Weapon focus: Gauntlet - should it exist?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 102 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kazaan wrote:
Using the Gauntlet to make Unarmed Strike deal lethal damage ...It only changes nonlethal to lethal on your Unarmed Strike; nothing more.

Wasn't there an old FAQ saying that gauntlets always do the damage listed in their entry (1d3)? so for example a monk that does 2d8 with a naked punch will do 1d3 with a gauntlet?


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

But remember, folks: this has always been the rule, James Ajay's knee the rule worked like this, and we've been deliberately misinterpreting Paizo's holy writ for the sake of power.

Also, we have airways been at war with Oceania.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is the game better or worse if gauntlets can be enchanted?

Would they offer bonuses to touch delivery?

Would monks finally get something nice?

Can I be Batman?


The current PDT stance is that "We're going to make a FAQ about this soon." so we'll see how soon is soon. If you want a shortcut, throw a bug report to herolab and have them ask the devs and get a faster answer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

Can I be Batman?

Vigilante?


DominusMegadeus wrote:
So, what you're saying, if I'm understanding you, is that it is needlessly complicated.

I'd say it's involved certainly, but neither complicated nor needless. Any type of weapon that is worn rather than held is, by its very nature, going to involve a more detailed rule-set that involves things that held weapons don't do. But the most complicated thing about it is imposed by people reading it in a purposefully obtuse manner.

It's not much different than a Sawtooth Sabre which is a 1-h weapon which can be treated as light for specific circumstances. In most situations, wielding a Gauntlet is no different than wielding a Shortsword. It's a light weapon that uses its own damage dice, its own enchantments, and is a valid option for feats and similar abilities that require you to pick a specific type of weapon (ie. Weapon Focus(Gauntlet) is just as valid as Weapon Focus(Shortsword). The only extra features it has are as follows:
1) You can't be disarmed of a Gauntlet.
2) You can still hold another item or weapon in a hand that's wearing a gauntlet (though, you still can't double-dip attack economy)
3) When wearing a Gauntlet, you can let your Unarmed Strikes deal lethal damage instead of non-lethal with no attack penalty (doesn't change anything else regarding Unarmed Strikes)
4) An attack with a Gauntlet (as its own weapon, not using it to make unarmed strikes lethal) counts as an Unarmed Attack (not an Unarmed Strike, which is a specific weapon, but Unarmed Attack which is a category of types of attacks). Functionally, this lets you do things like deliver a Stunning Fist with a Gauntlet attack.

That's all; nothing more and nothing less. It's people over-complicating it that makes the problem.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

You forgot the part about it also being the only weapon you can't enchant.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
silverrey wrote:
You forgot the part about it also being the only weapon you can't enchant.

Unless you staple some spikes onto it.


Ventnor wrote:
silverrey wrote:
You forgot the part about it also being the only weapon you can't enchant.
Unless you staple some spikes onto it.

True but my comment still holds since they are listed as two different weapons.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Nicos wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
Using the Gauntlet to make Unarmed Strike deal lethal damage ...It only changes nonlethal to lethal on your Unarmed Strike; nothing more.
Wasn't there an old FAQ saying that gauntlets always do the damage listed in their entry (1d3)? so for example a monk that does 2d8 with a naked punch will do 1d3 with a gauntlet?

What Kazaan said has nothing to do with what you said.

Yes, Gauntlets deal 1d3 in the hands of a 20th level Monk.

They also allow a 20th level Fighter without Improved Unarmed Strike to deal 1d3 Unarmed Strikes lethal.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
silverrey wrote:
You forgot the part about it also being the only weapon you can't enchant.

Well, lets see...

Advanced Class Guide/Skullcrusher Gauntlets wrote:
These bloodstained gauntlets are made of a combination of blackened steel and polished white stone. They are slightly over-sized and somewhat bulky, though still suitable for combat. They function as +1 gauntlets. Once per day, the wearer can unleash a devastating attack with the gauntlets that can instantly knock a target unconscious. The wearer must announce her intent before making her attack roll, and creatures immune to critical hits can't be affected. To make the attack, the wearer makes a single melee attack at her highest base attack bonus as a full-round action. If the strike hits, the target takes 4d6 points of force damage and must succeed at a DC 15 Fortitude save or fall unconscious until the end of its next turn. Even if the target succeeds at the Fortitude save, it is staggered until the end of its next turn. When worn by a brawler with the knockout class feature, the DC to resist the brawler's knockout increases by 2.
Dirty Tactics Toolbox/Constrictor's Gauntlets wrote:
These +1 gauntlets are made of snakeskin and grant a +1 enhancement bonus on grapple checks. Once per day as a standard action, the wielder of a pair of constrictor's gauntlets can target a single creature wearing medium or heavy armor within 30 feet. The target must succeed at a DC 16 Will saving throw or its armor shrinks and constricts, dealing 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage to the target if it's wearing medium armor or 1d8 points of bludgeoning damage if it's wearing heavy armor. The armor deals this damage each round for 3 rounds, and then returns to its normal size. The armor's armor bonus, maximum Dexterity bonus, armor check penalty, and other attributes do not change while it is shrunken.
Crown of the Kobold King/Grasp of Granite wrote:

This left-handed black iron gauntlet appears little more than a dull soot-stained plated glove at first glance, but in truth it is a powerful boon granted by a god to his most faithful subjects.

Placing the glove on your left hand causes excruciating pain as your appendage curls into a tight fist and then slowly transforms to supernaturally hard black stone. You cannot use your left hand for anything beyond smashing it into objects or creatures (you cannot carry a shield or secondary weapon and you take a –4 on skill checks that usually require two hands).

The gauntlet cannot be removed without a successful casting of remove curse, break enchantment, or a similar spell. The gauntlet grants you a +2 enhancement bonus to Strength and acts as a +1 adamantine gauntlet. The item also grants you the ability to use the gauntlet as a secondary natural attack. In addition, the Grasp of Granite allows its wearer to use stone shape once per day.

Armor Master's Handbook/Shielded Gauntlet Master wrote:
While using Shield Gauntlet Style, you no longer lose your shield bonus to AC when you attack with your gauntlet (or spiked gauntlet) or use it to hold a weapon. In addition, you add your gauntlet’s enhancement bonus to the shield bonus to AC granted by this feat as if it were a shield enhancement bonus.

No, it doesn't look like I actually forgot anything. That thing about not being able to enchant them seems to be a load of hokum.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kazaan wrote:
No, it doesn't look like I actually forgot anything. That thing about not being able to enchant them seems to be a load of hokum.

lol Oh I am not arguing that point at all. Just that by the same rulings that have been making this thread a headache they can't be and you should ignore the mound of evidence to the contrary. Response that boil down to "Yes what we just said goes counter to everything else before this but only the newest opinion matters" is where you get people questioning if common sense rulings from before still hold. Doubly so when there is no justification beyond "that is how it was suppose to be from the start".


Kazaan wrote:
silverrey wrote:
You forgot the part about it also being the only weapon you can't enchant.

Well, lets see...

Advanced Class Guide/Skullcrusher Gauntlets wrote:
These bloodstained gauntlets are made of a combination of blackened steel and polished white stone. They are slightly over-sized and somewhat bulky, though still suitable for combat. They function as +1 gauntlets. Once per day, the wearer can unleash a devastating attack with the gauntlets that can instantly knock a target unconscious. The wearer must announce her intent before making her attack roll, and creatures immune to critical hits can't be affected. To make the attack, the wearer makes a single melee attack at her highest base attack bonus as a full-round action. If the strike hits, the target takes 4d6 points of force damage and must succeed at a DC 15 Fortitude save or fall unconscious until the end of its next turn. Even if the target succeeds at the Fortitude save, it is staggered until the end of its next turn. When worn by a brawler with the knockout class feature, the DC to resist the brawler's knockout increases by 2.
Dirty Tactics Toolbox/Constrictor's Gauntlets wrote:
These +1 gauntlets are made of snakeskin and grant a +1 enhancement bonus on grapple checks. Once per day as a standard action, the wielder of a pair of constrictor's gauntlets can target a single creature wearing medium or heavy armor within 30 feet. The target must succeed at a DC 16 Will saving throw or its armor shrinks and constricts, dealing 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage to the target if it's wearing medium armor or 1d8 points of bludgeoning damage if it's wearing heavy armor. The armor deals this damage each round for 3 rounds, and then returns to its normal size. The armor's armor bonus, maximum Dexterity bonus, armor check penalty, and other attributes do not change while it is shrunken.
Crown of the Kobold King/Grasp of Granite wrote:
This left-handed black iron gauntlet appears little more than a
...

The most interesting part:

Grasp of Granite lets you take Improve Natural Attack with your Gauntlet (since it counts as a Natural weapon).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:
haremlord wrote:
a monk cannot use Stunning Fist with their unarmed strike.

I really don't know why this subject is so hard to grasp.

Unarmed Strike is an Unarmed Attack.

Things that only work on Unarmed Attacks work on Unarmed Strike.

All of your examples are you conflating Unarmed Attack with Unarmed Strike.

This whole problem would be fixed if they renamed Unarmed Strike as Funky Attack. No one would confuse the issue.

So basically, a Brawler using Gauntlets could use Pummeling Style in conjunction with Shield Gauntlet Style because what applies to a Unarmed Strike applies to Unarmed Attacks. Thus, you could use gauntlets while Blending Styles (such as Dragon Style and Pummeling Style).

That's what you're arguing yes?

drgnmstr44 wrote:
So gauntlets do not count toward shielded gauntlet style. it specifically states weapon focus (spiked gauntlet).

The feat actually states "Prerequisites: Weapon Focus (GAUNTLET or SPIKED GAUNTLET), proficiency with bucklers and light shields". So yes, gauntlets DO count toward Shield Gauntlet Style. All of the feats in the chain use the same wording.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
swoosh wrote:
Wow. Huge nerf to gauntlets here. And once again a significant game change buried in arbitrary threads on the forums.

If it's not in a book, in an errata, or in a FAQ then it's not official rules.


master_marshmallow wrote:
Is the game better or worse if gauntlets can be enchanted?

I don't know.

master_marshmallow wrote:
Would they offer bonuses to touch delivery?

Maybe.

master_marshmallow wrote:
Would monks finally get something nice?

Probably not.

master_marshmallow wrote:
Can I be Batman?

NO!

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Wildstag wrote:
Brawler using Gauntlets could use Pummeling Style in conjunction with Shield Gauntlet Style because what applies to a Unarmed Strike applies to Unarmed Attacks. Thus, you could use gauntlets while Blending Styles (such as Dragon Style and Pummeling Style).

I read Shield Gauntlet Style and didn't see anything similar to that in it. Do you have text you think says that?

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bumping this as there has been no new update. With shielded gauntlet style and fist of the avenger there are several character options that make gauntlets a primary weapon choice. We need to know if they can be enchanted or not.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I must say it's kind of odd that the game allows you to enchant a shield (a thing I primarily would use to protect myself from getting hit) as a weapon, but not the big steel glove I put on my hand for purposes of punching people without hurting my hand.

Personally, it seems that the last clause of Shielded Gauntlet Master is supposed to do something.


Nicos wrote:


Wasn't there an old FAQ saying that gauntlets always do the damage listed in their entry (1d3)? so for example a monk that does 2d8 with a naked punch will do 1d3 with a gauntlet?

No, there is not.

PossibleCabbage wrote:
the big steel glove I put on my hand for purposes of punching people

That isn't really the purpose of gauntlets. Of course it is about the only effect they have in PF, but that isn't why actually exist.

This is kind of a strange position for me, as I have long held that gauntlets should do UAS damage, including increased UAS damage for monks, brawlers, warpriests, etc. So I am a little happy about "gauntlets are just unarmed strikes."

But to then say gauntlets can't be enchanted totally defeats the point, which makes me sad.


Yeah, don't worry guys. We have word from Jason that he is going to address the issue by June 10th with the DEV team. So it's basically high priority and coming soon. ...

Yeah, apparently they've had lots and lots of exceptional situations that have postponed them meeting together. Birthdays, cons, sickness, them being tired from having birthdays, cons and being sick. Like FAQ Friday has dropped considerably in consistency. But don't worry guys. This should be answered soon.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I sort of imagine that the resolution being four months and nine days late is that the solution the rules committee came up with was "we goofed, there's no way to fix this without breaking something, so just be quiet about it and let the GM fix it in their own game."

I mean if you can enchant gauntlets as weapons, then monks can save money on the AoMF, but then you have to keep track of which part each monk attack hits with which is not bookkeeping anybody wants to have to do.

If you can't enchant gauntlets as weapons, then Shielded Gauntlet Style doesn't work correctly which is a shame since it's a neat style.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I mean if you can enchant gauntlets as weapons, then monks can save money on the AoMF, but then you have to keep track of which part each monk attack hits with which is not bookkeeping anybody wants to have to do.

How is this any worse than having to keep track of the 2 weapons you use when Two Weapon Fighting?


Every time I remember I still gotta wait on this answer, a random forlorn Disney princess song about waiting for that special something/someone starts playing in my head.

Note to self: I should watch Enchanted again.


How and where does the weapon focus apply when you throw down said gauntlet?


Nezzarine Shadowmantle wrote:
How and where does the weapon focus apply when you throw down said gauntlet?

You'd get a +1 on the attack to target your square, but what happens if you miss? Does it last in a different square instead?


Don't roll a Nat 1, you might hit your own foot. Be careful how hard you throw it then, you might become flat-footed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps the problem with this mechanic lies more in the rules for unarmed strikes, and not with the gauntlets themselves?

Since enhanced gauntlets already exist as items, it's really hard to take any statement that they can't exist seriously.

Many of my players use an enhanced gauntlet for their characters as a 7th item of the big six. Dueling, Defending, Training and the other useful enhancements to always have on are really attractive to my players, so I allow it no problems. Really though the only difference/problem with allowing gauntlets vs. spiked gauntlets comes down to not wanting monks/brawlers to have nice things, which I am 100% against.

Funny thing we discovered in this game, if you waste your last iterative attack with a Defending Gauntlet you basically get to add another +5 to your AC for free. Another funny thing we noticed is by giving up the magical +5 enhancement bonus, you also get to regain access to the +1 enhancement bonus from being masterwork, since normally you wouldn't as said bonuses don't stack, so really you only lose out on +4 to hit. The more you know!!!! Combining this with Shield Gauntlet style/attack/master makes for nice AC buffs for characters using a two handed weapon.

Also, I'm still not sure if magical gauntlets (or magical anything really) improve your ability to land touch attacks (or rays/ranged touch attacks).

If Paizo really wanted my money they'd say yes to all of the above.... hint hint


Quote:
Since enhanced gauntlets already exist as items, it's really hard to take any statement that they can't exist seriously.

Not necessarily. Unique items are unique after all, so you can have a unique item be something that can't actually exist.

Pretty sure I remember at least one enchanted improvised weapon in some book somewhere as a special unique item.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I sort of imagine that the resolution being four months and nine days late is that the solution the rules committee came up with was "we goofed, there's no way to fix this without breaking something, so just be quiet about it and let the GM fix it in their own game."

I mean if you can enchant gauntlets as weapons, then monks can save money on the AoMF, but then you have to keep track of which part each monk attack hits with which is not bookkeeping anybody wants to have to do.

If you can't enchant gauntlets as weapons, then Shielded Gauntlet Style doesn't work correctly which is a shame since it's a neat style.

The likely solution would be to errata Shielded Gauntlet Style. It has the least impact on the game while still addressing the issue.

Letting gauntlets be enchanted would be a huge change in a lot of builds.


Have they ever done errata on a thing from a Player Companion's book? If they start, fixing Ascetic Style is probably more of a priority than fixing Shielded Gauntlet Style.

Of course, we know what the fix to Ascetic Style ought to be (replace "effect" with "feat") but the Shielded Gauntlet one is muddier. Personally, I'm just allowing enhancements on gauntlets on the grounds that they're on the weapons table so they're weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Funny enough, I just stumbled on an old post from SKR explicitly stating gauntlets are light melee weapons, not unarmed attacks.

So it seems this has been a confusing issue for a long time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions


1 person marked this as a favorite.
johnlocke90 wrote:

Funny enough, I just stumbled on an old post from SKR explicitly stating gauntlets are light melee weapons, not unarmed attacks.

So it seems this has been a confusing issue for a long time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions

Linked


johnlocke90 wrote:

Funny enough, I just stumbled on an old post from SKR explicitly stating gauntlets are light melee weapons, not unarmed attacks.

So it seems this has been a confusing issue for a long time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions

It really seems like we're unlikely to get the word of dev on this one, since it's so easy for the GM to fix. If someone says "I want to play a vigilante that punches people instead of using weapons, can I get my gauntlets enchanted with flaming burst so I can punch people with fire explosions?" either the GM says yes or you need to find a GM who is cooler.

If a Monk player comes to me and really wants to play RZA in "The Man with the Iron Fists" I guess you have to let them.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
johnlocke90 wrote:

Funny enough, I just stumbled on an old post from SKR explicitly stating gauntlets are light melee weapons, not unarmed attacks.

So it seems this has been a confusing issue for a long time.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions

It really seems like we're unlikely to get the word of dev on this one, since it's so easy for the GM to fix. If someone says "I want to play a vigilante that punches people instead of using weapons, can I get my gauntlets enchanted with flaming burst so I can punch people with fire explosions?" either the GM says yes or you need to find a GM who is cooler.

If a Monk player comes to me and really wants to play RZA in "The Man with the Iron Fists" I guess you have to let them.

I agree, every DM I know would interpret this the same way.

Happy players are more agreeable when you have rule hard on important stuff. I'm not scared of damage dice.


PossibleCabbage wrote:
Have they ever done errata on a thing from a Player Companion's book? If they start, fixing Ascetic Style is probably more of a priority than fixing Shielded Gauntlet Style.

Why? The UAS damage part is neither overpowered nor debatable (the old FCS FAQ confirms it as valid), and the big discussions where over feats like Weapon Finesse.


Any news about this issue? Did the FAQ was printed? (I could not find it if it were, my bad).

If there is no FAQ yet, how does the gauntlet (normal, no spiked) works in conjunction with Tiger Claw with the current rules?

1 Is it possible to use tiger claw with a gauntlet, or two?

2 Is it possible to select weapon training (Weapon Master fighter archetype) with a gauntlet or it has to be unarmed strike?

For what I understood in this thread: 1. Maybe but pointing towards no. 2. Weapon training -> unarmed strike (thus may or may not conflict with 1).

Many thanks

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Let me get this straight.

For years, gauntlets have been treated as weapons, which has been used as justification why the monk needs an amulet of mighty fists. Though the text implies gauntlets might not be weapons, it's nonetheless listed as a weapon. Nothing in the CRB says you can't masterwork or enhance gauntlets. Items and class features have been published with this assumption.

Then out of no where, a Paizo representative says that gauntlets are actually items that modify your unarmed strikes, not weapons themselves?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Nothing new on this.

Gauntlet wrote:
This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of gauntlets.

Things we know from that and other rules.

  • Unarmed Strikes are a subclass of unarmed attacks as are "armed" touch attacks, natural attacks, etc.
  • Gauntlets are unarmed attacks.
  • Gauntlets modify your Unarmed Strike weapon to deal lethal but are not unarmed strikes.
  • Gauntlets can't be disarmed.
  • Amulet of Mighty Fists modify unarmed attacks, which Gauntlets are.
  • If a +1 gauntlet was used with amulet of might fists +1, the two +1 wouldn't stack.

The only change the Herolab confirmation made from our understanding is that you can't generally make +1 gauntlets. Never mind that they exist in unique items.

I think should this go to FAQ it would just point out +1 gauntlet don't stack with aomf +1, they are not unarmed strike, don't use monk damage swap on unarmed strike, and are unarmed attack using a gauntlet.


James Risner wrote:
Amulet of Mighty Fists modify unarmed attacks, which Gauntlets are.

This mean that the feat Shielded Gauntlet style and Co. increase the shield bonus depending on the AoMF?

James Risner wrote:
The only change the Herolab confirmation made from our understanding is that you can't generally make +1 gauntlets.

What about making them of silver or cold iron?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

They say:

Quote:
a gauntlet or spiked gauntlet

A spiked gauntlet isn't a gauntlet and can by made +5 spiked gauntlet.

A gauntlet uses AoMF but there are several unique items that are listed as "+1 gauntlet" and you'd use the higher of the two (+1 or AoMF +x).

The material the gauntlet is made of is irrelevant, there is no rule saying you made use of materials for unarmed attacks for gauntlets.

If you have a silver +1 spiked gauntlet, it is silver and processes DR as expected.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

I really want this answered because I'm designing 3pp content that uses enhanced guantlets. It's frustrating to work with anything using unarmed strike and gauntlet rules since the CRB is so ambiguous and awkward in describing how they work.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

We know it's going to get answers, they have said they are working through the "ambiguous and awkward" rules as you say.

It's probably safe to assume the FAQ will maintain that AoMF adds to Gauntlet attacks and that things that modify Unarmed Strikes won't help


In that regard I would prefer that the gauntlet became a weapon per-se, like how Steel Headbutt makes the helmet a weapon and not the convoluted mess of unarmed attack.


<bump> I'm necro'ing this thread cuz I still hope it'll get addressed by an FAQ or developer response this year.

Liberty's Edge

Protoman wrote:
<bump> I'm necro'ing this thread cuz I still hope it'll get addressed by an FAQ or developer response this year.

Still doesn't have as many pages to it as Masterpieces for Bards/Skalds/Other Performers...


Wait, this is a thing?

One of Paizo's semi-official stances is that the gauntlet isn't a weapon in its own right? Sometimes?

FAQ'ing, because if that's the case, it really needs to be stated explicitly somewhere besides an email to a third party.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Many +1 gauntlets have appeared in official publications by now. At this point, it feels logical they should just rule that gauntlets are weapons and AoMF doesn't stack with gauntlet enhancement bonuses.


Maybe the issues that by making them weapons you can strip them off suits of armour for fun and profit. If mithril gauntlets come with some suits then you can get free mw weapons.

Personally I just wouldn't let them come free to fix that or inflate the prices.


Cavall wrote:

Maybe the issues that by making them weapons you can strip them off suits of armour for fun and profit. If mithril gauntlets come with some suits then you can get free mw weapons.

Personally I just wouldn't let them come free to fix that or inflate the prices.

That's a different problem, really.

Mithral gauntlets would break DR on a werewolf just as well as a mithral waffle iron, regardless of if they're considered weapons or not. Adamantine gauntlets would be just as hard as the adamantine shears or adamantine wire saw. The difference is whether the user wants Improved Unarmed Strike, Catch Off-Guard, or Simple Weapon Proficiency.

The alternative is to assume the smith cheaped out on the gloves, because "nobody really gets hit on the hands anyway, right?" And that could cause issues for druids with Dragonhide armor (excluding breastplates.)

51 to 100 of 102 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Weapon focus: Gauntlet - should it exist? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.