but failed to quote the rules that state when no activation cost is stated, the default is command word/standard activation.
Ignoring the RAW that contradicts your stance doesn't make you right. It just means you didn't look into the rules well enough.
I am of the opinion that if one were to complete a jumping high five with his buddy whilst wearing these gloves, the buddy would suffer the grevious effects of the gloves. Were they to just shake hands, the effect would not take place.
It's the motion of the ocean, Baby!
|
RAW as written indicate that these gloves do not need a standard action to be activated. Calth has the appropriate citations to support this.Only IF you ignore the default activation rules and assume it is a use activated item. They quoted the rules most pertinent for their argument but failed to quote the rules that state when no activation cost is stated, the default is command word/standard activation.
Ignoring the RAW that contradicts your stance doesn't make you right. It just means you didn't look into the rules well enough.
So far the only person i have seen fail to quote rules to support their argument is you. Feel free to go to Paizo.com/PRD and copy paste the specific rule you're referencing. That might make you a tid bit more convincing.
As written, any touch attack made by the wearer of the glove gains the d6 acid damage. Whether the attack is taken as a single standard action, or as part of a full attack action.
I can tell you of an absolute certainty that you can make a number of melee touch attacks each round up to the number of attacks allowed by your base attack bonus as part of a full attack action. Its how caster's have been using chill touch with iterative attacks in the round after casting since the dawn of time.
RAW as written indicate that these gloves do not need a standard action to be activated. Calth has the appropriate citations to support this.Only IF you ignore the default activation rules and assume it is a use activated item. They quoted the rules most pertinent for their argument but failed to quote the rules that state when no activation cost is stated, the default is command word/standard activation.
Ignoring the RAW that contradicts your stance doesn't make you right. It just means you didn't look into the rules well enough.
So far the only person i have seen fail to quote rules to support their argument is you. Feel free to go to Paizo.com/PRD and copy paste the specific rule you're referencing. That might make you a tid bit more convincing.
As written, any touch attack made by the wearer of the glove gains the d6 acid damage. Whether the attack is taken as a single standard action, or as part of a full attack action.
I can tell you of an absolute certainty that you can make a number of melee touch attacks each round up to the number of attacks allowed by your base attack bonus as part of a full attack action. Its how caster's have been using chill touch with iterative attacks in the round after casting since the dawn of time.
Because we have explicit rules from holding the charge and in the spell write up.
An item that has general rules stating it defaults to a certain activation when one is not specified is [b]not[/i] the same thing no matter how you look at it. Apples and oranges.
|
An item that has general rules stating it defaults to a certain activation when one is not specified is not the same thing no matter how you look at it. Apples and oranges.
Anyone can use a hand slot wondrous item unless specified otherwise by the item's description. These wondrous items are usually use-activated or triggered by a command word, but details vary from item to item.
Furthermore, three times per day on command, the gloves affect the wearer as the greater heroism spell.
These heavy leather gloves ripple and flows at the wearer's command, reshaping to fit any hand, claw, tentacle, or alien limb. 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.
The wearer's gloved hand is protected from the acid ability of oozes, allowing him to use that hand to attack oozes with unarmed strikes or natural attacks without risk of harm from contact with the ooze. These unarmed strikes and natural attacks never cause an ooze to split.
Skylancer, I think you're off here. Worn items that require activation specifically say "Activate" or "command" in in their descriptions. Deliquescent Gloves DO say "command", but only in reference to how they resize and reshape. Without saying "on command", the item defaults to a use-activated item. That just means that when the user makes a melee touch attack, the event happens.
When you use your +1 Frost Longsword, do you have to spend a standard action to activate the Frost damage? No, of course not. It just happens. These gloves function in the same manner.
*edited because wall of text. I changed most of the quotes to spoiler tags.
Items which aren't use activated and don't have a specified activation cost do indeed require a standard action to activate. I'm not aware of any rule which says that such items deactivate unless you keep spending standard actions each round though.
I think that the description makes it sound as if the gloves are activated by command word (which is a standard action). I'm drawing this from the sentence which says, "These heavy leather gloves ripple and flows at the wearer’s command, reshaping to fit any hand, claw, tentacle, or alien limb." I seem to recall that command word activation is how flaming weapons get "turned on" too, but once you activate them they presumably stay activated until you deactivate them.
One thing a DM and I couldn't agree on is whether a character wearing activated Deliquescent Gloves could make an AoO with the touch attack. Another point of contention was that since the text repeatedly refers to "that hand" many folks feel that the Corrosive property should only apply to weapons held in one hand. This generally wasn't an important point for my sword and board PC since he didn't use TWF, but it could be an important distinction for the dual shortsword wielder in the OP's question.
@Merm7th - Regarding punching somebody with a gauntlet while holding a shortsword in the same hand, I'd allow it though I'm not completely sure that's the correct ruling per RAW.
An item that has general rules stating it defaults to a certain activation when one is not specified is not the same thing no matter how you look at it. Apples and oranges.Anyone can use a hand slot wondrous item unless specified otherwise by the item's description. These wondrous items are usually use-activated or triggered by a command word, but details vary from item to item.** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
Some do, some don't, which is why we have wording stating "when they don't" it defaults.
It isn't an opinion, it isn't up for debate, it is right there in the magic item rules under command word activation.
Because no one arguing otherwise has bothered to actually read the rules here is the quote, because I'm tired of repeating myself.
Command Word: If the activation is on command or if no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.
If you want to assume it is a use activated item, that is on you. It is not what the rules state.
It doesn't suggest anything other than allowing for a touch attack. Activating the item as a standard action, which allows for a touch attack to be taken.
Is there anything in the description of the Gloves which leads you to conclude that they need to be activated repeatedly rather than just being turned on or off?
|
|
Is there anything in the description of the Gloves which leads you to conclude that they need to be activated repeatedly rather than just being turned on or off?
Exactly, they are activated by command word one time when you first put them on (or arguably at the start of combat if you don't want to deal acid damage every single time you touch a mundane object in your day to day life depending upon whether or not your GM wants to argue that incidental touches count as touch attacks).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because no one arguing otherwise has bothered to actually read the rules here is the quote, because I'm tired of repeating myself.Command Word: If the activation is on command or if no activation method is suggested either in the magic item description or by the nature of the item, assume that a command word is needed to activate it. Command word activation means that a character speaks the word and the item activates. No other special knowledge is needed.If you want to assume it is a use activated item, that is on you. It is not what the rules state.
It doesn't suggest anything other than allowing for a touch attack. Activating the item as a standard action, which allows for a touch attack to be taken.
Many use-activated items are objects that a character wears. Continually functioning items are practically always items that one wears. A few must simply be in the character's possession (meaning on his person). However, some items made for wearing must still be activated. Although this activation sometimes requires a command word (see above), usually it means mentally willing the activation to happen. The description of an item states whether a command word is needed in such a case.
Unlike other magic items, items made for wearing are assumed to be use activated unless the description says otherwise. Don't accuse others of not bothering to read the rules when you read only the part that seems to say what you want and then ignore the rest of the rules.
I know how the glove's and touch attacks work. For the exact same question in a non-magic senario. If I'm wield two short swords and wearing gauntlets, and the target is more seceptible to bludgeoning, do I need to drop a sword to hit with the gauntlet?
Merm7th, I think this question got lost in the ongoing argument.
I would let you hold the sword in your hand while using the gauntlet to hit the target. If you had a bulky, awkwardly-shaped, or delicate item in your hand, I might make you drop it, but I can't see that being a problem for a short sword (assuming you don't have a basket hilt on it).
|
|
I know how the glove's and touch attacks work. For the exact same question in a non-magic senario. If I'm wield two short swords and wearing gauntlets, and the target is more seceptible to bludgeoning, do I need to drop a sword to hit with the gauntlet?Merm7th, I think this question got lost in the ongoing argument.
I would let you hold the sword in your hand while using the gauntlet to hit the target. If you had a bulky, awkwardly-shaped, or delicate item in your hand, I might make you drop it, but I can't see that being a problem for a short sword (assuming you don't have a basket hilt on it).
This again brings up the fundamental difference between making a touch attack, and making an unarmed strike. What you describe sounds like an unarmed strike to me (hitting with the gauntlet) where a simple touch attack would deal no damage of its own and requires only a single finger (or other appendage) brush the target with the most minimal of contact.
I personally would rule you can do either of those things as part of a full attack. Its not hard to hold a sword and extend a finger or 2 off of the hilt in order to touch something. It's what makes opposable thumbs worth having.
@Gwen Smith - I also said upthread that I'd allow a gauntlet attack to be made while you're holding shortswords. I'd also allow a spiked gauntlet attack or an Improved Unarmed Strike (even one made specifically with the hand). I wonder if there's anything in the official rules about this though.
Deliquescent gloves are a command word to activate. What they do, when activated, is reshape to fit your hand and grant you a touch attack that deals acid, make a weapon corrosive etc. etc.
This means that you can certainly make multiple acid touch attacks, just like you can attack multiple times with a corrosive weapon.
I don't believe though you can make an attack with a limb that is occupied holding something else, whether a weapon or not.
Deliquescent gloves are a command word to activate. What they do, when activated, is reshape to fit your hand and grant you a touch attack that deals acid, make a weapon corrosive etc. etc.
This means that you can certainly make multiple acid touch attacks, just like you can attack multiple times with a corrosive weapon.
I don't believe though you can make an attack with a limb that is occupied holding something else, whether a weapon or not.
You are taking liberties and inserting more into it than it states.
The corrosive has wording to the effect it stays on, because it functions like the weapon.
The melee touch attack has no duration or implied duration. Just that single function.
Standard action gets you a melee touch attack as written. Strictly speaking, with the rules and wording we have. There is nothing "certain" about it other than you giving it more than the write up and rules state if you have it function like that.
The two functions are not intertwined, they are not related, they are two separate functions. Period included to make the point. One function is the touch attack. The other is imbueing weapons with corrosive. Both require a command word to activate, only one has duration even implied, corrosive. By default you get the action per activation, as written.
That would mean, standard action for one melee touch attack.
At 8k they are cheap because they are giving any two weapons a +1 equivalent bonus, corrosive. Any weapon you pick up, not just *these* two particular weapons like normal. Unlimited touch attacks ON TOP of that are worth way more, mechanically.
Folks can't seem to agree about the touch attacks, and I doubt anything short of developer input will budge either side much at this point. From a game balance perspective I suppose that iterative touch attacks could be very strong for a sneak attacker. On the other hand, I guess that a wand of Flame Blade would accomplish something pretty similar though at a higher action economy cost.
I still wonder whether you really gain the Corrosive property on weapons held in both hands or whether you only get it for 1 weapon held in "that hand" (which some would say implies just one hand as opposed to those hands, your hands, etc). I'd guess you should get the benefit with both hands, but if so that could lead to even more touch attack questions.