PDA

View Full Version : Monks and Gauntlets?



rubycona
2008-12-08, 12:00 PM
I saw this addressed in the Q&A Raw thread, and was hoping for some clarification.

To me, it reads like monks should be able to equip gauntlets just fine.

If you look at the Table 7-5 Weapons page 116 of the PHB, you'll note that it has the category "Unarmed Attacks" with both Gauntlet and Unarmed Strike under it. Spiked Gauntlet, however, is in light melee weapons.

Obviously, unarmed strike is neither a weapon, nor does it require simple weapons proficiency (as I understand), but it's nonetheless listed in the Simple Weapons general category.

If you read the gauntlet, it says, "A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack."

A spiked gauntlet, however, is in the light melee weapons category. An important distinction between the two is that a spiked gauntlet says, "An attack with a spiked gauntlet is considered an armed attack."

A regular gauntlet doesn't have that distinction. Being as such, it really looks like an attack with a gauntlet is an unarmed attack, and therefore qualifies for a monk. As for proficiency, a gauntlet is specifically categorized as an "unarmed attack," same as "unarmed strike" is.

Improved Unarmed Strike says, "Benefit: You are considered to be armed even when unarmed that is, you do not provoke attacks or opportunity from armed opponents when you attack them while unarmed. However, you
still get an attack of opportunity against any opponent who makes an unarmed attack on you. In addition, your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your option."

The phrasing is "attacking while unarmed," as opposed to "attacking with an unarmed strike." That lack of clarification suggests that improved unarmed strike applies to Any case of being unarmed... including gauntlets.


So, maybe it's an interpretation thing, but that's really how it reads to me. I could be missing something, though. If indeed gauntlets don't work with monks, would there be any theoretical way to add enhancement bonuses to unarmed attacks?

Thanks for your help :)

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 12:03 PM
Houserule and be done with it.

AmberVael
2008-12-08, 12:05 PM
There have been lots and lots of arguments over this. I don't think you'll be getting a clear answer any time soon- or ever.
I agree with Stupendous- House Rule for the win, whether you actually think it is needed or not.

starburst98
2008-12-08, 12:05 PM
gauntlets count as unarmed, even if they are enchanted (my DM says so anyway)

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 12:06 PM
Course, you're wielding a weapon that you're not proficient with...

Kesnit
2008-12-08, 12:08 PM
Course, you're wielding a weapon that you're not proficient with...

Which comes back to "houserule and be done with it." :smallbiggrin:

Moriato
2008-12-08, 12:10 PM
As far as I know it doesn't work that way. I remember reading somewhere that you can't just throw on flaming or sonic or whatever gloves or gauntlets, because not all of a monks attacks are punches. They're also kicks, headbutts, knees, elbows, etc. So you'd have to have flaming gloves, flaming boots, flaming headband, flaming kneepads, flaming elbowpads, etc., etc., etc.

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 12:11 PM
As far as I know it doesn't work that way. I remember reading somewhere that you can't just throw on flaming or sonic or whatever gloves or gauntlets, because not all of a monks attacks are punches. They're also kicks, headbutts, knees, elbows, etc. So you'd have to have flaming gloves, flaming boots, flaming headband, flaming kneepads, flaming elbowpads, etc., etc., etc.

That sounds hot.

Sstoopidtallkid
2008-12-08, 12:11 PM
Gauntlets are a weapon that Monks are not proficient with and that is not listed under "Special Monk Weapons". Of course, they aren't proficient with Unarmed Strikes either, so...

Kurald Galain
2008-12-08, 12:13 PM
They can always use gauntlets to store their partial wands in...

Attilargh
2008-12-08, 12:13 PM
If indeed gauntlets don't work with monks, would there be any theoretical way to add enhancement bonuses to unarmed attacks?
The Kensai prestige class springs to mind. If I recall correctly, it can be found in Complete Warrior.

Moriato
2008-12-08, 12:13 PM
That sounds hot.

On the "bright" side, with all that gear, you'd be impervious to ninjas, because as we know:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v336/Backstaber/Ninjas_Fire_beware.jpg

Darrin
2008-12-08, 12:15 PM
To me, it reads like monks should be able to equip gauntlets just fine.


They can. It's just by RAW, they aren't proficient in them. Actually, by RAW, monks aren't proficient with unarmed strikes. Any dip into a class other than wizard or druid usually fixes the problem (monochrome Monk-20s tend to be pretty rare).

You can also fix the proficiency problem by taking Simple Weapon proficiency, Militia, Otherworldly. However, by RAW you cannot flurry with a gauntlet.

Unorthodox Flurry (Dragon Compendium, p. 109) not only allows you to flurry with a chosen light weapon, it also grants proficiency in that weapon. This solves three nagging problems for the Monk: the proficiency problem, the flurry problem, and the weapon enchantment problem.

Houseruling that the monk is proficient with unarmed strikes (and sometimes gauntlets as well) is a popular fix, for those that are even aware of the proficiency problem.

Kesnit
2008-12-08, 12:15 PM
As far as I know it doesn't work that way. I remember reading somewhere that you can't just throw on flaming or sonic or whatever gloves or gauntlets, because not all of a monks attacks are punches. They're also kicks, headbutts, knees, elbows, etc. So you'd have to have flaming gloves, flaming boots, flaming headband, flaming kneepads, flaming elbowpads, etc., etc., etc.

I see your point and am not belittling it. That said...

If a FGT has a sword that does 1d6 acid damage, it does that damage no matter where you hit - tip, halfway down the blade, just above the hilt. A Monk's body works the same way - all of it is the "weapon" and it works just like the FGT's sword - wherever it hits, it does the damage.

RAW, probably not. But it makes sense (to me anyway :smallbiggrin:)

rubycona
2008-12-08, 12:16 PM
There have been lots and lots of arguments over this. I don't think you'll be getting a clear answer any time soon- or ever.
I agree with Stupendous- House Rule for the win, whether you actually think it is needed or not.

Ahhh, ok. From the Q&A Raw thing, it looked like a standard answer, when to me, it looked really possible to interpret differently.

I don't even think it needs a house rule, per se; it is, after all, the DM's call on how to interpret existing rules, and I do think it's an entirely valid interpretation.

And really, it's way sucky for monks to not be able to get enhancement bonuses on their unarmed attacks. Without it, it seems the only viable option for monks is to use a special monk weapon. That alone makes me lean towards yes on the gauntlet thing.

Edit: A lot of posts since I posted this. A monk's technically not proficient with unarmed strikes, even with all the monk class blather about a monk being specifically trained and whatnot in unarmed attacks?

Yeah, I can see houseruling that in...

AmberVael
2008-12-08, 12:22 PM
Ahhh, ok. From the Q&A Raw thing, it looked like a standard answer, when to me, it looked really possible to interpret differently.

I don't even think it needs a house rule, per se; it is, after all, the DM's call on how to interpret existing rules, and I do think it's an entirely valid interpretation.
Yeah, but if you get one of those annoying rule lawyer types, they'll argue with you about it to the death.
>.>
<.<
*Might possibly have done that kind of thing before*
Sometimes it is best just to say "this is the way it is" rather than "this is the way I think it is."


And really, it's way sucky for monks to not be able to get enhancement bonuses on their unarmed attacks. Without it, it seems the only viable option for monks is to use a special monk weapon. That alone makes me lean towards yes on the gauntlet thing.

I agree. There should be more options for the poor monk, and gauntlets help out, if only a little.

Moriato
2008-12-08, 12:25 PM
I see your point and am not belittling it. That said...

If a FGT has a sword that does 1d6 acid damage, it does that damage no matter where you hit - tip, halfway down the blade, just above the hilt. A Monk's body works the same way - all of it is the "weapon" and it works just like the FGT's sword - wherever it hits, it does the damage.

RAW, probably not. But it makes sense (to me anyway :smallbiggrin:)

I'm not saying that a monk shouldn't be able to get these enhancements, I absolutely think they should. Just that it's not so simple as throwing on a pair of gloves. There's the amulet of mighty fists, (I think that's the name?) that gives an enhancement bonus to all your natural attacks, I don't see why a person couldn't also throw some other properties on it.

monty
2008-12-08, 12:28 PM
On the "bright" side, with all that gear, you'd be impervious to ninjas, because as we know:

http://img2.moonbuggy.org/imgstore/ninjas-cant-catch-you-if-youre-on-fire.gif

The image is broken, or at least it is on my computer, but I assume it is referring to ninjas and their aversion to fire?

rubycona
2008-12-08, 12:45 PM
Yeah, but if you get one of those annoying rule lawyer types, they'll argue with you about it to the death.
>.>
<.<
*Might possibly have done that kind of thing before*
Sometimes it is best just to say "this is the way it is" rather than "this is the way I think it is."



I agree. There should be more options for the poor monk, and gauntlets help out, if only a little.

Bah. I'm good at arguing.

But even still, I have a secret weapon. The DM fist of DEATH! Muhahaha.

Actually, I kind of already have a house rule on the subject: Realism beats rules. A monk isn't proficient with an unarmed strike? HA!

I once believed that the books were decently balanced... how cruelly does research rip open my eyes...

kamikasei
2008-12-08, 01:03 PM
Edit: A lot of posts since I posted this. A monk's technically not proficient with unarmed strikes, even with all the monk class blather about a monk being specifically trained and whatnot in unarmed attacks?

There is actually disagreement about this, too.

Basically it goes: unarmed strike is listed as a simple weapon on the weapons table. However, in various other places (the weapon focus or weapon specialization feat, possibly weapon finesse - I'd have to go hunting for the last thread about this) it is mentioned separately from "all weapons" or "any weapon", which implies that it's not a weapon at all. Since monks are not proficient with all simple weapons, if unarmed strike is a simple weapon proper then they are not proficient in it (or gauntlets). If you consider (as I came around to doing) that they are not really weapons at all, then monks don't need to be proficient in them; they're just on the weapons table where they are for convenience (ironically).

You can then take the view that since gauntlets are on the weapons table in the same little nook as unarmed strikes, they are also not really weapons and don't require proficiency - they're just something that modifies the unarmed strike non-weapon. You can attack without penalty, flurry with them, etc.

The problem with this interpretation (and up to this point it is interpretation rather than houserule) is that if the gauntlets aren't really weapons... can you enchant them like weapons? To which the reasonable answer is "YES, bloody hell, monks have enough problems already and I have a headache now anyway". But YMMV.

Moriato
2008-12-08, 01:16 PM
The image is broken, or at least it is on my computer, but I assume it is referring to ninjas and their aversion to fire?

Well damn, it worked earlier, fixed now

theMycon
2008-12-08, 01:18 PM
Since a Monk's unarmed strike is treated as a natural weapon for effects that enhance them... if he's not proficient with it, neither are any monsters with a natural attack. The rest of the party may be _very_ happy if the DM rules against the monk, but the intention of the rules is clear.

As for Gauntlets... Since they're an unarmed attack, he's clearly proficient if he's proficient unarmed. Whether he can flurry depends on whether you consider an "unarmed attack" the same as an "unarmed strike." On one hand the books use them interchangeably without any distinction whatsoever. On the other hand, it's never explicitly said they're the same thing.

All in all, the interpretation I like best is "He can flurry in Gauntlets, unless he's holding something. Then he has to kick. Remember, each gauntlet is its own weapon, so one for each hand costs twice as much."


*I.E., an effect of a natural weapon being proficiency.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-08, 01:21 PM
Don't forget that the existence of the Amulet of Mighty Fists is an argument against RAI letting monks enchant their hands (or, as the case may be, gauntlets).

NEO|Phyte
2008-12-08, 01:25 PM
Since a Monk's unarmed strike is treated as a natural weapon for effects that enhance them... if he's not proficient with it, neither are any monsters with a natural attack. The rest of the party may be _very_ happy if the DM rules against the monk, but the intention of the rules is clear.
*I.E., an effect of a natural weapon being proficiency.

Which is all fine and dandy, until you notice that Humanoids are NOT proficient with natural weapons. Compare Fey (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#feyType) to Humanoid (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#humanoidType).
"Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry."
"Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class."
If a fey happens to have a natural attack, it is proficient in it. Not so for a humanoid. So hey, the monk capstone IS useful, it gives them proficiency in their unarmed strike!

RPGuru1331
2008-12-08, 01:29 PM
If a fey happens to have a natural attack, it is proficient in it. Not so for a humanoid. So hey, the monk capstone IS useful, it gives them proficiency in their unarmed strike!

Is it that unbelievable that the humanoid entry isn't proficient with weapons he not only doesn't have, but isn't going to get?

Psions must be pretty ticked with this entry too.

Artanis
2008-12-08, 01:30 PM
That sounds hot.
*whaps you with a wiffle bat* That's so bad it isn't even punny.

*awaits his own wiffle-beating*

Ixahinon
2008-12-08, 01:30 PM
Make a new 'weapon'

Handwraps:

This piece of flexible leather is normally used in pit brawl, or from streetfighters, but monestaries have often taken to using these wraps and extending their usefulness with the use of magic. When magical handwraps are used on a non-monk...the additonal damage does not apply to their natural attacks

handwraps are treated as clothing, but when put on the hands of a monk, actually works as an 'extention' to the monk's natural attack. (Unlike Gauntlets, which use a material hardness to improve attacks) For each +1 bonus to the weapon (Up to +5) infers upon the handwraps addional damage to their unarmed strike.

+1 = +1d2 Damage
+2 = +1d4 Damage
+3 = +1d6 Damage
+4 = +1d8 Damage
+5 = +2d4 Damage

Example: A monk with a Natural Attack of 2d10 damage wearing +3 Handwraps would do 2d10 + 1d6 damage to their attacks.

Additionally, added effects can be added to the handwraps, such as Holy, Axiomatic, Bane, and any other effect that does not exclude Bludgeoning damage (So you can't have Vorpal Handwraps)

Insintive for the Monk to continue using natural weapons (Hands, Feet, Head, etc) and not look like an idiot and wear free flowing clothes with restricting heavy gauntlets.

Works in my game pretty well.

NEO|Phyte
2008-12-08, 01:31 PM
Is it that unbelievable that the humanoid entry isn't proficient with weapons he not only doesn't have, but isn't going to get?

Psions must be pretty ticked with this entry too.

Psions? Hardly. Now, psychic warriors...

Darrin
2008-12-08, 01:34 PM
Since a Monk's unarmed strike is treated as a natural weapon for effects that enhance them... if he's not proficient with it, neither are any monsters with a natural attack.


Humanoids do not automatically gain proficiency with natural weapons. Other monster types, such as animals and magical beasts, explicitly get proficiency with their natural weapons. Monstrous humanoids get automatic proficiency with any weapon mentioned in their stat block (which would include natural weapons).

The humanoid type gets either simple weapon proficiency or by character class. Really, probably just an oversight by the designers. Most people don't pay all that much attention to these weird little gaps in proficiency.

Sir Giacomo
2008-12-08, 02:13 PM
Ahhh, ok. From the Q&A Raw thing, it looked like a standard answer, when to me, it looked really possible to interpret differently.

I don't even think it needs a house rule, per se; it is, after all, the DM's call on how to interpret existing rules, and I do think it's an entirely valid interpretation.

And really, it's way sucky for monks to not be able to get enhancement bonuses on their unarmed attacks. Without it, it seems the only viable option for monks is to use a special monk weapon. That alone makes me lean towards yes on the gauntlet thing.

Edit: A lot of posts since I posted this. A monk's technically not proficient with unarmed strikes, even with all the monk class blather about a monk being specifically trained and whatnot in unarmed attacks?

Yeah, I can see houseruling that in...

Agreed.
The thread again has shown now many different opinions there are even on this monk unarmed strike gauntlet thing.
In my view, it is fairly obvious to come to the interpretation you provided right away.
Some would like to have that deemed "houseruling" to support their opinion that monks are weak class,
but the consensus of most DMs likely is:
"go forth dear monk player with gauntlets enchantable as other weapons and with them flurry, do unarmed damage and be proficient - without any feats to spend."

Technically, even without gauntlets and the overly expensive amulets of mights fists (because they even use the wrong slot!) you can get enhancement bonuses to your fists with spell buffs, even in core:
- magic weapon/greater magic weapon
- magic fang / greater magic fang
- holy sword (the 4th level paladin spell)
When no casters are present to buff you (pc or npc), you can try it via the Use Magic Device skill and wands, or with rings of spell storing.

- Giacomo

Roderick_BR
2008-12-08, 02:21 PM
By Raw:
* Monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes: There's a consensus that it's just a typo that was never errata'd
* If unarmed strikes are considered weapons that actually requires a feat, then gauntlets are also unarmed weapons.
* Thus, if you can flurry with unarmed strikes, you can flurry with gauntlets.
* Present these informtions for your DM, and see if he allows a monk to use magic gauntlets

Matthew
2008-12-08, 02:21 PM
There was some Sage Advice (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ask/20080528a) eventually issued on part of this issue:



Q: Can a monk use a +5 gauntlet in an unarmed attack, gaining all of his class benefits as well as the +5 bonus to hit and damage from the gauntlet?

A: Gauntlets are indeed a weapon. If a monk uses any weapon not listed as a special monk weapon, he does not gain his better attack rate. He would, however, gain the increased damage for unarmed attacks.

I don't particularly agree with it myself, but there you go.

Tacoma
2008-12-08, 02:25 PM
My answer for the Monk not being proficient in Unarmed Fighting is that it's a mistake and should be in the errata if it's not already. I mean c'mon. That's just silly.

Wearing spiked gauntlets is very different IRL than just punching someone. I would definitely say it counts as a weapon. And it definitely limits mobility of the hands for anyone using openhanded fighting techniques.

That said, if I had the choice to fight with gauntlets or to fight barehanded, I would always choose the gauntlets every time. Unless I'm swimming or something, you know.

As for a Monk using all his body as a weapon, I just don't see why they should specifically be penalized when everyone else fighting unarmed is assumed to just be punching. And when a Fighter gets to be high level we don't assume he's using his whole body. I say a Monk uses whatever the player wants for his fighting style, whether that's mainly hands, mainly feet, hands and feet, whole-body, etc. But he has to stick with it.

My answer: magical brass knuckles. They don't have an effect as a weapon in the sense that you are still attacking unarmed and there's no change in damage. But the brass knuckles can be enchanted and you can wear then over your gloves because they take up the equipped weapon and shield spaces and not the glove spaces.

And if you have proficiency in punching, you have proficiency in using brass knuckles. It's no different. They are not exotic. They are not Martial. You're still just punching.

Ascension
2008-12-08, 02:40 PM
Go Monk/Swordsage/Shadow Sun Ninja. Swordsage should give you enough weapon proficiencies to cover gauntlets unless they're Exotic. :smallbiggrin:

...

What? Don't look at me that way. You can't have a monk thread anymore without somebody mentioning Swordsage.

Person_Man
2008-12-08, 03:55 PM
As others have said, a Monk can use Gauntlets and use their Monk Unarmed Damage progression. However they're not proficient with the weapon (unless they multi-class or go into certain PrC). And they can't Flurry with them.

In addition to the Kensai Prestige Class from Complete Warrior, another perfectly legal option is to just boost their Unarmed Damage. Here's a list of ways (forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=662842). Scroll down to "Increasing Monk Damage" and you'll see that its not that hard to get to 12d8 unarmed damage by ECL 12ish via a variety of means.

Stunning Fist is also easy to pump via Pharaoh's Fist (Sandstorm, which allows it to effect everyone adjacent to your target as well) and/or Freezing the Lifeblood (Complete Warrior, paralyzes enemy for 1d4+1 rounds). Pharaoh's Fist works very well in dungeons, especially when you have Pushback, Knockback, Forceful Staff Style, and/or Shock Trooper or something similar, all of which allow you to move your enemy around. And Freezing the Lifeblood is one of the better Save or Lose effects in the game, once you qualify for it around ECL 15. Only the Monk and a few Monk PrC get a decent number of Stunning Fist uses per day.

Monk is also the only the class that can reliably use Touch of Golden Ice (Book of Exalted Deeds, unarmed or natural attack forces Evil enemy to make a Fort Save or take 1d6 Dex damage, but with a garbage Save DC), since the only time you would want to take it is level 1.

So in summary, yes it sucks that Monks can't use and enchant gauntlets without their core abilities being screwed up. But there are many non house rule workarounds.

hamishspence
2008-12-08, 03:57 PM
dragon ruled in favor in their Monk Guide- no proficiency penalty and can flurry- but thats Dragon.

Signmaker
2008-12-08, 04:22 PM
Generally, most discussions I have witnessed have come down to the following as reasonable interpretations:

1. The monk can wear said gauntlet. Enchant it even. Use it with unarmed strike damage progression. However, the monk is not proficient with the gauntlet, and thus takes -4.

2. The gauntlet, not being part of the standard monk kit of weapons, is not able to be used in conjunction with Flurry Of Blows.

Therefore, that enhancement had better be well-worth it. There are ways to fix this issue (and other aspects of the monk), but those dip in to splatbooks and 3rd party sources, such as Dragon. Personally, I don't mind a person that walks in to my session with a reformed Lion Totem Barbarian/Monk/Kensai, with whatever other methods they use to fix the synergy issues of the monk. The idea of a Pouncing Enhanced FOB attack tree I consider to be a colorful and a decent exercise in class cherrypicking.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-12-08, 04:27 PM
Generally, most discussions I have witnessed have come down to the following as reasonable interpretations:


It just took a few thousand posts with the same arguments repeated ad nauseam sprinkled with some monk jokes, monk bashing and partially charged wands.... :smallamused:

Example thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=96002), many more available through search...

Signmaker
2008-12-08, 04:30 PM
It just took a few thousand posts with the same arguments repeated ad nauseam sprinkled with some monk jokes, monk bashing and partially charged wands.... :smallamused:

But of course! I'm proud (and likewise somewhat disturbed) to have been in many of them.

Also, I've always been in favor of the hand-wraps accessory option: It's nifty, it fixes the problem, and it's flavorably correct. But then, that's a house-rule fix in a raw discussion. :smalltongue:

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-12-08, 04:40 PM
But of course! I'm proud (and likewise somewhat disturbed) to have been in many of them.

There are always few who do not come back from those threads! :smalleek:



Also, I've always been in favor of the hand-wraps accessory option: It's nifty, it fixes the problem, and it's flavorably correct.

Indeed.


But then, that's a house-rule fix in a raw discussion. :smalltongue:


Well I for one am sick and tired of people running around quoting the RAW... :smallamused:

Signmaker
2008-12-08, 04:42 PM
There are always few who do not come back from those threads! :smalleek:



Thank goodness I haven't made too many offenses yet.



Well I for one am sick and tired of people running around quoting the RAW... :smallamused:

And then running to you to be doubly sure?

sin_sephiroth
2008-12-08, 04:48 PM
There's no clear answer by RAW core, so I won't even TRY to think of an answer that hasn't already been dissected aver and over again.
If your DM allows it, just houserule it and be done with it. For a slightly more "legit" answer, I've discovered that VoP from BoED not only makes for some pretty formidable monk-iness, but also addresses the monks MAD pretty handily too, and boosts armor like crazy, all things that monks get bashed for pretty regularly.

Also, I use the hand/feet wrapping idea too, complete with campaign fluff and everything, and everyone in my group loves it.

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 04:49 PM
There's no clear answer by RAW core, so I won't even TRY to think of an answer that hasn't already been dissected aver and over again.
If your DM allows it, just houserule it and be done with it. For a slightly more "legit" answer, I've discovered that VoP from BoED not only makes for some pretty formidable monk-iness, but also addresses the monks MAD pretty handily too, and boosts armor like crazy, all things that monks get bashed for pretty regularly.


Dear merciful Kord...

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-12-08, 04:51 PM
Thank goodness I haven't made too many offenses yet.

Some remain scared for life and never recover while others just disappear and are never spoken of again.
Such is the terror of the monk thread....

only1doug
2008-12-08, 04:55 PM
Some remain scared for life and never recover while others just disappear and are never spoken of again.
Such is the terror of the monk thread....

and others return again and again to terrify us with partially drunk potions... no, wait that's not it.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-08, 05:10 PM
Some remain scared for life and never recover while others just disappear and are never spoken of again.
Such is the terror of the monk thread....

You are entering the realm which is unusual. Maybe it's magic or contains some kind of monster. The second one. Prepare to enter... The Scary Door.

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 05:11 PM
and others return again and again to terrify us with partially drunk potions... no, wait that's not it.

Turns out, it's man.

rubycona
2008-12-08, 05:16 PM
I never realized that the monk class had any problems.

I mean, we didn't even Try to look this stuff up. It seemed so incredibly obvious that monks should be able to fight normally with gauntlets (considering gauntlets are listed as an unarmed attack) that it just never occurred to us to second guess it.

This whole RAW thing is freaking weird. I used to trust the rulebooks...

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 05:17 PM
I never realized that the monk class had any problems.

A close examination will reveal that not all classes were properly written...

Signmaker
2008-12-08, 05:17 PM
You are entering the realm which is unusual. Maybe it's magic or contains some kind of monster. The second one. Prepare to enter... The Scary Door.

*deedoodeedoodeedoodeedoo*

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-12-08, 05:19 PM
I never realized that the monk class had any problems.

I mean, we didn't even Try to look this stuff up. It seemed so incredibly obvious that monks should be able to fight normally with gauntlets (considering gauntlets are listed as an unarmed attack) that it just never occurred to us to second guess it.

This whole RAW thing is freaking weird. I used to trust the rulebooks...

Such sweet innocence... lost forever. :smallsigh:

Hurry drink a potion of forgetfulness and stay far away from this message board. You will be much happier person, I promise. :smalltongue:

Matthew
2008-12-08, 05:20 PM
I never realized that the monk class had any problems.

I mean, we didn't even Try to look this stuff up. It seemed so incredibly obvious that monks should be able to fight normally with gauntlets (considering gauntlets are listed as an unarmed attack) that it just never occurred to us to second guess it.

This whole RAW thing is freaking weird. I used to trust the rulebooks...

I shouldn't worry; what online examinations of the "rules as written" tend to reveal is that nobody really plays by them. Keep playing the game the way you are, because it will not become better balanced by a strict adherence to the rule books.

rubycona
2008-12-08, 05:24 PM
Such sweet innocence... lost forever. :smallsigh:

Hurry drink a potion of forgetfulness and stay far away from this message board. You will be much happier person, I promise. :smalltongue:

Ha! I'm a lot happier knowing that neither I, nor any of my players, will be rules lawyers. Having read this forum, I'm now quite content in my decision that the rulebooks are simply very thorough and useful guidelines.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2008-12-08, 05:27 PM
Ha! I'm a lot happier knowing that neither I, nor any of my players, will be rules lawyers. Having read this forum, I'm now quite content in my decision that the rulebooks are simply very thorough and useful guidelines.

I am very happy for you. :smallsmile:

Stupendous_Man
2008-12-08, 05:30 PM
Ha! I'm a lot happier knowing that neither I, nor any of my players, will be rules lawyers. Having read this forum, I'm now quite content in my decision that the rulebooks are simply very thorough and useful guidelines.

fixed it for you.

rubycona
2008-12-08, 05:35 PM
fixed ti for you.

XD Fair enough

Ponce
2008-12-08, 05:41 PM
The obvious answer to the "monks hit with any part of their body" is for them to run around in +5 flaming gimp suits. Done.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-08, 05:46 PM
The obvious answer to the "monks hit with any part of their body" is for them to run around in +5 flaming gimp suits. Done.

And here I thought that monks were gimped enough already...

horseboy
2008-12-09, 02:50 AM
Actually, I kind of already have a house rule on the subject: Realism beats rules. A monk isn't proficient with an unarmed strike? HA!
Realism and D&D???????
*Snap*
Oh great there goes my brain.

BobVosh
2008-12-09, 03:36 AM
and others return again and again to terrify us with partially drunk potions... no, wait that's not it.

With CC Preform: Drink? I luled hard on this


Realism and D&D???????
*Snap*
Oh great there goes my brain.

Ah. Finally. Now you will fit in around here.


The obvious answer to the "monks hit with any part of their body" is for them to run around in +5 flaming gimp suits. Done.

Can you GMW that?


This whole RAW thing is freaking weird. I used to trust the rulebooks...

There. Found your mistake. Trusting any WotC is silly (or any game company really). Look at magic. Seems simple, draw, play a land card, play yadda yadda, attack. Pass turn. Repeat. Then study the stack, EoT, etc. Let your brain try to run for it.