Natural attacks and Class attacks confusion

[Cameron]

It's in the weapon entry for unarmed strike as well... but only in the PHB, not the SRD.



Gauntlet, not spiked gauntlet.

I think the gauntlet makes your unarmed strike deal lethal damage... but not if you don't use it.

If you're kicking, you're attacking with an unarmed strike without using the gauntlet. If you're punching, you're attacking with an unarmed strike, using the gauntlet.

When the whip says "The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don’t threaten the area into which you can make an attack", there's an implicit 'with the whip' following 'you don't threaten'. If I'm using a whip and a shortsword, I still threaten with the shortsword, despite the whip stating "you don’t threaten the area into which you can make an attack".

Similarly, to me "This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes" is applicable if you're actually using the gauntlet when you make your attack with unarmed strike.

-Hyp.

No. You are claiming that I can't TWF with unarmed strikes because they are the same weapon. If they are, then you cause lethal damage to *all* your unarmed strikes with a spiked gauntlet, especially it is written *explicitly* that your unarmed strikes (note it doesn't specify punches only) now cause lethal damage.

You can't say that it is the same weapon for one thing, and then several different weapons for another. That is just bunk, although this moving of goal posts is something you have done for the entire thread *shrugs*

You'd make a good Helen, Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No. You are claiming that I can't TWF with unarmed strikes because they are the same weapon. If they are, then you cause lethal damage to *all* your unarmed strikes with a spiked gauntlet, especially it is written *explicitly* that your unarmed strikes (note it doesn't specify punches only) now cause lethal damage.

Gauntlet, not spiked gauntlet.

Note that the immediately following sentence states "A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered..." I don't find it inconsistent to read the first sentence as referring to a strike with the gauntlet also.

You can't say that it is the same weapon for one thing, and then several different weapons for another.

It's not several different weapons. It's the same weapon, but used in a different fashion - again, just as the dagger, scythe, or halberd is one weapon that can be used in different ways.

If your hands are full, you can't use the gauntlet when you make your unarmed strike. If your hands aren't full, you can use the gauntlet when you make your unarmed strike. If you use the gauntlet when you make your unarmed strike, the property of the gauntlet causes your unarmed strike to deal lethal damage.

I'm not claiming the unarmed strike to be several different weapons; merely one weapon that can behave in different ways depending on how it is used.

-Hyp.

 

[Cameron]

Gauntlet, not spiked gauntlet.

Note that the immediately following sentence states "A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered..." I don't find it inconsistent to read the first sentence as referring to a strike with the gauntlet also.



It's not several different weapons. It's the same weapon, but used in a different fashion - again, just as the dagger, scythe, or halberd is one weapon that can be used in different ways.

If your hands are full, you can't use the gauntlet when you make your unarmed strike. If your hands aren't full, you can use the gauntlet when you make your unarmed strike. If you use the gauntlet when you make your unarmed strike, the property of the gauntlet causes your unarmed strike to deal lethal damage.

I'm not claiming the unarmed strike to be several different weapons; merely one weapon that can behave in different ways depending on how it is used.

-Hyp.

So you are saying that a two-bladed sword cannot be wielded as a two-handed weapon using only one blade?

 

[kigmatzomat]

Punching with both hands would use iterative attacks, not TWF. Unless you were using another weapon in addition.
-Hyp.

Tell me why these four things are different:

1st level Commoner using TWF (no feats) with a dagger in each hand

1st level Commoner using TWF (no feats) with a spiked gauntlet on each hand

1st level Commoner using TWF (no feats) with a gauntlet on each hand

1st level Commoner using TWF (no feats) with each hand

 

[Hypersmurf]

So you are saying that a two-bladed sword cannot be wielded as a two-handed weapon using only one blade?

Certainly it can. It's a double weapon. Like all double weapons, it carries footnote 5 on the Weapons table.

Unarmed strike isn't, and doesn't.

Tell me why these four things are different:

In the first two cases - the commoner has two weapons. In the second two cases, he doesn't, and thus isn't eligible to use TWF.

-Hyp.

 

[Caliban]

So you are saying that a two-bladed sword cannot be wielded as a two-handed weapon using only one blade?

Advice: Don't try to debate Hypersmurf by asking him leading questions. He's a master of the question game.

The only winning move is not to play.

 

[Cameron]

Advice: Don't try to debate Hypersmurf by asking him leading questions. He's a master of the question game.

The only winning move is not to play.

And now we will take the focus away from the Hypersmurf fan gallery...

 

[Cameron]

Certainly it can. It's a double weapon. Like all double weapons, it carries footnote 5 on the Weapons table.

Unarmed strike isn't, and doesn't.
-Hyp.

Really? Then explan the gauntlet. If it affects unarmed strike, then explain a kick dealing non-lethal damage. For that matter, why isn't there a helmet entry in the weapons table for headbutts?

What you are saying, really, is that the rules are OK if you agree with it, but if you don't they are bunk or wrong. I don't buy that. In fact, I call foul on it.

 

[Caliban]

And now we will take the focus away from the Hypersmurf fan gallery...

You must be new here.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Then explan the gauntlet. If it affects unarmed strike, then explain a kick dealing non-lethal damage.

Because you're attacking with your unarmed strike, but not making use of the gauntlet in so doing.

Just like I threaten with my shortsword even whilst wielding a whip in my other hand.

-Hyp.