D&D 3E/3.5 3.5 FAQ change: Monks & gauntlets

[mvincent]

The following has been removed from the most recent 3.5 FAQ:
"Can a monk treat an attack with a gauntlet as an
unarmed strike?

A monk could wear such an item and treat it as an unarmed
strike (since the Player’s Handbook says that “a strike with a
gauntlet is . . . considered an unarmed attack”), although the
damage dealt by the gauntlet would always be considered lethal
damage (as noted in the gauntlet entry) and the monk would
suffer a nonproficiency penalty (since the gauntlet is a simple
weapon). The monk could even use gauntlet attacks as part of a
flurry of blows."

Since another monk/gauntlet answer was previously removed, this leaves only the following reference left in the 3.5 FAQ:
"Can a monk get her unarmed strike enhanced as a
magic weapon?
No. Even a magic gauntlet or spiked gauntlet isn’t the ideal
answer, since these aren’t listed as special monk weapons (and
therefore aren’t as versatile as unarmed strikes)."

So now the 3.5 FAQ no longer has any conflicting answers (or non-conflicting answers for that matter) about monks with gauntlets.

 

[Deset Gled]

Good job, FAQ!

 

[Legildur]

Wow! They actually listen..... Maybe there is hope for the FAQ after all.... until 4e of course.

 

[Branduil]

So what is the actual rule on Monks and gauntlets?

 

[Deset Gled]

So what is the actual rule on Monks and gauntlets?

Gauntlets are simple weapons that do the damage listed in the equipment table. They can be enchanted, but they are not monk weapons, and monks are not proficient with them, so they are not very useful to monks.

 

[rowport]

Weapons of Legacy?

That creates an interesting corner case for one of the Weapons of Legacy, then; there is a magical gauntlet that is clearly intended for monks. Oh, the irony.