|
Playing through Iron Gods, and I have a PC in my group, who is utilizing this. Just wondering if it is legit. I'll pry continue to allow it, seeing as most of the enemies either have high DR, or are incorporeal. But, for future reference, the monk can use adamantine gauntlets, right? And doing so, can he still use a lightning elemental fist attack along with it? This is allowing him to overcome DR, and deal 1.5 damage to the constructs in this adventure path. I remember reading that if an adamantine weapon also has magical properties, they don't stack, you go with the better bonus. But these are two different attack scenerios, where the magic is coming from a different source than the weapon itself. So, what we end up with, when he uses his KI, is 2 claw attacks, fury of blows, with elemental lightning fists...so like 4 attacks, with multiple magic damages stacked on top. Are we doing this correctly, or am I dumb for allowing it?
Thanks
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Elemental Fist doesn't turn your damage into the selected element; it just adds a d6 damage of that type. His Elemental Fist damage against electric-vulnerable targets is normal damage + (1d6 x 1.5), not (normal damage + 1d6) x 1.5.
Also, the benefits that monks gain from gauntlets is a hotly contested topic. Personally, I'm of the opinion that monks making attacks through gauntlets roll gauntlet damage, not their unarmed strike damage. So if your player wants to bypass hardness, he can attack with his gauntlets, gaining their enhancement bonuses and material effects, but rolling 1d3 plus static.
There's also no way he should be gaining any benefit from gauntlets on his claw attacks. And finally, if he's using four uses of Elemental Fist every round, he's going to run out very quickly. Even if he's a Monk of the Four Winds, that'll still drain him in a few full attacks.
*wince*
No - a monk can't use gauntlets to bypass DR or hardness with unarmed strikes. GM Rednal quoted the relevant text but made a common error in interpreting: "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."
A gauntlet attack is an unarmed *attack*, not an unarmed strike, meaning it would provoke attacks of opportunity from armed opponents to use. Gauntlets do nothing for monks, since they already can deal lethal damage without penalty.
As the others above have said, you can't make natural attacks in addition to a flurry of blows (or even use a natural attack *for* a flurry of blows without a feat). And Elemental Fist adds elemental damage (which would indeed bypass DR), but doesn't change the rest of the hit from a bludgeoning melee attack (usually).
Regarding this: "I remember reading that if an adamantine weapon also has magical properties, they don't stack, you go with the better bonus." You're thinking of a rule from 3.0, when adamantine weapons had an inherent enhancement bonus. In 3.5 and Pathfinder adamantine simply bypasses hardness under 20 and DR/adamantine. They do of course have the +1 enhancement bonus to attacks for being a masterwork weapon automatically - which does not stack with magical enhancement bonuses.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
20th level human monks attacks with unarmed strike for what? 2d10?
With a gauntlet, 1d3.
With a cestus, brass knuckles, etc, 1d3 or 1d4 per the weapon.
Currently there is a new faq coming on gauntle that has minimally been explained to rule that gauntlet isn't a weapon at all. It's a tool. It can't be made magical, spiked gauntlet style shouldn't refer to it, it can't be a target for weapon focus. If all that happens it will be clear it doesn't help monks and can't be made into special materials.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Playing through Iron Gods, and I have a PC in my group, who is utilizing this. Just wondering if it is legit. I'll pry continue to allow it, seeing as most of the enemies either have high DR, or are incorporeal. But, for future reference, the monk can use adamantine gauntlets, right? And doing so, can he still use a lightning elemental fist attack along with it? This is allowing him to overcome DR, and deal 1.5 damage to the constructs in this adventure path. I remember reading that if an adamantine weapon also has magical properties, they don't stack, you go with the better bonus. But these are two different attack scenerios, where the magic is coming from a different source than the weapon itself. So, what we end up with, when he uses his KI, is 2 claw attacks, fury of blows, with elemental lightning fists...so like 4 attacks, with multiple magic damages stacked on top. Are we doing this correctly, or am I dumb for allowing it?
Thanks
Everything about Gauntlets is hotly debated, and many on these boards have conflicting views on them. Paizo has yet to publish an Errata or FAQ concerning them, and the description of the Gauntlet itself hasn't changed since the 3rd edition Player's Handbook. Any claim that the Paizo developers intended for it to function differently is horses**t; they didn't write the Gauntlet.
I've argued extensively (and multiple times with James in particular) that gauntlets can be made from special materials, be made magical/technological, and that a Brawler/Monk can use a gauntlet to deal their favorable damage progression. I strongly believe that their only legitimate reason for existing it to provide a way for Brawlers/Monks to acquire Enhancement Bonuses and Special Abilities for their Unarmed Strikes. I'll omit presenting those arguments again (since my staunchest opponents simply cannot be swayed by reason), if you're really curious I suggest a couple of searches, you'll likely find all the information you need to make an informed decision of your own.
For my own sake, if Paizo ever does release the "Gauntlets Are Tools Not Weapons" FAQ that James mentions above: I'll ignore it at my table, probably never play a Brawler/Monk in PFS, and lose what little faith I still have in Pathfinder as a ruleset.
20th level human monks attacks with unarmed strike for what? 2d10?
With a gauntlet, 1d3.
With a cestus, brass knuckles, etc, 1d3 or 1d4 per the weapon.
Currently there is a new faq coming on gauntle that has minimally been explained to rule that gauntlet isn't a weapon at all. It's a tool. It can't be made magical, spiked gauntlet style shouldn't refer to it, it can't be a target for weapon focus. If all that happens it will be clear it doesn't help monks and can't be made into special materials.
Except they made magical guantlets (+1 enhancement ones), made them with special materials, etc.
Now, either change all previous specific weapons as Spiked Guantlets or they can't really change it in a new FAQ.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Except they made magical guantlets (+1 enhancement ones), made them with special materials, etc.
Now, either change all previous specific weapons as Spiked Guantlets or they can't really change it in a new FAQ.
The existence of incorrect rules in the past hasn't proven those rules are correct.
The incoming FAQ is resulting from Herolab questioning how to program conflicting rules. It's very likely that the delay in answering the Gauntlet FAQ is because of so many "+1 gauntlet" items and Spiked Gauntlet Style working with "spiked gauntlet or gauntlet". All of those errors would need to be corrected with the FAQ.
*wince*
No - a monk can't use gauntlets to bypass DR or hardness with unarmed strikes. GM Rednal quoted the relevant text but made a common error in interpreting: "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."
If you pull out your hard copy of the core rulebook and look up unarmed attacks, you'll find that all unarmed strikes are unarmed attacks.
Unarmed strike is defined under the Unarmed Combat rules.
Unless of course the 'something' is explicitly described as something you make an Unarmed Strike with like Gauntlets are.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Unless of course the 'something' is explicitly described as something you make an Unarmed Strike with like Gauntlets are.
That really isn't remotely true nor does it match every developer comment ever made regard gauntlets.
At some point you will need to abandon your position in the wake of an avalanche of opposition. But I guess you plan to just refuse until the gig is up and the FAQ lands?
I think the biggest loophole you're facing is the fact he's making claw attacks with gauntlets on.
Yeah that part simply doesn't work.
The closest you can get to making something like that work is to play a Catfolk with the Claws Alternate Racial Trait and wear Claw Blades... but then you aren't actually making a Natural Attack anymore, you're wielding a Light Slashing Weapon (that just happens to deal damage equal to your Claw damage). But those won't work for a Monk either, since they don't say anything about Unarmed Strikes or Unarmed Attacks. You'd have to be a 4th level Brawler or a Warpriest with Weapon Focus (Claw Blades) to get your damage progression with them.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While "Ask Your GM" is never the wrong answer, it's a counter productive answer to a question posted in the Rules Questions forum.
You are also the one giving opinions which blatantly contradict the literal RAW. Opinions you've never been able to provide any credible evidence to support.
Developer statements in E-mail format are no more an official source than developer statements in Forum Post format (which is to say, not at all!). Whomever sent that e-mail was in no position to comment on the intent of the Gauntlet's description given that they didn't write it in the first place, nor is an e-mail an officially accepted source for rules changes (in PFS or otherwise). So the HeroLab interpretation is based on sources with no credibility, and therefore lacks credibility itself. If Paizo decides to take an official stance on this issue after all this time, they must do so through FAQ or Errata (which they've proven more than willing to do in the recent past).
I'm not a PFS GM, so I don't have to adopt Paizo's ruling if I don't agree with it (official or otherwise), and I almost never get to actually play Pathfinder as a Player. As such there is little chance of me being disappointed by the future ruling. At most it will make me even less likely to play a Monk (which is already a pretty slim possibility thanks to the Table Variance surrounding gauntlets), and if I play a Brawler I'm much more likely to abuse damage-scaling thrown Wooden Stakes than I am to try wearing gauntlets in PFS.
If the aforementioned FAQ gets dropped than there simply isn't any legitimate reason to ever wear gauntlets, period.
I'm glad people are debating the big issues. Good to see folks standing up for what really matters.
Can metal gloves be made of metal?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
While "Ask Your GM" is never the wrong answer, it's a counter productive answer to a question posted in the Rules Questions forum.
You are also the one giving opinions which blatantly contradict the literal RAW. Opinions you've never been able to provide any credible evidence to support.
That's a primary example of why "Ask your GM" works.
As much as you want to say I'm blatantly contradicting the rules, I say that right back at you.
Clearly both of us are flabbergasted and utterly dumbfound how the other could possibly read that text the other way.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
@Zarius:
Gauntlets have a listed die roll in the weapon table for convenience sake. The value of 1d3 (for medium sized gauntlets) is clearly (to me)derived from the unarmed strike damage of the wielder (which is usually 1d3 for a medium creature) given that the description makes it quite clear that gauntlets are 'weapons' which allow your unarmed strikes to deal lethal damage. You have to actually be making an unarmed strike for that sentence in their description to make any sense.
Monks apply their damage progression to any Unarmed Strike, even those made unnecessarily lethal, granted a +1 enhancement bonus, or made adamantine, cold iron, or flaming/shocking/etc by wearing gauntlets of those materials or with those special properties.
The original and unchained monks do not treat their Unarmed Strikes as Adamantine until 16th level, likewise for the Brawler at 17th. So wearing an Adamantine Gauntlet lets them (at my table if nowhere else) bypass damage reduction and hardness significantly earlier.
Brawlers have it a little easier (in terms of table variation), because as long as the GM accepts that Gauntlets are still weapons*, than as members of the close weapon group Brawlers are explicitly entitled to use their Damage Progression at class level -4 with them. Even if the GM refuses to admit that an attack with a Gauntlet is an Unarmed Strike.
*which is also unfortunately in question thanks to that godawful stupid e-mail to HeroLab which has yet to be substantiated in any way by RAW, FAQ, or Errata.
Clearly both of us are flabbergasted and utterly dumbfound how the other could possibly read that text the other way.
A year ago (or was it two... we've had this debate so many times now) it was flabbergasting, these days it's just frustrating and diappointing.
Which is why I'm no longer bothering to cite my arguments as I have in the past; it just doesn't matter anymore. You simply refuse to engage in a dialectic discussion on the subject. Anybody else who really cares can run a search, or just read the PRD & FAQs and find enough evidence to make their own decisions. And all my IRL D&D and Pathfinder players have held the same position as I without even having to present any arguments (even ones currently playing in campaigns I'm not GMing... so it's not like I 'tainted' them).
At this point, if the PDT drops the FAQ-Hammer on gauntlets like they recently did for Magical Bows & Ammunition... it'll simply be one more house-rule to type out before my next Pathfinder campaign.
Can metal gloves be made of metal?
Not so much that but does making a glove metal actually DO anything. Somehow it a non-weapon item that modifies one way a weapons deals damage [lethal vs nonlethal] but somehow ignores another way it deals damage [DR]. Oh, and not to mention the issue of the gauntlet being mistakenly put on the weapon chart since before pathfinder was a thing...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good times!
|
|
Lol, jeez look what I started...great responses. Ultimately, I will let him play his character as is, I could have screwed up on how many actual attacks are being made, at the end of the day I was just curious if the gauntlets bypassed hardness if made of adamantine, while at the same time damage is dealt from elemental fist, do also bypass DR. He is using a feat, and does keep track of how many times he can use fury of blows, and multiple attacks stem from full round attacks. Thanks for all the great input.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is old, but here is the original take from WotC.
Can a monk use a +5 gauntlet in an unarmed attack,gaining all of her class benefits as well as the +5 bonus on
attack rolls and damage rolls from the gauntlet?Gauntlets are indeed a weapon. If a monk uses any weapon not listed as a special monk weapon, she does not gain her better attack rate. She would, however, gain the increased damage for unarmed attacks.
Again, not Paizo, but clearly the original intent of the items. I don't have a link as I have the file saved from way back when.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is that from book of Heavily Debated Topics? I’d like to get a copy of that again, as all internet copies are gone now
PM me your email and I will send it to you. It is a 945 KB PDF.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The incoming FAQ is resulting from Herolab questioning how to program conflicting rules. It's very likely that the delay in answering the Gauntlet FAQ is because of so many "+1 gauntlet" items and Spiked Gauntlet Style working with "spiked gauntlet or gauntlet". All of those errors would need to be corrected with the FAQ.
Several questions:
1) How does you or anyone know what's going to be in that FAQ?2) How does Shield Gauntlet Style work now?
3) What is taking so long?
If all that happens it will be clear it doesn't help monks and can't be made into special materials.
I disagree with the last part iparticualr.
1) We know things that aren't weapons or armor can be made from special materials, and usually have an increase in cost based on how much they weigh.
2) Heavy Armors come with gauntlets, yes? Does it make sense then to purchase(for example) Adamantine Fullplate... with iron/steel gauntlets? That sounds quite foolish.
As for the first part, I'd enjoy it if that went away. It makes little sense to put on gauntlets and suddenly hit as hard as a local Commoner. Where did all the training go? What magic do gauntlets possess to make Monks weaker just by wearing them?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1) How does you or anyone know what's going to be in that FAQ?
2) How does Shield Gauntlet Style work now?
3) What is taking so long?
1) Many developer comments and the response to HeroLab's questions on how to program their rules plus the resulting programming behavior. It's been a year since the first news hit the threads.
2) It works how your GM says, but it apparently couldn't have ever worked with a gauntlet because a gauntlet isn't a weapon. Again, based on the planned FAQ coming out as currently stated.
3) I think what is taking so long is a realization that there have been a lot of misunderstanding about gauntlets, what they do, how they work, whether or not they are weapons. So the FAQ can't be "not a weapon". It needs to be a blog post explaining all the current gauntlet adjunct rules and how they work or should have worked.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
2) Heavy Armors come with gauntlets ... Adamantine Fullplate... with iron/steel gauntlets?
3) What magic do gauntlets possess to make Monks weaker just by wearing them?
2) Masterwork Armor Adamantine Platemail has Masterwork Armor (but not Masterwork Weapon) Adamantine Gauntlets. There are no rules for any of this. Some will argue that paying masterwork armor (150 gp) makes it masterwork when used as a weapon. There are no rules for that either. All adamantine things are auto masterwork, so a stance that it is a masterwork weapon gauntlet is also possible. But no rules for that either.
3) You are asking a 20th level monk to ignore training and hit with these metal weapons on their hands. So yea, 1d3 damage. The same as asking the monk to use a temple sword.
You might be forgetting that 3.5 Monks were worse that pathfinder. There were many weapons (Kama, brass knuckles) that delivered your unarmed damage dice increases to the foes. Early on, Brass Knuckles delivered this damage through. SKR was a fan of this concept. He was overridden and there was errata to take that language out of all the weapons that had it at the time. It doesn't make sense that they "missed" gauntlets. It makes more sense if we think it deals Monk unarmed with Gauntlets, we are misunderstanding them. Because they don't.
3) I think what is taking so long is a realization that there have been a lot of misunderstanding about gauntlets, what they do, how they work, whether or not they are weapons. So the FAQ can't be "not a weapon". It needs to be a blog post explaining all the current gauntlet adjunct rules and how they work or should have worked.
My guess is that this is like 'do constructs take negative energy damage?'. The answer was 'of course not!' but when the follow up question was 'where does it say that?' there was silence because it wasn't an actual rule, just an assumption or unwritten rule. So now they have to try and make a rule that #1 fits what they want it to mean and #2 fit within the rules without invalidating large swathes of material/characters. #3 there could also be some contention over what the rule should be too, as it's clear that there is a difference of opinion somewhere with their being +1 gauntlets in several books, including hard covers, and Shield Gauntlet Style.
For a true fix, they have to remove it from ALL the weapon list and add it to equipment somewhere. Then they have to explain what you do with the 'weapon gauntlets' and gauntlet style, hopefully not making them useless.
I'll have to see that FAQ before I'll believe it. How is it not a weapon? It's on the weapons table with a complete set of stats!
That's not something a mere FAQ can undo. They'll need errata.
I really hope Paizo doesn't do this. It doesn't make much logical sense, and will likely create more problems than it will resolve.
What they really need to be clarifying is if armors that come with gauntlets come with gauntlets made out of the same material. Does adamantine full plate come with a pair of adamantine gauntlets, for example?
Also, forget Hero Lab. Paizo should be changing the rules to better accommodate their customer base, not a programming company.
It honestly struck me that "Gauntlets are weapons, you can enchant them, WF: Gauntlet is a thing, Shield Gauntlet Style works like it says on the box, monks with gauntlets can choose between their unarmed damage or the weapon's damage (with enchantments and special materials) not both" would be the simplest way out of this mess.
I'll have to see that FAQ before I'll believe it. How is it not a weapon? It's on the weapons table with a complete set of stats!
That's not something a mere FAQ can undo. They'll need errata.
I really hope Paizo doesn't do this. It doesn't make much logical sense, and will likely create more problems than it will resolve.
What they really need to be clarifying is if armors that come with gauntlets come with gauntlets made out of the same material. Does adamantine full plate come with a pair of adamantine gauntlets, for example?
Also, forget Hero Lab. Paizo should be changing the rules to better accommodate their customer base, not a programming company.
Someone told hero lab that they were doing gauntlets wrong. Hero lab then when and ask the PDT directly how gauntlets work. the PDT told them how gauntlets work. Hero lab then told the someone what PDT said. That someone posted on the forums and it shocked the community, first that Hero lab was getting "faqs" directly without needing to go through the process, and what the answer was. So Jason posted saying something like, "he was unaware that everyone didn't already know this and that the PDT would talk about it next week" That was like over a year ago now.
My suspicion is that perhaps because it's been over a year waiting for "next week" indicates that the solution turned out to not be as simple as what the PDT person was telling HeroLab (or is at least very different from that.)
First Off, is this a PFS game? If so then wait for the errata, FAQ or whatever publication that answers this question to make itself known. Or alternately enter into the swirlpool of randomly quoted things up there that may or may not actually answer your question.
Now that that's done. What's the point of playing RPG's? Is it to rules lawyer everyone that doesn't completely follow the rules to the letter; or is it to have fun? Because, in my experience it can't be both. Rules should be respected for sure but I think they're more guidelines than anything else. Conflict resolution for things that can't be agreed upon if you will.
Does it make any thematic sense that a monk can punch something for 2d6 (7) damage but when he puts on an abnormally hard gauntlet he can only punch for 1d3 (2) damage. Not in my opinion. What benefits does this give the Monk?
He can bypass DR? If he can get adamantine weapons then I assume any other martial in the group could as well.
It's cheaper to enchant? For sure it is but not any cheaper than it would be for any other martial and their weapons.
Let's not forget that it's stupidly difficult the enchant the monk's unarmed attacks, you essentially have two options find a badass Lv.20 spellcaster to permanently enchant you with greater magic fang or pay out the butt for an AOMF and it's +5 limit.
What's the point of playing RPG's? Is it to rules lawyer everyone that doesn't completely follow the rules to the letter; or is it to have fun? Because, in my experience it can't be both. Rules should be respected for sure but I think they're more guidelines than anything else. Conflict resolution for things that can't be agreed upon if you will.
You speak as if these are separate. Rules lawyering to completely follow the rules is the most fun.
I'll have to see that FAQ before I'll believe it. How is it not a weapon? It's on the weapons table with a complete set of stats!
That's not something a mere FAQ can undo. They'll need errata.
I really hope Paizo doesn't do this. It doesn't make much logical sense, and will likely create more problems than it will resolve.
What they really need to be clarifying is if armors that come with gauntlets come with gauntlets made out of the same material. Does adamantine full plate come with a pair of adamantine gauntlets, for example?
Also, forget Hero Lab. Paizo should be changing the rules to better accommodate their customer base, not a programming company.
HeroLab isn't "a software company". It is a licensed tool designed to aggregate and implement the rules of Pathfinder. I buy all the data for HeroLab before I buy the books. It is SO much easier to build characters and creatures because of this tool.
I still buy the books and the PDFs, but more because I am a completionist than for any need. The PDFs are nice because the get updated but for the most part the books just collect dust and become obsolete.
The point is, HeroLab IS a Pathfinder product that Paizo makes money from. Just because it may not be your preferred medium for the rules data doesn't mean it should play second fiddle to any other form. All Lone Wolf Development is really doing is the programming for Paizo's computer based record sheet. It is incumbent upon Paizo to explain the rules so that Lone Wolf can program them correctly.
The point is, HeroLab IS a Pathfinder product that Paizo makes money from. Just because it may not be your preferred medium for the rules data doesn't mean it should play second fiddle to any other form. All Lone Wolf Development is really doing is the programming for Paizo's computer based record sheet. It is incumbent upon Paizo to explain the rules so that Lone Wolf can program them correctly.
Agree 100% -- but also have no issue with a Gauntlet being a weapon that does 1d3 damage. Perhaps a feat (Gauntlet Monk) would be appropriate to allow a Monk to replace the gauntlet's base damage with their Unarmed Strike would be in order.
Where I firmly disagree is in the notion that other monk special features would apply to a gauntlet weapon attack. Similarly, a claw attack implies a natural like attack - and I would never allow a player to stack a claw attach with a weapon attack (though I would allow an Unarmed Strike to stack the Claw attack dice).
But not a single word of my opinion is RAW............... So it's just 2 cents!
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Lots of points from the past several posts.
- Herolab makes Paizo money, so it’s important to Paizo for it to work as designed. That means implementing the rules correctly.
- Paizo considers FAQ errata, because they don’t believe changing the wording is required to get people to use their interpretation for a rule.
- No one is saying adamantine armor doesn’t have adamantine gauntlets. The issue is how that extends to masterwork weapons.
- I agree it turned out to not be simple or we’d have an FAQ published by now.
- The difficultly I’m enhancing unarmed strikes is a cost considered to be part of the trade off for gaining monk benefits. You can disagree but how the rules work is up to Paizo. They might listed to well reasoned posts, but won’t go rants and raves.