[3.5] Unarmed combat and Spiked gauntlets

[gibbo88]

In an upcomming campaign, one of my characters is going a monk and wants to use spiked gauntlets, however what affect do you guys think they would have for a monk? Im reluctant to add the 1d4 damage straight on top of the monks unarmed damage.

Also, how would this affect the various lawful/magic etc strikes of the monk?

Thanks guys

[NEO|Phyte]

In an upcomming campaign, one of my characters is going a monk and wants to use spiked gauntlets, however what affect do you guys think they would have for a monk? Im reluctant to add the 1d4 damage straight on top of the monks unarmed damage.

Also, how would this affect the various lawful/magic etc strikes of the monk?

Thanks guys

If he wants to get the spiked gauntlet damage, let him. He just can't get his unarmed strike damage at the same time, because spiked gauntlets aren't unarmed strikes. The argument can be made for REGULAR gauntlets being usable by monks, but spiked are right out.

As for the various effects, they wouldn't work unless he got the Ki Focus enchantment on the gauntlets.

[Keld Denar]

Monks are also not proficient with gauntlets, spiked or otherwise, and thus would require a feat or a level dip in something with proficiency.

Then there is the issue that Spiked Gauntlets are NOT a special monk weapon, and thus can not be used in conjunction with Flurry of Blows.

Then there is the issue that Spiked Gauntlets don't actually add damage to your UAS, they replace the UAS damage with their own 1d4. So, your level 1 monk who swings for 1d6? Not anymore. 1d4 for you. And your level 20 monk who's swinging what, 2d10? Sorry, still 1d4 for you!

[Deth Muncher]

And your level 20 monk who's swinging what, 2d10? Sorry, still 1d4 for you!

That's so silly.

Monk: I punch you...IN THE FACE!
Punch-ee: Ow...what was that, d4+Str?
Monk: Yeah...that's a good point...::removes gauntlet::

Seriously? Wouldn't adding metal to your fist make you do more damage?

[Frosty]

Monks are also not proficient with gauntlets, spiked or otherwise, and thus would require a feat or a level dip in something with proficiency

Monks are also not proficient with Unarmed Strikes, their fists or otherwise, and this would require a feat or a level dip in something other than Wizard or Druid in order to gain said proficiency.

[Keld Denar]

No, because you aren't just some heavy handed guy landing a solid blow to the face.

You are Kung-Fu McNinja, master of the spinning roundhouse kick to the face. You strike parts of your body most people don't know they have. You don't just kick people, your deliver hurt and pain with the sword edge of your foot. You don't just punch people, you deliver brutal blows many different finger configurations.

Yea, I don't try to understand it either. Thems the rules. If you don't like em, change em.

(or use the rules for Scorpion Kama's from Sandstorm, which deal normal UAS damage as a weapon...easily transmutable onto other weapons you feel should be monkly, like sais, normal kamas, staves, and nunchucks, etc.)

[ericgrau]

Seriously? Wouldn't adding metal to your fist make you do more damage?

Normally, but most people don't do greatsword damage with their bare fist. Adding the metal spike to a monk's fist is more akin to putting boxing gloves or a rolled up towel on an ordinary person.

And anyway, that's how the rule goes. Just tell the player it doesn't work that way, at least if he wants to keep his monky goodness.

Three quick tips: Successfully initiating a grapple deals unarmed damage. At first level a monk gets improved grapple or stunning fist. So he can get a grapple with his unarmed damage or a stun with his unarmed damage. It's like presents under a Christmas tree, just take it. One targets BAB + strength, another targets fortitude saves. The poor physical types suck at both, and they're usually good strategic targets anyway. Hey look, only monks, rogues and bards get tumble, the skill that let's you select almost any target you want. And that's the monk in an undersized nutshell.

[TempusCCK]

Let him get enchanted gloves, leather or some kind, maybe something with some tasty bursts what have you.

[Curmudgeon]

Point the Monk player to the Necklace of Natural Attacks (from Savage Species, and also online here at the bottom). It's a much better buy for a character with a single natural attack (in this case unarmed strike) than an Amulet of Mighty Fists, which improves all natural weapons regardless of number. Why should the Monk pay for an item that's going to improve their gore, bite, claw, and slam attacks when they don't have any of those?

I'd avoid going for custom items like "enchanted gloves". You'll squabble over the correct price, and set the player up for disappointment if they later play with another DM who disallows such an item.

[Eloel]

A question would be, would an enchantment to Natural Attacks also enchant any thrown weapons, just like bows enchant their ammo.

[Curmudgeon]

A question would be, would an enchantment to Natural Attacks also enchant any thrown weapons, just like bows enchant their ammo.

Almost never. Porcupine quills are an exception, though.

[PinkysBrain]

Spiked gauntles are clearly non monk weapons ... so they wouldn't work with flurry, nor would they add damage to unarmed strikes.

Normal gauntlets are a bit controversial. Personally I don't think there is anything stopping monks from using them with normal unarmed strike damage since "A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack.". This way a monk could overcome DR using the metal of his gauntlets and get cheaper enhancement bonuses ... but as I said, it's a bit controversial.

In 3.0 the Ward Cestus explicitly allowed this, but they were never upgraded to 3.5.

As for balance, meh ... monks have enough problems without being unable to overcome a lot of DR with their strongest weapon and paying tripple what other classes pay for enhancement bonuses, so just give him the gauntlets.

[Curmudgeon]

Normal gauntlets are a bit controversial. Personally I don't think there is anything stopping monks from using them with normal unarmed strike damage since "A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack.".

I agree with this; a Monk should indeed do their superior unarmed damage using gauntlets; plus gauntlets, as weapons, can be magically enhanced. But the facts that nonproficiency penalties apply, and flurry of blows won't work, should be sufficient reasons to reconsider using regular gauntlets. You can gain Simple Weapon Proficiency, but gauntlets will never be special Monk weapons.

[UserClone]

In 3.0 the Ward Cestus explicitly allowed this, but they were never upgraded to 3.5.

As for balance, meh ... monks have enough problems without being unable to overcome a lot of DR with their strongest weapon and paying tripple what other classes pay for enhancement bonuses, so just give him the gauntlets.

EFFIT! Why bother updating the Ward Cestus? It's perfectly fine the way it is. 10gp, damage and crit as UAS, and 4 lb weight. Adds +1 to AC if you take total defense. And allows you to use all your neat abilities (because any attack with a Ward Cestus is explicitly considered an unarmed strike) withOUT making it a ki focus weapon. Win!

Edit: A Ward Cestus is a leather fingerless glove with a bar of iron sewn into the back over the back of the hand, just behind the knuckles. Cost and weight are for a single Ward Cestus. Not available where firearm sales are prohibited. Batteries not included. Ehancement bonus sold separately.

EDIT2: I WOULD, however, houserule that the Monk gets EWP: Ward Cestus at level 1 for free.

[Dunkelhand]

Ask the GM if it's ok to use the Gauntlets for the Monk. I'd allow it if the monk spends a feat. It's +2 on avg., the monk isn't actually a powerhouse anyway.

[Curmudgeon]

Ask the GM if it's ok to use the Gauntlets for the Monk. I'd allow it if the monk spends a feat. It's +2 on avg., the monk isn't actually a powerhouse anyway.

How is it "+2 on avg."? 1st level medium size Monks do 1d6 damage; spiked gauntlets do 1d4 damage if medium size. That's -1 (3.5 -> 2.5) on average. The Simple Weapon Proficiency feat would of course allow using spiked gauntlets, but I don't think that's a smart choice because nothing except special Monk weapons are going to work with flurry of blows.

[PinkysBrain]

I agree with this; a Monk should indeed do their superior unarmed damage using gauntlets; plus gauntlets, as weapons, can be magically enhanced. But the facts that nonproficiency penalties apply, and flurry of blows won't work, should be sufficient reasons to reconsider using regular gauntlets. You can gain Simple Weapon Proficiency, but gauntlets will never be special Monk weapons.

See that's why I said it's controversial ...

"A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack"

Can be read in different ways by different people.

Just remember, there is no truth outside of mathematics.

[Sir Giacomo]

gibbo88,

as you can see there are varying interpretations on how to treat gauntlets and a monk's unarmed attacks. The core rules are not clear-cut here and even the FAQ is not 100% straight on this.

As for the spiked gauntlets: they definitley are not listed under the "unarmed attacks" section and so monks are neither proficient with them, nor would their unarmed damage be added on top in any case.

I'd suggest to allow the player metal gauntlets with a fluff to be a bit sharp-edged (or cool-looking) and have him use the normal monk attack progression with flurry etc.

The big advantage of that ruling for the monk player would be that he could later get magical gauntlets that can provide enhancement bonuses (and all other properties of magical weapons).
Mundane metal gauntlets could be made masterwork and get a +1 to hit bonus. But that's all.

- Giacomo

[Optimystik]

Why blow a feat? Just multiclass cleric and put that high Wis to good use. You'll get simple weapons and a slew of buffing spells, plus get to keep all your existing class features.

Personally I don't think you should be allowed to get FoB with the gauntlets on, but you should still get the 1d6+1d4 for wearing them. Come to think of it, doesn't Bane have a monastic order? If so, it'd make sense for them to be walking around in spiked gauntlets.

[Dunkelhand]

How is it "+2 on avg."? 1st level medium size Monks do 1d6 damage; spiked gauntlets do 1d4 damage if medium size. That's -1 (3.5 -> 2.5) on average. The Simple Weapon Proficiency feat would of course allow using spiked gauntlets, but I don't think that's a smart choice because nothing except special Monk weapons are going to work with flurry of blows.

Spiked gauntlets do 1d4 damage, so 2 points (ok, 2.5points) of damage. I'd allow a house ruled feat that allows a monk to add the gauntlet damage on top of his unarmed damage - basically allowing him to modify his unarmed strikes with the gauntlet (I'd also require him to come up with a clever name for that feat).

That's why I said he should talk to the GM. To use the RAW he wouldn't have to ask the GM.

Blargh, I think I'd even allow him to use the gauntlets that way w/o a feat, if he gives me a in character reason which I could use as a plot hook.

[Frosty]

Forget Gauntlets, get the Monk proficient with Unarmed Strikes first. Then we ca talk about gauntlets and other simple weapons.

[Sir Giacomo]

Frosty, I do not think that monks should ever be considered non-proficient with unarmed strikes, since everyone is considered proficient with the own natural attacks in the game.

- Giacomo

EDIT: a better way to describe it is that unarmed strikes are NOT a weapon (notice the word un-ARMED...) and you can only get proficient with weapons in the game.
Plus, in all official WoTC examples of monk attack calculations (see FAQ 3.5) there is never ever a -4 penalty for non-proficiency.
So please, guys, let the "monk does not even have proficiency with unarmed strikes" fallacy rest...

[NEO|Phyte]

Frosty, I do not think that monks should ever be considered non-proficient with unarmed strikes, since everyone is considered proficient with the own natural attacks in the game.

This is almost true, by which I mean that the humanoid type does NOT convey proficiency with natural weapons (nor "any weapons mentioned in its entry.") by RAW. Not that you'll find a single humanoid monster that takes the -4 penalty for not being proficient.

[Temp.]

EDIT: a better way to describe it is that unarmed strikes are NOT a weapon (notice the word un-ARMED...) and you can only get proficient with weapons in the game.

...Which is why Unarmed Strikes are listed as Simple weapons in the PHB?

That said, nobody actually treats Monks as unproficient with their Unarmed Strikes. Nobody.

[edit:] This has really turned into the central argument of three threads? This is ridiculous.

[Frosty]

...Which is why Unarmed Strikes are listed as Simple weapons in the PHB?

That said, nobody actually treats Monks as unproficient with their Unarmed Strikes. Nobody.

[edit:] This has really turned into the central argument of three threads? This is ridiculous.

In the cases where table and text disagree, table trumps text right?

[Curmudgeon]

This has really turned into the central argument of three threads? This is ridiculous.

Of course it's ridiculous. It's a ridiculous oversight on the part of the designers. And it's also ridiculous to try to redefine the problem to make it somehow not be a ridiculous oversight. Just throw in my house rule ("Monks are proficient with their unarmed attacks.") and you're covered, even if you prefer to pretend that D&D game designers don't make mistakes and the rule is unnecessary. It's ridiculous to keep discussing when nobody is taking the position that Monks should incur nonproficiency penalties. (And the reason for doing so would be because the class is overpowered, naturally. )

I'm done. I've made my point, and if you don't want to believe the core rules have some gotchas that never got fixed, I won't try to convince you otherwise.