To all of you debating whether Magic Weapon can be used on a person's fists!

Status
Not open for further replies.

log in or register to remove this ad

Chris_Nightwing said:
Just give the damned monks in question some gauntlets and cast it on them. End of story.

Gaunlets are no more weapons than unarmed strike are.

Gaunlets lets you deal normal damage instead of subdual damage.

If you are not considered armed with your unarmed strike niether are you while wearing gaunlets.
 
Last edited:

KarinsDad said:


Well, for such a brilliant guy, it took you nearly 3 days to look it up.

So, I will quote you:

Sheesh


That's what you gotta love about these boards (not). There is always someone bitching about someone else's bitching. :)

Actually, I only came in on it today, and I had to go to work, so just shut your mouth. I looked it up when I got the time.

At least I DID look it up, unlike most other people.
 

Re: Re: To all of you debating whether Magic Weapon can be used on a person's fists!

AGGEMAM said:


Who is flaming now.

It is not in the errata, it is in the corrections and clarifications version 2.

I do not think I was the only one, who did not realise that there was a newer version of this.

It IS in the errata, I'm looking at it right now! Wow, I never believed anyone could be this dense! I downloaded the official errata from the official web site, and it's right there in black and white.
 

AGGEMAM said:


Gaunlets are no more weapons than unarmed strike are.

Gaunlets lets you deal normal damage instead of subdual damage.

If you are not considered armed with your unarmed strike niether are you while wearing gaunlets.

That is correct. Technically, gauntlets are considered part of armor, not weapons. This is stated in the description of the gauntlet. They merely allow your unarmed strike to do real damage.
 




spunky_mutters said:
Also, the original question in that thread had to do with casting MW or GMW on Bracers of Striking. It got a little off-topic, but that point wasn't completely resolved. There was a quote about them being treated like Blunt Weapons for purposes of enhancement magic, so that lends credence to it.

That would have been me. :) In fact, I'll retype it again, and hope it doesn't get lost in a storm of flames and one-liners (hint, hint, people):

Bracers of Striking:The wearer of bracers of striking is considered armed even when unarmed (as if he had the Improved Unarmed Strike feat).
The bracers may be modified with special weapon abilities as if they were a blunt weapon (though they cound as a double weapon, so double the cost of any ability).
--- Magic of Faerun, page 155; lower right corner

Note, the bracers may be modified "as if they wre a blunt weapon." As I see it, it means that applying weapon enchantments/enhancements/abilites/etc requires you to follow all relevant rules regarding putting together the abilities of a magic weapon.

And before you can make a sword "flaming" or "shocking burst", etc, it has to be at least a +1 sword. Ergo, the "ability" to add an actual enhancement bonus is actually a prerequisite you must in fact meet, before adding non-enhancement magical weapon abilities to the Bracers. IMO and IMC, at the very least; I tend to feel it's perfectly within the spirit of the rules, and not entirely contradicted by the letter of those rules (in that the bracers create a special exception for themselves).

NOW ... to further pretzel your brains: in a bar, with an impending bar-fight scene about to start ... can you cast GMW on a barstool or tankard, if that item is intended for use as an impromtu weapon ... ? Why, or why not?

What about, not the horse's HOOF, but the HORSESHOE? Would that work? Why, or why not? Would it make a difference if you specifically fashioned the shoe to have studs, edges, or whatnot that would enhance the damage the hoof did in a kick? Why, or why not?

:D
 


Status
Not open for further replies.

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top