PDA

View Full Version : Gauntlets = unarmed strikes?



Godskook
2009-09-13, 03:36 AM
Ok, we broke out this argument in another thread, and I didn't want it to take that thread too far off on this tangent, so here goes:

Speaking purely from a Char-Ops RAW point of view, shouldn't it be true that:

1.A monk wielding gauntlets gets the benefits of the enchantments on the gauntlets when making unarmed strikes with hands armed with said gauntlets.
2.Gets the full benefit of his class bonus to unarmed strike damage.
3.He's technically proficient with the gauntlets because technically:
"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."
And as far as I know, nobody requires a monk to be 'proficient' with his own fists.

Yora
2009-09-13, 03:43 AM
1. Yes.
2. No.
3. Maybe.

:smallbiggrin:

rezplz
2009-09-13, 03:45 AM
I'm not sure what RAW says, but I would say that a monk could use gauntlets just like if he was doing his normal unarmed strike. Seems like a common sense thing to me.

PId6
2009-09-13, 03:46 AM
1. Yes.
2. I'm leaning no, because a gauntlet has its own damage entry, indicating that it replaces normal unarmed damage.
3. "A strike with a gauntlet" is not the gauntlet itself. A gauntlet is a separate weapon with its own entry, and you need proficiency with it like any other weapon.

SparkMandriller
2009-09-13, 04:02 AM
I always thought attacks with gauntlets being considered unarmed just meant you could use stunning fist with them and get AoO'd if you don't have IUS. It's an unarmed attack, but not an unarmed strike. If that makes sense. Which it doesn't really, but, well, 3.5 is like that.

Godskook
2009-09-13, 04:03 AM
2. I'm leaning no, because a gauntlet has its own damage entry, indicating that it replaces normal unarmed damage.

The entry is identical for the relevant information. A 'true' unarmed strike deals the same damage as a strike with a gauntlet, according to the table. The text there states that they're treated the same, except damage with a gauntlet is lethal. Hence, shouldn't they be equally modified by the monk's class feature?


3. "A strike with a gauntlet" is not the gauntlet itself. A gauntlet is a separate weapon with its own entry, and you need proficiency with it like any other weapon.

Ok, go this way:
1.Does it say somewhere that people are proficient with their own body, or not? If not, are monks?
2.If a monk is proficient with his own body(unarmed strike), and a gauntlet is treated as an unarmed strike, why is he not proficient with gauntlets, since they're treated as unarmed strikes(except as explicitly noted)?


I always thought attacks with gauntlets being considered unarmed just meant you could use stunning fist with them and get AoO'd if you don't have IUS. It's an unarmed attack, but not an unarmed strike. If that makes sense. Which it doesn't really, but, well, 3.5 is like that.

Ok, by what justification does IUS apply to gauntlets but the other things I'm arguing don't? IUS never mentions 'unarmed attacks', only 'unarmed strikes', while the monk class feature uses both terms in referring to a monk's damage.

RS14
2009-09-13, 04:05 AM
Ok, we broke out this argument in another thread, and I didn't want it to take that thread too far off on this tangent, so here goes:

Speaking purely from a Char-Ops RAW point of view, shouldn't it be true that:

1.A monk wielding gauntlets gets the benefits of the enchantments on the gauntlets when making unarmed strikes with hands armed with said gauntlets.
2.Gets the full benefit of his class bonus to unarmed strike damage.
3.He's technically proficient with the gauntlets because technically:
"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."
And as far as I know, nobody requires a monk to be 'proficient' with his own fists.

1. Sometimes.
2. Yes, when making unarmed strikes.
3. No.
The attack with the gauntlet and the unarmed strike are distinct things. A monk is proficient with unarmed strikes (by convention), but not with gauntlets, which are a distinct weapon. However, they are an unusual weapon, as when they are worn, you may make an unarmed strike that happens to deal lethal damage. But to be perfectly clear, you can also make an attack with gauntlets, using the damage given on the table. So a monk can make an attack with gauntlets for 1d3 or make an unarmed strike. With the unarmed strike, he uses monk unarmed strike damage as normal and has the option of dealing lethal or non-lethal damage.

As for enchantments and proficiencies, "[magic weapons] apply these [enhancement] bonuses to both attack and damage rolls when used in combat." When (and only when) the function of gauntlets to allow the wielder to make a lethal unarmed strike is used, they apply their enhancement bonus to an unarmed strike. Likewise, "A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls;" this would apply to most monks using gauntlets to make a lethal unarmed strike (and thus apply an enhancement bonus).

To summarize, neither Unarmed Strike(Non-lethal) nor Unarmed Strike (Lethal) by virtue of Imp. Unarmed Strike adds the enhancement bonus nor the nonproficiency penalty, even when wearing gauntlets; Unarmed Strike(Lethal) by virtue of the gauntlets and Gauntlet +x melee both apply the enhancement bonus and the nonproficiency penalty.

VKO
2009-09-13, 04:06 AM
1. Definitely.
2. Let's think about this one carefully for a second. Look at the rules entry, specifically the first sentence:


"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."

Alright, now every player who's been in a bar brawl can tell you that an unarmed strike from a medium creature does how much damage? 1d3 nonlethal. How much damage do the gauntlets do? 1d3 lethal.

I propose that the value on the table is listed for convenience alone and that the rules as written in the weapon's description stand: The wielder is still attacking as though he was unarmed (Complete with the AoO) and therefore can increase this damage like he can increase his fist's damage. The gauntlet and the unarmed strike are listed underneath the same portion of the chart after all.

3. He is not proficient. The gauntlets are some kind of zany weapon that the game designers created to confuse us many years later by making it both a weapon and a simple enhancement to the unarmed strike.

My brain hurts.

SparkMandriller
2009-09-13, 04:32 AM
Ok, by what justification does IUS apply to gauntlets but the other things I'm arguing don't? IUS never mentions 'unarmed attacks', only 'unarmed strikes', while the monk class feature uses both terms in referring to a monk's damage.

Yeah, it's, I dunno, in my head I have unarmed strikes, and unarmed attacks. Unarmed strikes are always unarmed attacks, but unarmed attacks consist of things other than just unarmed strikes. Or they could. Even though they don't.

Look I admitted it doesn't make much sense.

Curmudgeon
2009-09-13, 04:39 AM
A monk wielding gauntlets gets the benefits of the enchantments on the gauntlets when making unarmed strikes with hands armed with said gauntlets.
2.Gets the full benefit of his class bonus to unarmed strike damage.
3.He's technically proficient with the gauntlets
1. Maybe on some percentage of attacks. Unarmed strikes don't use just hands.
Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts ...
What percentage of unarmed attacks are from punches, what part from kicks, and so on for head butts, elbows, knees, hip checks ... ?

2. Definitely not. Gauntlets are weapons, and those weapons are not on the special Monk weapon list.
Weapon and Armor Proficiency

Monks are proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling. 3. Gauntlets aren't on this list, so no.

PId6
2009-09-13, 04:40 AM
The entry is identical for the relevant information. A 'true' unarmed strike deals the same damage as a strike with a gauntlet, according to the table. The text there states that they're treated the same, except damage with a gauntlet is lethal. Hence, shouldn't they be equally modified by the monk's class feature?
Being "considered an unarmed attack" is not the same as being an unarmed strike. I interpret that line as meaning that making an attack with the gauntlet (for 1d3 damage) counts as an unarmed strike (for things like Stunning Fist), but it still starts as a strike with the weapon (gauntlet). It's ambiguous at best.


Ok, go this way:
1.Does it say somewhere that people are proficient with their own body, or not? If not, are monks?
2.If a monk is proficient with his own body(unarmed strike), and a gauntlet is treated as an unarmed strike, why is he not proficient with gauntlets, since they're treated as unarmed strikes(except as explicitly noted)?
1. Nowhere is it stated that you're proficient with an unarmed strike that I know of. I suppose you could take it as meaning that all unarmed strikes, even from monk, lack proficiency, if you want to go full RAW.
2. You're taking that line too literally; a gauntlet is its own weapon entry, and in fact, the words "strike with a gauntlet" comes before "otherwise," which suggests that it starts out as a gauntlet attack, requiring gauntlet proficiency, that becomes treated as an unarmed strike afterward.

Aken0008
2009-09-13, 05:26 AM
1.A monk wielding gauntlets gets the benefits of the enchantments on the gauntlets when making unarmed strikes with hands armed with said gauntlets.
2.Gets the full benefit of his class bonus to unarmed strike damage.
3.He's technically proficient with the gauntlets because technically:
"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."
And as far as I know, nobody requires a monk to be 'proficient' with his own fists.

1. I would say only when specifying an attack with fists, rather than an unarmed attack, which can be any part of the body
2.I think that they should chose between gauntlet damage and "normal" damage
3.Gauntlets heavy enough to do lethal damage would change the balance of the strikes, therefore needing a proficiency.

Omegonthesane
2009-09-13, 06:50 AM
I'm pretty sure this was FAQed... at least partially.


Q: 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?
A: 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.

As for proficiency, there is a special layer of Hell reserved for DMs who don't think being proficient with unarmed strikes equates to being proficient with heavy gloves worn while making unarmed strikes, but the position's arguable by RAW.

Godskook
2009-09-13, 11:40 AM
As for proficiency, there is a special layer of Hell reserved for DMs who don't think being proficient with unarmed strikes equates to being proficient with heavy gloves worn while making unarmed strikes, but the position's arguable by RAW.

Yes, well, everything I'm suggesting(even working with flurry, which I didn't think about initially) is reasonable, I'm not worried about that. I'm wondering about RAW. Besides, there's a lot of DMs like that if the stories are true.

sofawall
2009-09-13, 11:48 AM
Ok, we broke out this argument in another thread, and I didn't want it to take that thread too far off on this tangent, so here goes:

Speaking purely from a Char-Ops RAW point of view, shouldn't it be true that:

1.A monk wielding gauntlets gets the benefits of the enchantments on the gauntlets when making unarmed strikes with hands armed with said gauntlets.
2.Gets the full benefit of his class bonus to unarmed strike damage.
3.He's technically proficient with the gauntlets because technically:
"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."
And as far as I know, nobody requires a monk to be 'proficient' with his own fists.

1. Yes.
2. No.
3. No.

The problem is, Gauntlets are neither a special monk weapon, nor do they allow special monk damage. So no flurry, and no extra damage. Sorry.

Just an FYI, this has been discussed more times than you know.

EDIT: Amusingly, looking over Monk, they aren't proficient with their Unarmed Strikes.

Frosty
2009-09-13, 11:59 AM
EDIT: Amusingly, looking over Monk, they aren't proficient with their Unarmed Strikes.

Mostly becuase Unarmed Strike is a Simple weapon, which monks don't have proficiency for.

Omegonthesane
2009-09-13, 12:04 PM
The problem is, Gauntlets are neither a special monk weapon, nor do they allow special monk damage. So no flurry, and no extra damage. Sorry.
*facepalm* I literally just quoted WotC themselves on this. Gauntlets are a weapon; they may not be used in a flurry. Thus far, you are right. But gauntlets are unarmed strikes in all other respects, so a monk gets extra unarmed damage for making unarmed strikes. Now to try invoking my rules-lawyering skills to reach the same conclusion:


Gauntlet
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. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets.
Emphases mine. From this we deduce that though it is a material weapon, a gauntlet's fundamental nature is to let you do lethal damage with your fists without being a monk. Nothing else.

Now to quote the Monk's description:

Unarmed Strike

At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

A monk also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown on Table: The Monk. The unarmed damage on Table: The Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage.
Note that it consistently uses the term "unarmed strike", rather than for example "strike made without wielding a weapon" or "bare-handed attack". From this it can be inferred that if a monk were to wield a weapon that allowed them to make unarmed strikes, then these unarmed strikes would gain all the benefits of being unarmed strikes. Mechanically, a gauntlet is nothing if not a weapon that allows you to make unarmed strikes, and therefore a monk should get his extra unarmed strike damage.

...Although actually, using this reasoning, I can't see what part of the flurry of blows prevents a gauntlet wearer from flurrying. As consolation, flurry of blows sucks.


EDIT: Amusingly, looking over Monk, they aren't proficient with their Unarmed Strikes.
Known typo.

ericgrau
2009-09-13, 12:17 PM
Gauntlets are weapons that can be used when you could use an unarmed strike. So I'd say no for the monk.

The Rose Dragon
2009-09-13, 12:18 PM
Known typo.

That must be some big typo. I mean, I would understand if they wrote "unared strike" or something, but omitting the entire phrase is something beyond a typographical error, it is an error of ignorance.

Ravens_cry
2009-09-13, 12:19 PM
He can use em' like his fists, though his (the monks) fists already do lethal damage, so there isn't much point, except gauntlets can be magicked, so you can have flaming burst gauntlets. Get dancing, and you can be Rayman! There is magic fang, but I am not sure there are rules for magicking natural weapons permanently like bought weapons.

Otodetu
2009-09-13, 12:31 PM
Personal opinion; I don't see why one would deny a monk this; it is a mad-heavy and generally underpowered class.
The monk might be better than the fighter, but fighter is a npc class.


From a raw point of view; monks are not supposed to gain the benefits of enchanted gauntlets on their "powerful" unarmed strikes.

jiriku
2009-09-13, 01:20 PM
RAW no, but I houserule it yes. At middle and high levels, monks face non-trivial WBL challenges because they must use the more-expensive amulet of mighty fists and bracers of armor in place of the cheap magic weapons and armors that other classes use. Allowing the monk to enchant a gauntlet and get the less-costly weapon progression for enhancement bonuses is a small concession for an otherwise poorly-regarded class.

RS14
2009-09-13, 01:31 PM
I'm pretty sure this was FAQed... at least partially.

FAQ is not RAW. In particular I remember, only a year or so ago, it had two answers to this question, one after the other, which were mutually contradictory.

Also, let us please ignore "Unarmed Attacks." These are not relevant, as an unarmed attack is not explicitly the same thing as an unarmed strike. They allow us to conclude nothing about the applicability of bonus damage or flurry of blows.


From a raw point of view; monks are not supposed to gain the benefits of enchanted gauntlets on their "powerful" unarmed strikes.
That's a RAI view. From a RAI view, kobolds are not supposed to have infinite ability scores. We're not discussing RAI here.


1. Yes.
2. No.
3. No.

The problem is, Gauntlets are neither a special monk weapon, nor do they allow special monk damage. So no flurry, and no extra damage. Sorry.

Quite right, when they make a Gauntlet +x melee attack. But no rational monk will ever make a Gauntlet +x melee attack, because (so long as he wears gauntlets) he can make an unarmed strike instead. In particular, "This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes;" by invoking this clause, he is considered to be using gauntlets as part of his Unarmed Strike (Lethal) + x melee attack (in much the same way that e.g. a Guisarme can be used in a disarm attack) and therefor applies both the enhancement bonus and nonproficiency penalty.

This attack is explicitly an Unarmed Strike. "When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham)." So a monk cannot make a flurry of blows with a gauntlet +x melee attack, but she can make a flurry of blows with an unarmed strike. In particular, she may do so with an unarmed strike while using gauntlets to apply the enhancement bonus as well as the nonproficiency penalty. Similar reasoning shows that, as an unarmed strike, it uses monk unarmed strike damage.

(You could, I will concede, make a strong case that "attack only with" prohibits gauntlets from being used to augment the unarmed strikes. But I submit this question then: isn't a monk who applies the benefit of an Amulet of Mighty Fists by similar logic also attacking with the (benefit of the) Amulet and therefor forbidden from applying that bonus damage to a flurry of blows?)

Ravens_cry
2009-09-13, 01:32 PM
RAW no, but I houserule it yes. At middle and high levels, monks face non-trivial WBL challenges because they must use the more-expensive amulet of mighty fists and bracers of armor in place of the cheap magic weapons and armors that other classes use. Allowing the monk to enchant a gauntlet and get the less-costly weapon progression for enhancement bonuses is a small concession for an otherwise poorly-regarded class.
Agreed. If I play in a undead heavy D&D game, I am so begging my DM for this. Why? Two Words. Disruption. Gauntlets.
I punch evil in the face.*

*with apologies to Sluggy Freelance

Curmudgeon
2009-09-13, 03:59 PM
Personal opinion; I don't see why one would deny a monk this; it is a mad-heavy and generally underpowered class.
...
From a raw point of view; monks are not supposed to gain the benefits of enchanted gauntlets on their "powerful" unarmed strikes.
The reasons to deny Monks gauntlets are:
As this thread shows, gauntlets cause arguments.
The Necklace of Natural Attacks does everything that gauntlets might do, legally.
Since the Necklace affects the Monk's unarmed strike (a single natural weapon), it costs half as much as two magic gauntlets.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-13, 04:12 PM
But you could have to different gauntlets with different enchantments on each of them for different effects!

Curmudgeon
2009-09-13, 04:16 PM
But you could have two different gauntlets with different enhancements on each of them for different effects!
Fixed it for you.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-13, 04:18 PM
Ruined it for you.

Fixed it for you.

Godskook
2009-09-13, 04:46 PM
The reasons to deny Monks gauntlets are:
As this thread shows, gauntlets cause arguments.
The Necklace of Natural Attacks does everything that gauntlets might do, legally.
Since the Necklace affects the Monk's unarmed strike (a single natural weapon), it costs half as much as two magic gauntlets.


1.By that reasoning, you shouldn't even play D&D.
2.Necklace of Natural Attacks is 3.0 in SS(did it update somewhere else? I can't find it.), and is also questionable because of it.
3.Weird point, since if my view point was ruled to work, a monk only needs one gauntlet to make full use of his class features. The gauntlet also takes a weapon slot rather than a throat slot. If he wanted to take the TWF, he'd take the hit either way.
4.The argument is partially there due to my 'strictly by RAW' restriction. Several people have said 'just houserule it' or 'if it isn't, it should be' in this thread.

Keld Denar
2009-09-13, 05:51 PM
Unfortunately, Neck is a HIGHLY coveted magical item slot. Neck gives Con, Wis, Natural Armor, and a host of other features. Granted, with the rules in the back of the MIC for basic ability addons and item afinity, you can move Con to belt or vest, wis to head, and add NA to Natural Attacks, or something, but you are still pigeonholed into it.

dragoonsgone
2009-09-13, 06:02 PM
What about if you slap someone with the gauntlet? I now want a monk who walks around slapping people with gauntlets for some reason.

nefele
2009-09-13, 08:50 PM
1. Yes
2. Yes
3. Yes




A monk with gauntlets. Think about it. Think of any Kung Fu movie you've seen, any Shaolin Monks documentary you've ever watched. Remember their amazingly flexible and dexterous fingers. Now replace their precise punches and elegant chops and Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Techniques with gauntlets. Not straps, not thin, almost invisible gloves, but gauntlets. Heavy, metal things that will break your toes if you drop them. Thick, bulky things that allow your fingers no flexibility. Does it make sense? No. So if you want to help the monk, give him Full BAB, flurry as a standard action, a Necklace of Natural Attacks with CON and WIS bonus all wrapped in a convenient package. Or all of the above. Not gauntlets. :smalltongue:



[RAW+RAI compromise]
Refluff the monk's "gauntlets" as rags. Enchant the rags to your heart's delight. Everyone's happy.
[/RAW+RAI compromise]

Godskook
2009-09-13, 09:18 PM
You are apparently not familiar with the discipline of the Iron Fist... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D85xAVgV0mE&feature=related)(2 minutes in)

Darrin
2009-09-13, 10:23 PM
Think of any Kung Fu movie you've seen, any Shaolin Monks documentary you've ever watched. Remember their amazingly flexible and dexterous fingers. Now replace their precise punches and elegant chops and Five Point Palm Exploding Heart Techniques with gauntlets. Not straps, not thin, almost invisible gloves, but gauntlets. Heavy, metal things that will break your toes if you drop them. Thick, bulky things that allow your fingers no flexibility.


Hah. You've obviously never seen Death Mask of the Ninja (AKA Shaolin Prince AKA Iron Fingers of Death), which contains no death masks and no ninjas, but the BBEG does indeed have a golden metal gauntlet in this two-fingers-I-stab-you-to-death arrangement that he does indeed deal out much whoopass with. Also in this film: the Eighteen Buddha Attack, and the Sedan Chair of Death.

For those of you who think this matter is settled either by RAW or RAI, I hereby assign extra credit:

Outfit a Grippli monk (or other small-sized character) with the Mighty Arms graft (Faiths of Eberron) and two Battlefists (ECS). Now, explain by RAW:

1) What is the size/handedness of this weapon, how much damage, and what type of damage?
2) Can you Power Attack or Weapon Finesse with it?
3) If you TWF the battlefist as your primary weapon, can you use your other battlefist as your secondary weapon?

Godskook
2009-09-13, 11:02 PM
1.Where's battlefists from?

2.Setting specific material banzored! (Kidding)

Darrin
2009-09-13, 11:36 PM
1.Where's battlefists from?

Eberron Campaign Sourcebook. I wanted to strangle the person who wrote that up... whoever they are, they apparently know very little about the differences between a natural slam attack, a spiked gauntlet, an unarmed strike, and a monk's unarmed strike.

Fortunately, I went with the Girallon Arms soulmeld instead, and it turned out to be a heckuva lot more effective than I thought it'd be.

nefele
2009-09-14, 04:50 AM
You are apparently not familiar with the discipline of the Iron Fist... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D85xAVgV0mE&feature=related)(2 minutes in)
I am, in fact, and it's a gorgeous parody. Parody, I say. :smalltongue: (Also, I'd say the metal rings count as bracers and not gauntlets.)


Hah. You've obviously never seen Death Mask of the Ninja (AKA Shaolin Prince AKA Iron Fingers of Death), which contains no death masks and no ninjas, but the BBEG does indeed have a golden metal gauntlet in this two-fingers-I-stab-you-to-death arrangement that he does indeed deal out much whoopass with. Also in this film: the Eighteen Buddha Attack, and the Sedan Chair of Death.
Heh, you got me. I stand corrected.

I still refuse to make a monk with gauntlets (*shudders*) for any marginally serious game, but your objection is sustained. :smallwink:

Curmudgeon
2009-09-14, 05:13 AM
Unfortunately, Neck is a HIGHLY coveted magical item slot. Neck gives Con, Wis, Natural Armor, and a host of other features. Granted, with the rules in the back of the MIC for basic ability addons and item afinity, you can move Con to belt or vest, wis to head, and add NA to Natural Attacks, or something, but you are still pigeonholed into it.
This isn't a problem. You should read all of what it says in those new rules in Magic Item Compendium. You can add both CON and WIS enhancements to a Necklace of Natural Attacks with no price premium, and with no movement to other body slots required for these ability boosts.

If you also want natural armor enhancement, it can be added to any item in the Body or Torso slots, also without a price premium. You don't need to save the Throat slot for a Necklace of Natural Armor.

Hadrian_Emrys
2009-09-14, 12:37 PM
This really is a stupid fight. I've found that treating gauntlets/greaves/etc. as a simple means by which to add/convert slashing and/or piercing qualities to monk attacks (without crippling their class abilities) doesn't detract from the game in any way, save for offending the RAW obsessed... -and who really cares what they think? The true spirit of tabletop role play is to tell a collective story, even if WotC is spearheading a campaign to ensure that it is nothing more than an outdated form of video game.

PId6
2009-09-14, 12:44 PM
The whole point of this thread is debating RAW; the "spirit" of tabletop games are irrelevant to this discussion. And if people can have fun doing it, why not? I think universally we can all or nearly all agree that letting monks use gauntlets is in no way overpowering and fixes one of the major problems of the class, but that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. RAW matters because that's what we're discussing here, irrespective of what we'd do in an actual game.

Deadmeat.GW
2009-09-14, 01:09 PM
Either way if we go RAW monks are always at minus 4 to all unarmed strikes as they have no official proficiency with them.

I would actually go with Enchanted Gloves, not Gauntlets, and since you can pro RAW enchant cloth clothing it would work and clothing does not count as armour for proficiency.
Problem would be would the enchants available fall under clothing enchants?

Silly but hey...

+2 (bonus to AC) Gloves of Thunder?

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-09-14, 03:07 PM
This really is a stupid fight. I've found that treating gauntlets/greaves/etc. as a simple means by which to add/convert slashing and/or piercing qualities to monk attacks (without crippling their class abilities) doesn't detract from the game in any way, save for offending the RAW obsessed... -and who really cares what they think?

No one is saying Gauntlets shouldn't be houseruled to work, just that they don't the way the game is written.

And the people asking the question "Does this work by RAW" care what we think. I would advise you not to be so dismissive in the future.

Gerrtt
2009-09-14, 03:14 PM
[B]1.Gauntlets aren't on this list, so no.

Technically, neither are unarmed strikes. I've heard the claim that from a RAW perspective monks aren't proficient with the weapon their class features are designed around.

I say ask your DM, but my vote is to let the monks have gauntlets.

Xenogears
2009-09-14, 04:15 PM
I am, in fact, and it's a gorgeous parody. Parody, I say. :smalltongue: (Also, I'd say the metal rings count as bracers and not gauntlets.)


Heh, you got me. I stand corrected.

I still refuse to make a monk with gauntlets (*shudders*) for any marginally serious game, but your objection is sustained. :smallwink:

But I wanna play as Hellboy...

Just one giant punch over and over again...