Is there something I'm missing about handwraps?


Pathfinder Society


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Is there some rule complication or OP thing I'm missing with the handwraps in Martial Arts Handbook that put them on the ban-hammer's anvil for pfs? Just trying to understand the reasoning for this one.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

To avoid possible spoilers (could be a Chronicle reward), or arguing (never gets anyone anywhere), Leadership rarely explains why something doesn't initially make it on the Additional Resources list. We can offer conjecture, but that's about it.

Dark Archive 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

They are significantly cheaper than Amulets of Mighty Fists, and don't take up the precious neck slot... so far better than the amulet.

So, it is likely they were banned as allowing them would cause a good deal of outrage.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

Is the cost difference not because the amulet affects all unarmed and natural weapons? I get it, it's a huge increase, but that seems to be a problem with the amulet, not the wraps that are priced exactly the same as any other enchantable weapon. I just thought I was missing something.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

The amulet has the advantage of being out first (by a number of years) and to change the amulet would have a HUGE impact to many established characters.

For whatever it is worth, they learned the lesson and corrected it in Second Edition.

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Funny you mention that.

The amulet was originally 2.5x the cost of a regular weapon, and was errata'd circa 2012 to just 2x.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Couldn't you arguably combine the handwraps and the amulet of mighty fists, getting you +2 agile fiery fists for the cost of 2 +2 weapons instead of a +4 weapon?

Dark Archive 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

You could get a +2 weapon for 8K, and agile fiery amulet for 16K, so a total of 24K.

More like for the price of a +2 and approximately a +3... but, yeah.

Probably another good reason.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

A good illustration of combining weapon special abilities and bypassing fame requirements.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

The handwraps specifically prohibit combining with the amulet.

Handwraps wrote:
A character can’t benefit from both handwraps and other items that provide enhancement bonuses or weapon special abilities (such as an amulet of mighty fists) on the same attack.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Good Point. I missed that.

So it appears to come down to the price difference and the slot needed to get the benefit of weapon enhancements and special abilities.

Dark Archive 4/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Upper Midwest aka Silbeg

Yup.

Good catch, CraziFuzzy.

Gary, I think it is that sort of thing.

That, and if they made them legal, 10000 angry gamers would demand refunds on their amulets as well... so probably the best choice at this time.

Had these come out in 2012, maybe it would have made more sense to legalize them.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Jack Brown wrote:

Yup.

Good catch, CraziFuzzy.

Gary, I think it is that sort of thing.

That, and if they made them legal, 10000 angry gamers would demand refunds on their amulets as well... so probably the best choice at this time.

Had these come out in 2012, maybe it would have made more sense to legalize them.

Yeah, I would be one of them!

1/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

Generally, if a new item gets published that invalidates a core item in the Core Rulebook, then it's probably getting the ban hammer.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

plenty of items have come out over the years that make core options less optimal - hell, entire classes have come out - and those are made legal. I think I'd be okay with this if this was just a different slot amulet - but that's not really the case. It doesn't do some things the amulet does, and it does to some things the amulet does not.

The Exchange 5/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It’s banned because it would alter the design expectation of where a monk’s unarmed strike damage should be. As has been pointed out the handwraps are significantly cheaper than an amulet of mighty fists. And unlike other weapons, the monk can still do his own unarmed strike damage with the handwraps.

Those of us who have been around for a while remember that brass knuckles used to function exactly this way. They were officially errata’d so that the monk does not get his normal unarmed damage with brass knuckles.

So if the handwraps were allowed it would essentially be “oh, we put the old-style brass knuckles back in. You know, the ones on which we deliberately lowered the damage potential.”

As for “then why did they publish them?” I don’t know. My guess is that the handwraps were submitted by a freelancer and the developer who went over the book wasn’t a part of Paizo when the decision was made to errata the brass knuckles years ago.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Kevin Willis wrote:
As for “then why did they publish them?” I don’t know. My guess is that the handwraps were submitted by a freelancer and the developer who went over the book wasn’t a part of Paizo when the decision was made to errata the brass knuckles years ago.

It's also worth noting that the makeup of Paizo's staff has changed significantly since those days, including changes to the Design Team. It could be representative of a shift in general (though by no means unanimous) opinion.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

It still sounds like the major problem is that the amulet is too expensive, not that the wraps are too cheap. That means this is a fix, and not a complication.

Sovereign Court 1/5

I think the pricing on the amulet is fine. It costs the same as enchanting 2 weapons of equal power level, but you get to enchant your entire body and use any part of it to attack.

The Exchange 5/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

CraziFuzzy wrote:
It still sounds like the major problem is that the amulet is too expensive, not that the wraps are too cheap. That means this is a fix, and not a complication.

In the view of the designers of the Pathfinder rules (Jason Bulhman, et al.) the price of the amulet is a deliberate game balance mechanic, not a problem.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Venture-Agent, France—Paris

CraziFuzzy wrote:
It still sounds like the major problem is that the amulet is too expensive, not that the wraps are too cheap. That means this is a fix, and not a complication.

The flurry has ultimately the same number of attacks if not more than a TWF, without penalties if the char is a U Monk. The price of the amulet sounds fair in the light of this

Sczarni 5/5 5/55/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Society Subscriber

Especially since the price was already adjusted down once before.

Scarab Sages 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The amulet can also do something no other item in the game can do, which is skip the +1 requirement before adding a special ability (edit: not counting items that add a specific special ability, like deliquescent gloves). While they get expensive quickly, I think the amulets work out about right. Considering natural attack builds can enhance 5+ different weapons for the cost of 2 magic weapons, it’s fair.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Is there something I'm missing about handwraps? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.