PDA

View Full Version : D&D 3.5: Monks and Gauntlets



Tusalu
2010-01-22, 12:34 PM
We had a short discussion (lasting about 1/4 of the session) at my last roleplaying session, about whether or not a monk can get magically enchanced gauntlets, and deal his monk unarmed damage with the item enchancements on. It says in the book that a gauntlet is in effect an unarmed attack, which deals lethal damage. However it seems to make the Amulet of Mighty Fists rather useless. Could really use some second opinion on this...

Vizzerdrix
2010-01-22, 12:36 PM
We had a short discussion (lasting about 1/4 of the session) at my last roleplaying session, about whether or not a monk can get magically enchanced gauntlets, and deal his monk unarmed damage with the item enchancements on. It says in the book that a gauntlet is in effect an unarmed attack, which deals lethal damage. However it seems to make the Amulet of Mighty Fists rather useless. Could really use some second opinion on this...

I'm of the opinion that yes, gauntlets are monk friendly.

dsmiles
2010-01-22, 12:38 PM
I'm of the opinion that yes, gauntlets are monk friendly.

This. Plus one of my houserules allows monks to use spiked gauntlets as an 'additional' 1d4 damage (the force of their punch, plus the spikes).

Alejandro
2010-01-22, 12:39 PM
Technically, a monk is not proficient with the spiked gauntlet (a simple weapon.)

Monks are proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling.

Did you mean a different kind of gauntlet? And yes, I do know that I am splitting hairs here.

hamishspence
2010-01-22, 12:42 PM
Depends on if "ordinary gauntlets" count as simply an upgrade to Unarmed Strike, so can be used with it, without non-proficiency penalties.

Dragon Magazine (monk guide) suggests yes, they can. Hence, with Cold Iron or Silver gauntlets, you can overcome DR, plus use your normal monk unarme strike effects.

dsmiles
2010-01-22, 12:42 PM
Technically, a monk is not proficient with the spiked gauntlet (a simple weapon.)

Monks are proficient with club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, and sling.

Did you mean a different kind of gauntlet? And yes, I do know that I am splitting hairs here.

Nope. Spiked Gauntlet. Simple weapon. I just apply a little common sense to the RAW. If you can punch with a bare fist, you can punch with a gauntlet/spiked gauntlet. Like I said, houserule.

Alejandro
2010-01-22, 01:04 PM
A totally acceptable houserule. I just wanted clarification. By RAW the monk cannot do that, but houserule says he can.

I can think of other ways to get better results with certain magical items, but spiked gauntlets would certainly be a good choice for low level play.

dsmiles
2010-01-22, 01:09 PM
A totally acceptable houserule. I just wanted clarification. By RAW the monk cannot do that, but houserule says he can.

I can think of other ways to get better results with certain magical items, but spiked gauntlets would certainly be a good choice for low level play.

That's exactly why I use it. It's in a low-magic/high-technology campaign world.

ken-do-nim
2010-01-22, 01:11 PM
I say absolutely not for flavor reasons. I'd much rather just rule that monk weapons usable in a flurry also deal the monk's unarmed damage.

Asgardian
2010-01-22, 01:12 PM
We had a short discussion (lasting about 1/4 of the session) at my last roleplaying session, about whether or not a monk can get magically enchanced gauntlets, and deal his monk unarmed damage with the item enchancements on. It says in the book that a gauntlet is in effect an unarmed attack, which deals lethal damage. However it seems to make the Amulet of Mighty Fists rather useless. Could really use some second opinion on this...

We usually try to stay away from house rules in my group because they come back to bite us in the butt later even if they make sense at the time.

In this case, Monk players just use customized Ki Straps (MIC 113) and enhance those

JonestheSpy
2010-01-22, 01:30 PM
Nope. Spiked Gauntlet. Simple weapon. I just apply a little common sense to the RAW. If you can punch with a bare fist, you can punch with a gauntlet/spiked gauntlet. Like I said, houserule.

I'd say no way. Common sense says that punching someone with a spiked gauntlet and a martial arts strike are totally different things. Although I could see a totally plausible houserule about a monk style based around spiked gauntlets, but it'd have to take a feat or something, not just be a freebie.

Ecalsneerg
2010-01-22, 01:35 PM
A totally acceptable houserule. I just wanted clarification. By RAW the monk cannot do that, but houserule says he can.

RAW, monks aren't proficient in unarmed strikes. :smallwink:

Person_Man
2010-01-22, 01:35 PM
Gauntlets are not a special Monk weapon. Thus you cannot use Flurry of Blows while using them.

ShippoWildheart
2010-01-22, 01:38 PM
Gauntlets are not a special Monk weapon. Thus you cannot use Flurry of Blows while using them.

I do have to agree though, the rule of common sense says that anything you can punch with (like gauntlets), SHOULD be usable as a weapon by the monk. Dang WoTC and their whacky ruling of how monks are supposed to function. :yuk:

Alejandro
2010-01-22, 01:40 PM
I can see the argument that a spiked gauntlet is not the same. My view is, using a spiked gauntlet to hurt someone doesn't require any special skill, other than being able to punch well. The gauntlet is nothing more than a protective covering for your hand, with spikes to cause impact energy to be released in a smaller area.

Hurting someone seriously with an unarmed, martial arts strike, requires knowledge of edges and body surfaces, pressure points, densities, weak spots, etc. This is what makes some martial arts strikes more deadly than simple fist punching.

Of course, that could bring up another question: if a monk's strike relies a lot on pressure points, nerve cluster locations, targeting skeletal joints, etc, does it work on something immune to critical hits? Just a theory.

dsmiles
2010-01-22, 01:44 PM
I can see the argument that a spiked gauntlet is not the same. My view is, using a spiked gauntlet to hurt someone doesn't require any special skill, other than being able to punch well. The gauntlet is nothing more than a protective covering for your hand, with spikes to cause impact energy to be released in a smaller area.

Hurting someone seriously with an unarmed, martial arts strike, requires knowledge of edges and body surfaces, pressure points, densities, weak spots, etc. This is what makes some martial arts strikes more deadly than simple fist punching.

Of course, that could bring up another question: if a monk's strike relies a lot on pressure points, nerve cluster locations, targeting skeletal joints, etc, does it work on something immune to critical hits? Just a theory.

I also use a hit location table for monks. It helps against those pesky undead and their immunity to critical hits. As in, "Hey! That monk just tore off that zombie's arm!" (gives a penalty to the zombie's attacks)

Alejandro
2010-01-22, 01:47 PM
Do you allow the fighter to cut off the zombie's arm?

dsmiles
2010-01-22, 01:50 PM
Do you allow the fighter to cut off the zombie's arm?

Absolutely! I love hit location tables. I also have one for piercing weapons and one for bludgoening weapons, and one for ranged touch spells, and one for touch spells.

:smallbiggrin:

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 01:57 PM
I always envisioned that a monk's attacks and the way the dice increased was to represent a monk's increasing skill, rather than strength. He could strike nerve clusters, strike faster, strike more efficiently, etc...in a way that could still affect undead.

By that logic...hrmmm...I'd actually say a gauntlet would HAMPER a monk's unarmed damage! ;) Ever try to do something careful and delicate with your fingers wrapped in a big old glove? Now imagine that glove was made of steel with spikes on it!

:smallbiggrin:

I wouldn't make that ruling generally, but it's funny to think about.

dsmiles
2010-01-22, 01:58 PM
Now imagine that glove was made of steel with spikes on it!

:smallbiggrin:


That could be painful...:smalleek:

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 02:07 PM
That could be painful...:smalleek:

Get your mind out of the gutter.

Otodetu
2010-01-22, 02:18 PM
The monk is sort of ****ty so i see no reason to gimp the monk by disallowing enhanced gauntlets (or you know; some sort of battle-gear item, with knuckles and kneepads and similar items, but still one items.)

Doc Roc
2010-01-22, 02:25 PM
We had a short discussion (lasting about 1/4 of the session) at my last roleplaying session, about whether or not a monk can get magically enchanced gauntlets, and deal his monk unarmed damage with the item enchancements on. It says in the book that a gauntlet is in effect an unarmed attack, which deals lethal damage. However it seems to make the Amulet of Mighty Fists rather useless. Could really use some second opinion on this...

RAW, they are not.

Ignore this.

Seriously, ignore it and just allow it. Lie back, and think of England.

Tiktakkat
2010-01-22, 02:35 PM
Common sense says that punching someone with a spiked gauntlet and a martial arts strike are totally different things.

Okinawan martial artists would beg to differ:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tekko

Likewise Japanese and Filipino martial artists as per the yawara link.

I have used a chize kun bo mentioned in that article.

So there are actual real-world Asian martial arts fist-load type weapons, which as just a step away from gauntlets.

However . . .

The Magic Item Compendium features a particular weapon called the Scorpion Kama as part of the Gharyn's Monastic Array magic item set. (A new concept introduced in the book. This weapon has a special ability of doing damage equal to your unarmed strike damage (if greater of course).
This special ability is not given a specific price, but assuming there is no discount for it being part of a set, backward engineering gives a value of 4,000 gp to add it to a weapon, assuming you want to put it on some other monk weapon.

Tusalu
2010-01-22, 02:41 PM
Gauntlets are not a special Monk weapon. Thus you cannot use Flurry of Blows while using them.

I know. I mentioned this as well. But the counter-argument was that it says in the Gauntlet description, that it functions like an unarmed strike.
Basically the discussion is about whether or not, the fact the weapon is classified as an unarmed strike would allow a monk to use it with all the same benefits of an unarmed strike as well as the benefits of a manufactured weapon (allowing it to be enhanced). Also it would create some counterintuitive situations like the weapon bonus applying on the Circle Kick and Flying Kick attacks... My personal view of this is that enchancing unarmed attacks is already covered by the Amulet of Mighty Fists, but most of the group disagrees.

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 03:18 PM
So there are actual real-world Asian martial arts fist-load type weapons, which as just a step away from gauntlets.


You kiddin'?

You don't see the inherent difference in the way a fist-load weapon works and a giant honking glove made of metal would work, especially in the hands of a skilled martial artist? It's not a step away, it's a nigh-different world.

Gauntlets are NOT a fist load weapon. They are not even weapons in the technical sense. They are armor that can be utilized as weaponry. DnD makes the allowance (understandably and effectively) for gauntlets, spiked gauntlets, shields, and spiked armor to be used as weaponry, but that doesn't change the reality of it.

Personally, I think the idea of a monk using spiked gauntlets it ludicrous. It's clumsy and inelegant. I would much rather give them enchanted gloves or handwraps and houserule those into existence instead of saying "Your skilled martial artist now wears stupid looking metal oven mitts! Enjoy!"

Ravens_cry
2010-01-22, 03:28 PM
Personally, I think the idea of a monk using spiked gauntlets it ludicrous. It's clumsy and inelegant. I would much rather give them enchanted gloves or handwraps and houserule those into existence instead of saying "Your skilled martial artist now wears stupid looking metal oven mitts! Enjoy!"
Depends, I think with a massive bruiser type of monk, like a boxing sumo wrestler, spiked gauntlets would fit the flavour PERFECTLY. In fact, I want to do it some time.

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 03:48 PM
Depends, I think with a massive bruiser type of monk, like a boxing sumo wrestler, spiked gauntlets would fit the flavour PERFECTLY. In fact, I want to do it some time.

But see, I'd build that guy as a fighter, not a monk. Hence where we differ in our interpretations of a class. A monk, to me, isn't a brawler or a wrestler.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-22, 04:01 PM
But see, I'd build that guy as a fighter, not a monk. Hence where we differ in our interpretations of a class. A monk, to me, isn't a brawler or a wrestler.
I think the classes in 3.5 are broad enough that either could be the case.

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 04:04 PM
I think the classes in 3.5 are broad enough that either could be the case.

Agreed, I'm just saying that I interpret the monk differently and that reflects my comments in the thread.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-22, 04:16 PM
Agreed, I'm just saying that I interpret the monk differently and that reflects my comments in the thread.
No worries. We all interpret things differently.

Xenogears
2010-01-22, 04:22 PM
This. Plus one of my houserules allows monks to use spiked gauntlets as an 'additional' 1d4 damage (the force of their punch, plus the spikes).

The Spike Stone Graft from Fiend Folio allows you to grow spikes from your whole body and gives you +1d4 to unarmed damage. The idea is the same for either of them so there is some precedent even.

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 04:22 PM
No worries. We all interpret things differently.

I INTERPRET THAT SENTENCE AS A TERRIBLE INSULT.

DRAW YOUR WEAPONS SIRRAH.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-22, 04:33 PM
I INTERPRET THAT SENTENCE AS A TERRIBLE INSULT.

DRAW YOUR WEAPONS SIRRAH.

I have no weapon but words. Pray I do not draw them to my service.
(lol)

AtwasAwamps
2010-01-22, 04:35 PM
I have no weapon but words. Pray I do not draw them to my service.
(lol)

What, you write stuff on bullets?

El Dorado
2010-01-22, 05:05 PM
RAW, they are not.

Ignore this.

Seriously, ignore it and just allow it. Lie back, and think of England.


Such a great visual. :smallwink:

Ravens_cry
2010-01-22, 05:13 PM
What, you write stuff on bullets?
*sigh* I suppose even the sharpest sword is blunted by the dullest stone.:smallwink:

Origomar
2010-01-22, 05:35 PM
on a mildly related topic if you were to enchant a ward cestus(its pg 10 of arms and equipment) to make it a +2 weapon would you still keep all the monk increases and the +2 bonus for it being magical?

Kelb_Panthera
2010-01-22, 08:57 PM
The rules on this are, as you have noticed, somewhat ambiguous. The only proper course is to house-rule it. Knowing some things about unarmed martial arts and the wearing of armor myself, I can say with some certainty that, IRL, gauntlets can be either helpful or a hindrance depending on your technique. In D&D, your DM needs to decide whether or not gauntlets play nice with the monks unarmed strike. If he decides against it, you could ask for a homebrew of some kind of gloves or wrist-straps of that confer an enhancement bonus to unarmed strikes. There's no good reason not to either allow the gauntlets or home-brew something, since even the games designers admitted that they vastly over-priced the amulet of mighty fists.

The Deej
2010-01-22, 09:16 PM
Of course, that could bring up another question: if a monk's strike relies a lot on pressure points, nerve cluster locations, targeting skeletal joints, etc, does it work on something immune to critical hits? Just a theory.

This question was passed over, and I feel like answering it.

Even in the case of undead/constructs/plants etc. joints are still weak points. Also, I would assume that martial artists tend to know how to put as much energy into a punch as possible, even if they aren't hitting a 'weak spot'. Immune to crits doesn't matter if the punch could snap a branch off a tree, break a bone, or dent thin sheets of metal.

Tiktakkat
2010-01-23, 03:39 AM
You kiddin'?

No:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cestus
I am not kidding.


You don't see the inherent difference in the way a fist-load weapon works and a giant honking glove made of metal would work, especially in the hands of a skilled martial artist? It's not a step away, it's a nigh-different world.

I know the inherent physical difference.
It is far from the massive functional difference you seem to think it is.


Gauntlets are NOT a fist load weapon. They are not even weapons in the technical sense. They are armor that can be utilized as weaponry. DnD makes the allowance (understandably and effectively) for gauntlets, spiked gauntlets, shields, and spiked armor to be used as weaponry, but that doesn't change the reality of it.

So?
You seem not to realize something very critical about hitting people with your fist. That being, while it is indeed relatively easy to inflict highly damaging blows with some reasonable amount of training, it remains even easier to suffer even worse damage yourself in the process. Hence:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer%27s_fracture

That is why you need look for more than a simple fist-load. Past a certain point of basic entertainment fighting, not breaking your hand quickly supersedes breaking your opponent's face faster in overall importance. (Indeed, even for those with a particular love of bloodsports, allowing the competitors some protection so they can keep punching each other longer is actually preferred, hence why boxing gloves were developed in the first place.) And so given time, you develop something like:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted-knuckle_glove

Yes, I am well aware that is not a pseudo-medieval gauntlet or spiked gauntlet.
Yes, I am well aware that such is not a traditional weapon of any particular Asian martial art, this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nekode
notwithstanding. (Said item can be found in Underdark, and is a special monk weapon.)
I do not see it as being in any way incompatible with the basic concept of using trained and precise hand strikes to go upside someone's head. Indeed, quite the opposite, I see it as a prime tool to enhance such.

FishAreWet
2010-01-23, 03:55 AM
Monks don't punch.

IUS does not represent a punch. It represents a martial art style. It represents knowing Kung-fu. That's why a monk can attack even while holding weapons, and with every part of the body.

Letting gauntlet adds to there damage makes no more sense then letting kneepads add to there damage, or a helmet. That's not to say it makes no sense, just no more.

Kelb_Panthera
2010-01-23, 04:19 AM
I feel a need to elaborate on my previous comment about gauntlets being a possible help or hindrance for otherwise unarmed fighting.

A gauntlet's structure almost invariable restricts the movement of the joints of the hand to at least a small degree. This causes problems if the fighter's training has been focused on specific finger or wrist movements ie: several kung-fu hand techniques, or some ninjitsu wrist strikes. Even open palm strikes would be mildly hindered as the ability to present the triangle bone at the base of the hand is somewhat hindered.

If on the other hand, no pun intended, a fighter's training is more focused on using the fist as a bludgeon, a gauntlet cannot help but improve damage output, as damage is reliant on kinetic energy produced throughout the body and projected through the fist by proper kinetic-linking.

Kinetic linking, for those of you who don't know, is the term used to describe a coordination between separate parts of the body to produce a greater force than any of the "linked" parts could produce on its own. Example: a properly thrown right-cross is a combination of the right leg pushing the body toward the target, the hips twisting the right shoulder toward the target, and the right arm extending the fist toward the target; all in a simultaneous thrust that will invariably produce more power than a simple extension of the right arm. Adding a weight of any kind to the fist will increase the overall kinetic energy of the punch, and a gauntlet has the added bonus of protecting the hand at the same time.

Of course, if you intend to engage in any sort of grappling, you must use a lighter gauntlet composed of a glove with metal plates attached rather than a glove made from fully articulated metal pieces, as would be used by some medieval swordsmen.

With all that technical babble out of the way, I present my houserule on the subject. Monks in my game are allowed to use enhanced gauntlets to improve their unarmed strike, but such gauntlets only come in pairs, and most pairs also come with shin-guards that extend down over the foot. In game terms the cost is the same, but the weapon takes up both "glove slots" for the character in question. The shin-guards don't take up any body slots but must be warn with their matched gauntlets to work. Such a set counts as a special monk weapon, and requires no proficiency to use. This allows the monk his full range of punches and kicks, and prevents the player from trying to use a gauntlet on one hand and a glove of storing on the other.

dsmiles
2010-01-23, 10:18 AM
Monks don't punch.


They don't (http://www.videojug.com/film/martial-arts-the-punch)?

Origomar
2010-01-23, 10:47 AM
if they use where they hit instead of how hard they hit to determine their damage why isnt their wisdom modifier increase damage as well as their strength modifier?(or intelligence for knowing where they should hit, not sure which this would rely on intelligence or wisdom)

Vizzerdrix
2010-01-23, 11:12 AM
Gauntlets are not a special Monk weapon. Thus you cannot use Flurry of Blows while using them.

From Here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#gauntlet):



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.


And this (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070327a)

Between this article and the bolded section, I think monks can flurry with a basic gauntlet.

Tiktakkat
2010-01-23, 01:41 PM
I feel a need to elaborate on my previous comment about gauntlets being a possible help or hindrance for otherwise unarmed fighting.

A gauntlet's structure almost invariable restricts the movement of the joints of the hand to at least a small degree. This causes problems if the fighter's training has been focused on specific finger or wrist movements ie: several kung-fu hand techniques, or some ninjitsu wrist strikes. Even open palm strikes would be mildly hindered as the ability to present the triangle bone at the base of the hand is somewhat hindered.

True.
But I think the restricted techniques are a lot fewer than would otherwise be expected. At most I would expect a minor loss of target focus precision rather than any significant range of motion loss. As such, I would place any penalty as similar to that of a buckler with melee attacks - a -2 penalty on grapples and such, perhaps even on some of the feats that add special effects tagged off of Stunning Fist and the like, but no penalty for just unleashing basic damage.


They don't (http://www.videojug.com/film/martial-arts-the-punch)?

*shudder*

Well, hopefully they do not punch like that.
Otherwise yes, they very much do punch.


if they use where they hit instead of how hard they hit to determine their damage why isnt their wisdom modifier increase damage as well as their strength modifier?(or intelligence for knowing where they should hit, not sure which this would rely on intelligence or wisdom)

That is a difficult question, as it involves both the details of training as well as issues of simulationism.

At the simplest level, Intelligence is pretty near irrelevant for that sort of training. It does not take all that much cognitive capacity to learn that hitting here instead of there simply does more damage. It just requires training to the point of making hitting here instead of there reflexive. You do not really have time to think about where to hit in a fight. You have to rely on high end muscle memory and subconscious target assessment to ensure your hand (or foot, or whatever) goes where it needs to go at the right time.

It takes Intelligence to discover all those spots in the first place, but after that it devolves to simple training. That is why you can wind up with more unarmed fighters than unarmed instructors, and more unarmed instructors than unarmed system creators.

Once you get past that, you come to the simple recognition that "all other things being equal", a stronger person is going to do more damage than a weaker person.
However, once you open that door, you have to consider other factors. For example, as I learned, "Speed + Timing + Focus = Power". That is how I am able to inflict injury otherwise disproportionate to my physical strength. By that standard, we should not merely apply Wisdom (Timing) and Intelligence (Focus) to damage, but also Dexterity (Speed), with Strength becoming barely relevant. I could then add the psychological factor, "Martial Arts is 10% physical, and 90% mental", and make it clear that confidence is a key determinant, and so Charisma should most likely add to attack rolls. (Or, Iaijutsu Focus and Psychic Duels.)
At which point of course the entire system starts to collapse under the sheer weight of simulationism.

So the answer is "Yes", but with the caveat of opening the door to admit using every ability except perhaps Constitution as a direct attack or damage modifier, or both.

Curmudgeon
2010-01-23, 02:27 PM
You've only got one unarmed strike, and it uses your whole body. It seems pretty unreasonable to throw some metal on only one small part of that and get an improvement to the whole thing. Why do your kicks, elbow slams, knee jabs, and head butts improve when you weight your fists? You're using all of it together to get in your blows: feint with one hand, block with a forearm, block with a knee, and finally land a kick.

You might instead figure that gauntlets improve maybe 25% of unarmed strikes, and roll a d4 to see if the blow that connected was the one from the gauntlets.

Darrin
2010-01-23, 02:41 PM
Between this article and the bolded section, I think monks can flurry with a basic gauntlet.

Not everyone agrees.

The Unorthodox Flurry feat (Dragon Compendium) can be used to get around a "can't flurry" ruling (assuming the DM allows material from the Dragon Compendium). Allows you to pick any light weapon, and not only does it allow you to treat it as a monk weapon for flurry, but explicitly gives you proficiency with it as well. Loads of fun when combined with kusari-gama or drow scorpion chain.

If your DM is being stubborn about gauntlets, some other work-arounds:

Dragonfang Gauntlets (MIC p. 95, unarmed strike damage)
Scorpion Kama (MIC p. 201, unarmed strike damage *and* flurry)

Vizzerdrix
2010-01-23, 02:44 PM
Not everyone agrees.

The Unorthodox Flurry feat (Dragon Compendium) can be used to get around a "can't flurry" ruling (assuming the DM allows material from the Dragon Compendium). Allows you to pick any light weapon, and not only does it allow you to treat it as a monk weapon for flurry, but explicitly gives you proficiency with it as well. Loads of fun when combined with kusari-gama or drow scorpion chain.

If your DM is being stubborn about gauntlets, some other work-arounds:

Dragonfang Gauntlets (MIC p. 95, unarmed strike damage)
Scorpion Kama (MIC p. 201, unarmed strike damage *and* flurry)

But gauntlets aren't light weapons.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 02:47 PM
.

You might instead figure that gauntlets improve maybe 25% of unarmed strikes, and roll a d4 to see if the blow that connected was the one from the gauntlets.
I think a better idea is gauntlets improve your unarmed strikes, but not when your arms are impeded. After all, a certain martial artist may focus more on the punching aspect. That IS what a boxer is, a martial artist who focuses on punching. This is the trade off compared to the amulet (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/WondrousItems.htm#amuletofMightyFists). The amulet improves all unarmed strikes, the gauntlets just the hand ones.
Ironically though, the amulet is called the amulet of mighty FISTS.

Darrin
2010-01-23, 02:59 PM
But gauntlets aren't light weapons.

From the SRD:

"A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack." (Equipment section, Gauntlet description)

"Unarmed strikes count as light weapons" (Combat section, under Standard Actions, Unarmed Attacks).

Dr.Epic
2010-01-23, 04:02 PM
I would say no just because that isn't the way monks are trained and it does seem kind of broken.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 04:21 PM
I would say no just because that isn't the way monks are trained and it does seem kind of broken.
Different monks, different styles. If it really bugs you, refluff them as hand wraps, which IS how many martial artists are trained.
How is it broken though? The only change is it allows the monk the same magic weapon progressions as a normal weapon user, with maybe 1d4 damage added on top. That's hardly game breaking.

Curmudgeon
2010-01-23, 05:49 PM
How is it broken though? The only change is it allows the monk the same magic weapon progressions as a normal weapon user, with maybe 1d4 damage added on top. That's hardly game breaking.
If you want to make that argument, you should just use a Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a). Does exactly what you want, and avoids rules fights.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 07:22 PM
If you want to make that argument, you should just use a Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a). Does exactly what you want, and avoids rules fights.
That raises the question though, for pricing purposes, how many natural attacks a monk has?

olentu
2010-01-23, 07:28 PM
That raises the question though, for pricing purposes, how many natural attacks a monk has?

One would be most sensible.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 07:51 PM
One would be most sensible.
Really? The rules say monks can use their head, feet, arms, etc. in attacking. So how come a monk, by that ruling, a monk only needs to pay for a one natural attack, while a dragon has to pay extra to get the bonus to both claws, tails, bites, and wing slaps?
As a representative for the local Dragon #351, I say that's broken:smallamused:.

olentu
2010-01-23, 08:09 PM
Really? The rules say monks can use their head, feet, arms, etc. in attacking. So how come a monk, by that ruling, a monk only needs to pay for a one natural attack, while a dragon has to pay extra to get the bonus to both claws, tails, bites, and wing slaps?
As a representative for the local Dragon #351, I say that's broken:smallamused:.

As I find it so mostly because it is easiest.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 08:15 PM
As I find it so mostly because it is easiest.
Well, I find a monk using gauntlets, if they so choose, is easiest for a martial artist who relies on a more punching style. But hey, we all play differently,even when we play the 'same' game.

olentu
2010-01-23, 08:22 PM
Well, I find a monk using gauntlets, if they so choose, is easiest for a martial artist who relies on a more punching style. But hey, we all play differently,even when we play the 'same' game.

Well that would seem to be quite obviously correct.

Curmudgeon
2010-01-23, 09:38 PM
That raises the question though, for pricing purposes, how many natural attacks a monk has?
They have one natural attack. They can take Improved Natural Attack (unarmed strike), and it boosts the damage of their single attack, whether that comes in the form of kicks, elbow jabs, head butts, and punches. The Fanged Ring (Dragon Magic, page 101) establishes this as a precedent.

olentu
2010-01-23, 09:54 PM
They have one natural attack. They can take Improved Natural Attack (unarmed strike), and it boosts the damage of their single attack, whether that comes in the form of kicks, elbow jabs, head butts, and punches. The Fanged Ring (Dragon Magic, page 101) establishes this as a precedent.

I would have to say that unfortunately that is insufficient evidence without additional supporting text. Not that it is necessarily wrong just insufficiently supported by the presented text. And of course I would want the arguments supporting my side to be sufficiently well supported.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 10:13 PM
It gets especially ridiculous, as if it wasn't already, when that means you can have a throwing head butt. Without returning. Just what is been thrown and how do you function afterwards?
At least with a throwing gauntlet I can imagine it being like a rocket punch with the gloves coming off.

Terazul
2010-01-23, 10:16 PM
It gets especially ridiculous, as if it wasn't already, when that means you can have a throwing head butt. Without returning. Just what is been thrown and how do you function afterwards?

Your hair.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 10:18 PM
Your hair.
That's almost sillier.

Terazul
2010-01-23, 10:19 PM
That's almost sillier.

Almost.

Now imagine doing it with your beard.

Fistbeard.

FishAreWet
2010-01-23, 10:26 PM
IUS is a single natural attack.

Because it represents a martial arts style, not a punch. It can include a punch, sure, but also kicks, headbutts, elbows, anything you want.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 10:35 PM
IUS is a single natural attack.

Because it represents a martial arts style, not a punch. It can include a punch, sure, but also kicks, headbutts, elbows, anything you want. So your throwing your entire BODY with a throwing enchanted necklace of natural attacks?

olentu
2010-01-23, 10:51 PM
So your throwing your entire BODY with a throwing enchanted necklace of natural attacks?

Unfortunately the monk section only lists fist, elbows, knees, and feet as I recall. While the unarmed strike entry does list punch, kick, head butt, or other type of attack the these seem to be more of an action done with a body part rather then an actual body part. So the other type of attack would depend on the DM and could possibly be for example the action of a body slam rather then the body itself. This would of course look quite strange when thrown.

FishAreWet
2010-01-23, 10:53 PM
So your throwing your entire BODY with a throwing enchanted necklace of natural attacks?

throwing is obviously not intended to be used with natural attacks. it's a really obvious oversight on Wizard's part.

Pharaoh's Fist
2010-01-23, 10:55 PM
throwing is obviously not intended to be used with natural attacks. it's a really obvious oversight on Wizard's part.

Dhalsim.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/04/Super_Dhalsim.png/200px-Super_Dhalsim.png

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 10:59 PM
throwing is obviously not intended to be used with natural attacks. it's a really obvious oversight on Wizard's part.
Read the description of the amulet again. (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a)

For instance, a +1 throwing returning necklace of natural weapons would apply its enhancement bonus as well as the throwing and returning special abilities to one or more of the wearer's natural weapons.
Yeah, so didn't intend.:smallamused:

Kylarra
2010-01-23, 11:16 PM
It's part of the flying monk initiative. You can throw yourself 10' in order to attack like a pinball.

FishAreWet
2010-01-23, 11:19 PM
You're right. I wasn't clear with what I meant.

The major issue is if you have Throwing without Returning. What happens? That is the issue.

Ravens_cry
2010-01-23, 11:22 PM
Dhalsim.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/04/Super_Dhalsim.png/200px-Super_Dhalsim.png
yeah, but doing that without returning means you're plastic without being elastic, making whatever you threw with long and limp like stretched playdo. Not quite the Stretch Armstrong effect you may be looking for.

Kelb_Panthera
2010-01-23, 11:58 PM
They don't (http://www.videojug.com/film/martial-arts-the-punch)?

Did anyone else want to kick that guy in the ribs when they saw how high he holds his elbows?

Kylarra
2010-01-24, 12:06 AM
You're right. I wasn't clear with what I meant.

The major issue is if you have Throwing without Returning. What happens? That is the issue.You're now 10' closer to your target, clearly. :smallbiggrin:

Assuming you're a monk anyway.

Thurbane
2010-01-24, 12:13 AM
Already mentioned earlier, but AFAIK the most "legit" way to get a weapon that you can enchant that works in combo with a Monk's unarmed strike is the ward cestus from AEG 3.0:

Ward Cestus: This is a stout leather gauntlet with a well-forged metal weight sewn into it over the knuckles. A strike with a ward cestus is considered an unarmed attack. If you take a Total Defense action, you gain an additional +1 bonus to your Armor Class, representing blows you block with the back of your protected hand. Your opponent cannot disarm you of a ward cestus. The cost and weight are for a single ward cestus.

FishAreWet
2010-01-24, 12:17 AM
You're now 10' closer to your target, clearly. :smallbiggrin:

Assuming you're a monk anyway.

Well why not make it Distance? And take Far Shot? And travel 200' as an attack option?

olentu
2010-01-24, 12:26 AM
Well why not make it Distance? And take Far Shot? And travel 200' as an attack option?

Probably because it would not work that way.

Also the ward cestus seems to have almost the same text as the gauntlet and so assuming I am remembering the gauntlet description correctly then going form what has been posted the ward cestus would work seem to work just about as well as the gauntlet.

FishAreWet
2010-01-24, 12:31 AM
Probably because it would not work that way.

Says who? There aren't rules about Throwing natural attacks without Returning on them as well. The only logical assumptions are that you either loose the body part or throw yourself. Do you disagree?

If you can throw yourself then I see no reason it doesn't work. Why does it not? Did I mess up my math or is the premise flawed?

olentu
2010-01-24, 12:37 AM
Says who? There aren't rules about Throwing natural attacks without Returning on them as well. The only logical assumptions are that you either loose the body part or throw yourself. Do you disagree?

If you can throw yourself then I see no reason it doesn't work. Why does it not? Did I mess up my math or is the premise flawed?

Well as I said the listed instances of unarmed strikes are not really physical objects but rather actions done with physical objects or perhaps one of a limited selection of bodys parts from the monk entry, though that is a bit iffy. So one would not throw a body part they would instead throw an action that is done with a body part. Or alternatively they would throw whatever the DM decides they can but that goes without saying.

Curmudgeon
2010-01-24, 12:40 AM
I would have to say that unfortunately that is insufficient evidence without additional supporting text.
The Rules of the Game: Unarmed Attacks (Part Two) article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070403a) says the same thing.
For example, a monk can use the Improved Natural Attack feat to increase her unarmed strike damage.

Kylarra
2010-01-24, 12:41 AM
Well why not make it Distance? And take Far Shot? And travel 200' as an attack option?Sure, monks need all the help they can get anyway.

FishAreWet
2010-01-24, 12:43 AM
Well as I said the listed instances of unarmed strikes are not really physical objects but rather actions done with physical objects or perhaps one of a limited selection of bodys parts from the monk entry, though that is a bit iffy. So one would not throw a body part they would instead throw an action that is done with a body part. Or alternatively they would throw whatever the DM decides they can but that goes without saying.

I understand the concept of what an Unarmed Strike is, but this explaination doesn't work.

A +1 Throwing Shortsword throws the sword. By your logic, you throw the swing. That's not what happens though. If a Throwing Sword throws the sword, a Throwing Unarmed Strike throws the person/body part.

I agree that the rules are dumb.

olentu
2010-01-24, 12:46 AM
The Rules of the Game: Unarmed Attacks (Part Two) article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070403a) says the same thing.

That is a bit better though you have chosen a source that others may not agree with. It would probably be better for the position of only one for a better source to be found.

However additionally from just what has been posted, unless I am not getting something that is trying to be communicated, there has not yet been a restriction to only one unarmed strike.


I understand the concept of what an Unarmed Strike is, but this explaination doesn't work.

A +1 Throwing Shortsword throws the sword. By your logic, you throw the swing. That's not what happens though. If a Throwing Sword throws the sword, a Throwing Unarmed Strike throws the person/body part.

I agree that the rules are dumb.

A sword is as far as I can remember is said to be a sword which is an object. On the other hand an unarmed strike is said to be (and restricting to one instance to keep from typing a lot) a head butt which is an action. One attacks with a sword or one attacks with a head butt. The thing being used to make the attack is the sword or the head butt which would make the sword or the head butt the weapon that one is attacking with. So when one throws the weapon one throws the sword or the head butt at the target.

FishAreWet
2010-01-24, 12:48 AM
That is a bit better though you have chosen a source that others may not agree with. It would probably be better for the position of only one for a better source to be found.

What could possibly be a better source then the WotC website? :smallbiggrin:

olentu
2010-01-24, 12:52 AM
What could possibly be a better source then the WotC website? :smallbiggrin:

Eh, people have expressed dislike for such a thing and I would of course like for my position to be as solid as possible.

sofawall
2010-01-24, 12:56 AM
A sword is as far as I can remember is said to be a sword which is an object. On the other hand an unarmed strike is said to be (and restricting to one instance to keep from typing a lot) a head butt which is an action. One attacks with a sword or one attacks with a head butt. The thing being used to make the attack is the sword or the head butt which would make the sword or the head butt the weapon that one is attacking with. So when one throws the weapon one throws the sword or the head butt at the target.

Sword=weapon. Swing=attack.

Head=weapon. Headbutt=attack.

If you are throwing a sword, you are throwing a head.

Why do you not define these two cases the same? You have object for one and action for another. Not even being RAWtarded can support your position.

EDIT: When I use the word 'action' above, it in in the general English definition, not the D&D definition.

olentu
2010-01-24, 01:02 AM
Sword=weapon. Swing=attack.

Head=weapon. Headbutt=attack.

If you are throwing a sword, you are throwing a head.

Why do you not define these two cases the same? You have object for one and action for another. Not even being RAWtarded can support your position.

EDIT: When I use the word 'action' above, it in in the general English definition, not the D&D definition.

"an unarmed strike, which may be a punch,
kick, head butt, or other type of attack"

So an unarmed strike is not a weapon that is a weapon but a weapon that is an attack.

FishAreWet
2010-01-24, 01:07 AM
"an unarmed strike, which may be a punch,
kick, head butt, or other type of attack"

So an unarmed strike is not a weapon that is a weapon but a weapon that is an attack.

with a weapon! which is the unarmed strike! :smallannoyed:

olentu
2010-01-24, 01:13 AM
with a weapon! which is the unarmed strike! :smallannoyed:

As said in the quoted text an unarmed strike can be a punch, a kick, a head butt, or other type of attack. Not a thigh, heart, right eye, or other body part. Monks however might possibly get to use body parts rather then attacks but monks are limited to fist, elbow, knee, or foot and none of these are the whole body.

Kylarra
2010-01-24, 01:16 AM
As said in the quoted text an unarmed strike can be a punch, a kick, a head butt, or other type of attack. Not a thigh, heart, right eye, or other body part. Monks however might possibly get to use body parts rather then attacks but monks are limited to fist, elbow, knee, or foot and none of these are the whole body.A body slam is an attack. :smallbiggrin:

olentu
2010-01-24, 01:18 AM
A body slam is an attack. :smallbiggrin:

But the body is not.

Knaight
2010-01-24, 01:37 AM
Already mentioned earlier, but AFAIK the most "legit" way to get a weapon that you can enchant that works in combo with a Monk's unarmed strike is the ward cestus from AEG 3.0:

So the back of your hand making blocking easier gets you a bonus, but having a sword apparently doesn't. Because you know, the sword clearly isn't used for blocking as much and it is easier to block with the back of your hand than with a sword. Freaking WotC and their Ward Cestus and similar.

Kelb_Panthera
2010-01-24, 01:51 AM
Tangentially, does anyone else think it's kind of amusing that we're arguing how a guy is supposed to throw a headbutt, in a game where there are people who have creatures made-up of pure fire in their lineage? That's the fluff behind fire genasi for those who don't know. In any case, throwing an unarmed strike could be fluffed as striking toward the enemy in such a way that the air between the monk's attack and the enemy's face carries the force. Cat-girl killing physics aside, I'm pretty sure I've seen such things in at least a couple anime and video-games, and at least one or two wuxia films. Naturally, this would make the returning property unnecessary. I admit that this gives the monk with his +1 throwing unarmed strike a small edge over other throwers, but it's a monk for crying out loud. Cut him some slack and let him have something unique.

FishAreWet
2010-01-24, 01:52 AM
Tangentially, does anyone else think it's kind of amusing that we're arguing how a guy is supposed to throw a headbutt, in a game where there are people who have creatures made-up of pure fire in their lineage? That's the fluff behind fire genasi for those who don't know. In any case, throwing an unarmed strike could be fluffed as striking toward the enemy in such a way that the air between the monk's attack and the enemy's face carries the force. Cat-girl killing physics aside, I'm pretty sure I've seen such things in at least a couple anime and video-games, and at least one or two wuxia films. Naturally, this would make the returning property unnecessary.

Bloodwind spell(SpC) and Ring The Golden Bell Feat(DragComp) do this exact thing.

olentu
2010-01-24, 01:57 AM
Tangentially, does anyone else think it's kind of amusing that we're arguing how a guy is supposed to throw a headbutt, in a game where there are people who have creatures made-up of pure fire in their lineage? That's the fluff behind fire genasi for those who don't know. In any case, throwing an unarmed strike could be fluffed as striking toward the enemy in such a way that the air between the monk's attack and the enemy's face carries the force. Cat-girl killing physics aside, I'm pretty sure I've seen such things in at least a couple anime and video-games, and at least one or two wuxia films. Naturally, this would make the returning property unnecessary. I admit that this gives the monk with his +1 throwing unarmed strike a small edge over other throwers, but it's a monk for crying out loud. Cut him some slack and let him have something unique.

I think it is serious business. Also hilarious.

Tiktakkat
2010-01-24, 03:56 PM
Did anyone else want to kick that guy in the ribs when they saw how high he holds his elbows?

That or just snap that locked out elbow.
Or just ignore the punch comng in at too high a level to have any real strength behind it, so just lift a hand, catch his fist, and try not to laugh too hard while breaking his wrist.
Again, monks do punch, just not like that.