Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Raerin 05-29-06, 07:29 PM	Ok, heres the deal. One of my players thinks he has found a way to get himself attacks of O by wearing a spike gauntlet on his right hand (holding bow in left). So when he attacks with the bow, if something runs by him, he can hit it with his spiked gauntlet and get the attack of o. I think this is unfair, considering he has been using the bow and this doesn't threaten the spaces around him, and his 2 hands are consumed in the process. He brought up the point of a dual wielder being able to attack with an offhand weapon only one round, then being able to use his mainhand. When I said the part about both hands being consumed in firing the bow, he referred to a 2h sword user, having a silver spiked gauntlet. If a vamp runs past, can he punch it instead, since that would be more favorable (vamp having dmg reduction/silver)? I responded to this that maybe, since the 2h sword already threatens the spaces around him when the vamp runs past, so he would already have the attack, and wouldnt be relying on the gauntlet to give it to him. But I don't really know. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated, and if anyone can site some rules/combo of rules that relate to this, I would be most thankful. Appreciate it!
X-Codes 05-29-06, 07:42 PM	It's a lot simpler than using an Elvencraft bow from RotW. If you really think it's unfair for an archer to get AoO's for 1d4 damage then so be it. Honestly I've never seen an archer in a situation where he could get an AoO in the first place.
Lord Ian Stark 05-29-06, 07:52 PM	By RAW it's allowed. All you have to do is threaten the area a creature provokes an AoO from. But as X-Codes stated, the damage is minimal and if the character is an archer, odds are they have no feats invested in the gauntlet usage and have a low STR.
pres_man 05-29-06, 07:52 PM	Consider the following. A fighter full attacks with his greatsword and then drops it and quick draws a dagger. Does he now threaten with his dagger? The bow requires two hands to use, but not to hold. Once the bow is done shooting, it is now being held. At this point the person can use any weapon they have out, in this a gauntlet.
Edymnion 05-29-06, 07:56 PM	Low damage doesn't mean anything. There are plenty of enchantments you can put on it to make it exceedingly lethal, or just smear some good old fashioned poison on it. Judging a weapon on it's base damage output is a rookie mistake, because the bottom line is that there is very little differance between a dagger and a longsword when it comes to damage. After all, think of it this way. A 1d4 dagger and a 1d8 longsword are only seperated by 2 points of damage, on average. Heck, the differance between a dagger and a greatsword is only 5 points of damage per swing. Think about how much damage a high level character can do per attack, and ask if 5 points is really that big of a deal.
X-Codes 05-29-06, 08:15 PM	Low damage doesn't mean anything. There are plenty of enchantments you can put on it to make it exceedingly lethal, or just smear some good old fashioned poison on it. If he's only using it for AoO's, why not put those powerful enchantments on his bow and the poison on his arrows? Judging a weapon on it's base damage output is a rookie mistake, because the bottom line is that there is very little differance between a dagger and a longsword when it comes to damage. After all, think of it this way. A 1d4 dagger and a 1d8 longsword are only seperated by 2 points of damage, on average. Heck, the differance between a dagger and a greatsword is only 5 points of damage per swing. Think about how much damage a high level character can do per attack, and ask if 5 points is really that big of a deal. Actually, theres a bit of difference. A dagger can't be used two-handed to increase Strength bonus to damage, nor does it benefit from the increased damage of Power Attack (The two primary ways high-level characters increase their damage in melee). In this way, it's far inferior to both the Longsword and the Greatsword. Only certain classes will use it for it's few benefits (it's easy to conceal, it's throwable, and can be used with Weapon Finesse). The spiked gauntlet is inferior even to the dagger because it doesn't have an increased threat range, it's not throwable, and it's still a light weapon.
Lord Ian Stark 05-29-06, 08:31 PM	Judging a weapon on it's base damage output is a rookie mistake, because the bottom line is that there is very little differance between a dagger and a longsword when it comes to damage. True to a point. This is a secondary weapon and also it seems like the only reason it's there is if by chance an archer somehow gets an AoO. On top of that you can't use a dagger two-handed to get 1.5x STR damage and spending money on an item that you will only use occasionally may not be feasible.
X-Codes 05-29-06, 09:52 PM	True to a point. This is a secondary weapon and also it seems like the only reason it's there is if by chance an archer somehow gets an AoO. On top of that you can't use a dagger two-handed to get 1.5x STR damage and spending money on an item that you will only use occasionally may not be feasible. A spiked gauntlet costs peanuts compared to a longbow, especially when you start looking for Mighty longbows.
William1976 05-29-06, 10:16 PM	In my game, any two-handed weapons require a move action to go from holding the weapon in two hands to holding it in one. Then they cannot use the weapon until they do another move action to go back to two handed. So of you use a bow (which is two-handed), and even if you are a monk or wear a gauntlet, you cannot make any attacks of opertunity. The rule aloo makes most two-handed weapons really hard for spell casters to use, but many two-handed weapons are the better weapons, so this balances them out. Also to note in my game the quick draw feat allows you to change as a free action one per round. Will
Lord Ian Stark 05-29-06, 11:55 PM	A spiked gauntlet costs peanuts compared to a longbow, especially when you start looking for Mighty longbows. I'm not talking the base cost for the weapon, I'm talking about paying for magical enhancements on a secondary weapon when you could/should be spending it on your primary IMO. Unless you play in a game where the DM throws gold at you. :D
celtredleg 05-29-06, 11:58 PM	A spiked gauntlet costs peanuts compared to a longbow, especially when you start looking for Mighty longbows. But without enchantments on it, it is still a very weak weapon. And once you start in on the weapon enchantments the difference in price soon becomes meaningless. I believe that is what LIS meant. I dont think it is a very effective tactic, and definately not game breakiong. If I had a Player come up with it I would allow it.
stabs 05-30-06, 12:00 AM	I'm not talking the base cost for the weapon, I'm talking about paying for magical enhancements on a secondary weapon when you could/should be spending it on your primary IMO. Unless you play in a game where the DM throws gold at you. :D Once we fought an enemy with [Gil Toss]
Inigo Carmine 05-30-06, 12:07 AM	I'd hardly consider damage as the reason he's doing this. The main benefit is the potential to do any damage on an AoO, thus protecting himself from certain tactics (like disarm, grapple etc) that are automatically negated by a successful AoO. I don't like that it works by the rules. I've tried unsuccessfully to fix it with a way that isn't overly complicated, and that only restricts this kind of threatening, but not more legitimate mid-round weapon switching. I could never come up with a satisfying solution though.
clarkvalentine 05-30-06, 12:17 AM	I like it, actually. So a bad guy comes up to him and tries to disarm him - *WHAM*, right in the nose. I think that's cinematic and fun, and personally I dont' see a huge problem with it. If you honestly don't want him to do it, you cuold just houserule that a spiked gauntlet interferes with archery, and you can't wear one while shooting a bow. But I'd highly recommend having a very good reason for this, and at least try to get buy-in from the player before jsut dropping it on him with the Authority Of The GM.
Lord Ian Stark 05-30-06, 12:51 AM	If you honestly don't want him to do it, you cuold just houserule that a spiked gauntlet interferes with archery, and you can't wear one while shooting a bow. Interesting way of finding a possibly credible reason to get around the character using this combo. As you said, the DM/GM would need a good reason why, but this could be a good starting point IMO.
Ziggaraut 05-30-06, 02:01 AM	Spikes seem like they would damage a bowstring or something.
Sphyre 05-30-06, 03:03 AM	While, RAW it works, I will explain why it shouldn't logically work. In all reality, combat doesn't go round by round. Number of attacks, and attacks of opportunity are an abstract way to simulate real combat. Over 6 seconds, you fire a certain number of arrows as fast and an accurately as you can. In the round based combat system, you would shoot, and someone would come upto you and pass you. In reality, you're spending those 6 seconds to attack with your bow, when someone comes by for you to "opportunely just move your threatening weapon" you interupt your aiming, attack him, and then continue firing at your target as if nothing happened? No, you wouldn't feasably be able to make AoOs with a spiked gauntlet, logically speaking. If you're a monk, or have improved unarmed strike, you're fine, because you can kick him, but your hands are busy while you're firing. You don't actually "fire 3 arrows in less than a second" and then "spend the next 6 seconds with your bow down, threatening people with your guantlet." Hence, this cheese would not be available in my game.
Senevri 05-30-06, 03:58 AM	Interesting... I guess... you could actually, "logically" dual-wield a bow and your feet, firing arrows, kicking someone who gets too close and firing another arrow afterwards. Also, technically, a bow is held in one hand only after each attack, by definition, since the other hand just released the string, thus launching an arrow. I can see a heavy, metallic spiked gauntlet interfering with archery, but otherwise I can't see any reason to stop a player from using this trick. Do note, he could simply quickdraw a dagger after he's finished his full attack. I think it's clever, not cheese. A fine line, I admit...
Arem_K 05-30-06, 04:40 AM	While, RAW it works, I will explain why it shouldn't logically work. In all reality, combat doesn't go round by round. Number of attacks, and attacks of opportunity are an abstract way to simulate real combat. Over 6 seconds, you fire a certain number of arrows as fast and an accurately as you can. In the round based combat system, you would shoot, and someone would come upto you and pass you. In reality, you're spending those 6 seconds to attack with your bow, when someone comes by for you to "opportunely just move your threatening weapon" you interupt your aiming, attack him, and then continue firing at your target as if nothing happened? No, you wouldn't feasably be able to make AoOs with a spiked gauntlet, logically speaking. If you're a monk, or have improved unarmed strike, you're fine, because you can kick him, but your hands are busy while you're firing. You don't actually "fire 3 arrows in less than a second" and then "spend the next 6 seconds with your bow down, threatening people with your guantlet." Hence, this cheese would not be available in my game. Yes, but logically the combat system never pans out anyway. You are saying that the archer's full attack was six seconds. What if a guy wanders over and grapples him after his intiative pass. Well then logically he could not have taken six seconds of shots, because his spent a significant portion of that round stuck in a grapple and his bow was unusable. The same thing happens if the archer was disarmed or killed. Furthermore, there is really no difference between the monk's unarmed strike and using a spiked gauntlet. The person using an unarmed stirke has to stop anyway. You can't really fire a bow at one opponent while kicking the guy next to you. In both scenarios. the archer will be pausing momentarily and attacking with a convenient weapon, either his free hand or foot.
X-Codes 05-30-06, 04:42 AM	I can see a heavy, metallic spiked gauntlet interfering with archery, but otherwise I can't see any reason to stop a player from using this trick. Not all gauntlets have fingers. Yes, enchanted weapons all cost basically the same, but putting +1 on your Spiked Gauntlet really isn't that much when your bow is +1 Frost or even +1 Frost Distance. Increasing your primary weapon becomes more and more expensive compared to increasing your secondary weapon. For virtually the same price as a +5 weapon you could get a +4 weapon and a +3 weapon. This means you can have a +1 Frost Exit Wounds Longbow and a +1 Deflecting Defending Spiked Gauntlet.
Malakai_Demonos 05-30-06, 04:59 AM	Oh no, you mean your player found a proper way to defend himself. Even if he had a +1 Deflecting Defending Spiked Gauntlet, it would still not be very powerful. That was money he could have spent on anything. Don't try to gimp your player because he has a good idea that you can't think around. I am not trying to be insultive; but, focus more on how to let him and the other players have a good time instead of how to restrict him. If another player goes, "OMG, he can get an attack of opportunity with a bow, that's not fair" then said player needs to get his priorities strait. Hell, with all of the new and great feats for melee combatants coming out, your archers need to think smartly. In a campaign I played a while back, I had a warmage who wielded a spiked gauntlet and a long spear. Did I do it to break the game, no; I did it to protect myself from melee enemies. Your player isn't trying to break the game, he is trying to actually play it and have fun. BTW: Never try to mix DnD and logic as far as the combat system goes, you will make your head explode.
Weaponbreaker 05-30-06, 05:02 AM	I had the same situation come and here how " I allowed this cheese into my game" A) give him a -2 to shoot and half str bonus damage(off hand weapon) and -2 att w/gauntlet B) gauntlet must be masterwork or better (aka specialy made for this purpose) C) make a squad of Ogre's who use thsi tactic after a recurring V saw the damned archer tearing up the field. You have to make your game as fluid as possible the old adage of neccessity and such. Plus it lets a creative move by the player get rewarded with out breaking the game, plus an eleite squad of evoling ogres let the players know that their tactics can and will get used back if they are overly successful.
Sphyre 05-30-06, 05:13 AM	Yes, but logically the combat system never pans out anyway. You are saying that the archer's full attack was six seconds. What if a guy wanders over and grapples him after his intiative pass. Well then logically he could not have taken six seconds of shots, because his spent a significant portion of that round stuck in a grapple and his bow was unusable. The same thing happens if the archer was disarmed or killed. I hardly find the logical fallacy "this one situation isn't logical thus it doesn't matter if it's all not logical," as a good defense of such. Furthermore, there is really no difference between the monk's unarmed strike and using a spiked gauntlet. The person using an unarmed stirke has to stop anyway. You can't really fire a bow at one opponent while kicking the guy next to you. In both scenarios. the archer will be pausing momentarily and attacking with a convenient weapon, either his free hand or foot. While I agree that it might take a moment of hesitation to kick someone running by while still using your bow, if you've trained yourself to do it, you can. Simply wearing a glove isn't going to make you threaten anyone. There is a difference between a non-arm unarmed strike and using a spiked gauntlet. An unarmed strike is using a different appendange that is doing nothing other for you at the moment than letting you stand on the ground, while wearing a spiked gauntlet is using your hand for multiple purposes at the same time. There is a difference, whether you want to rule it one way or another in your game is your choice.
Nyaz 05-30-06, 05:45 AM	The way I'd do this is that he'd have to drop the bow before making the AoO so his gauntlet hand is free. If he thinks this is worth spending a move action next round to pick it up, then let him do it. And this is not according to RAW, but it's not against RAW either. It's one of those grey areas. Logic would imply this kind of solution, and you're both happy. Hopefully.
Zendu 05-30-06, 07:45 AM	My simple ruling is that you can only wield one weapon, one way per round. So you cant un-power attack, or switch form 1hand to 2hand styles. Of course dropping your weapon could change your range (droping a polearm in place of a sword at the end of your round) But without droping it seems silly to have a PC capable of ranged attacks and melee AoO at the same time. Whats next, fighters who switch thier swords for polearms so they can get 2 AoO on people moving away from them? However if hes willing to drop his weapon so he can do 1d4 damage so be it, but My vampire is kicking that bow the first time he gets a hint of what his style is.
Senevri 05-30-06, 07:46 AM	Disagree. You can hold a bow with one hand. Also, reason dictates you're already holding it with one hand after each attack. ...On the other hand, I'm not all that sure I'd allow a spiked gauntlet in the hand holding the arrow, which would mean the need to switch hands /drop bow. However, quick draw + dagger FTW. Isn't there that interesting Gnome knife in Races of Stone, by the way? Also, you could dual-wield a bow with daggers/throwing daggers... says logic. However, rules may disagree - since a bow is a 2h weapon, right? Wait, no... in that case, you could as easily fire another arrow - easier, even. Hmm. Bows aren't two-handed - you just need two (free) hands to wield one. Thus, after you've finished wielding it, you can have anything in your hands, as long as you still _hold_ the bow. In any case, yes, an archer which puts in the effort, _can_ make attacks of opportunity, one way or other. But without droping it seems silly to have a PC capable of ranged attacks and melee AoO at the same time. Er, dagger thrower, anyone? Or Hand Crossbow + 1h-melee weapon? A crossbow with a bayonet? Whats next, fighters who switch thier swords for polearms so they can get 2 AoO on people moving away from them? Well, Spiked Chain... But, wouldn't work anyway since the same action from a single character cannot provoke two AOOs from a single character. Needs to be a separate, provoking action. Hmm. Now that I look at it, there's technically nothing which says that a hand wielding a gauntlet is free --- or that it isn't.
X-Codes 05-30-06, 07:53 AM	Ok, you can't use a Longbow and make AoO's with a Longsword. Thats rather obvious to the lot of us. The Spiked Gauntlet is a special case, as it's not wielded in the typical sense. It's a weapon thats worn on the body.
Leilond 05-30-06, 08:51 AM	Think about this An archer can shot his arrows and then "quick draw" his long sword with the right hand and the bow in his left hand. This is perfectly by the RAW and the character can make his AoO Why not with a gauntlet?
bobberry109 05-30-06, 05:19 PM	Think about this An archer can shot his arrows and then "quick draw" his long sword with the right hand and the bow in his left hand. This is perfectly by the RAW and the character can make his AoO Why not with a gauntlet? Because quick draw doesnt let you sheath a weapon as a free action, and so take a full action the next round to shoot another 3 arrows at the enemy (and yes you could drop it but you're gonna run out of spare longswords real quick). To the OP id rule you need 2 hands to use a bow therefore if you've used it both your hands are in use for that round.
Arganis 05-30-06, 05:46 PM	I think the closest comparison here is not to any other weapon, but rather to the Buckler. If you wear a buckler but weild a two-handed weapon (in this case a longbow), you do not gain the AC bonus from the Buckler until the start of your next turn. I would treat a spiked gauntlet in the same fashion.
NitrosDragon 05-30-06, 05:46 PM	I'm gonna have to be on the players side for this one. As long as he's wearing his Spiked Gauntlets at the time of the AoO i think he should be able to do it. Makes plenty of sense to me. Depending on what kind of bow he has, it's probably light enough to hold in one hand and just take a punch at someone. Now, if he was readying his weapon and had an arrow ready to be shot i wouldn't allow it, unless he feels like dropping an arrow and taking a free action to pick it up next turn. Just my thoughts, enjoi. Carpe DM, NitrosDragon
Cifer 05-30-06, 06:51 PM	IMO, he should be allowed to do it. The idea that you need the whole round in order to make your full-round action is pretty old by now. Still, please tell me why a Swashbuckler can, on the one hand, make four attacks with his rapier in one round (full attack), but can go up to eight easily (4 AoOs by combat reflexes and 16 dex). If my image of the word "greataxe" is not completely off, I find it rather strange that a barbarian can accomplish exactly the same feat, not a single attack more or less. Got to be a pretty light greataxe he wields there. Don't even get me started about 4 or more arrows in six seconds... IMO, the gauntlet technique is perfectly valid - with the mentioned several shots in four seconds, you don't hold your aim anyway (not that any archer would do that with a strong bow), so fitting a punch in there is not more difficult for an archer than for a warrior who spends a full attack action in order to hack enemies. An archer's spiked gauntlet would probably only cover the backhand so the claws wouldn't really interfere with shooting. The only thing you shouldn't permit is letting the gauntlet be a defending one since that easily leads to spiked monstrosities using all their spikes to boost their AC. In my game, any two-handed weapons require a move action to go from holding the weapon in two hands to holding it in one. Then they cannot use the weapon until they do another move action to go back to two handed. I wonder why it is that hard to let go of a weapon...
Crash01234567890 05-30-06, 09:20 PM	Ok, first off, the bow has to be light enough to hold in one hand. I mean that is how you fire them, one hand holds the bow, one hand plucks the string. Now then, since we have that figued out lets look at RAW. The core rules are pretty silent on whether it would or would not work. I havn't found anything definate one way or the other. So, since no ruling in the main books where do we go. The FAQ. Now, I know it doesn't deal specifically with spiked guantlets, but the FAQ does have a bit to say on armor spikes. And they can be used as an off-hand weapon while wielding a two handed weapon. Meaning someone can wield them at the same time as a two handed weapon. Now, nothing says you have to have attacked with a weapon already to make a AoO with it. With this in mind the archer could strap on some spiked mithral chainshirt armor and make AoO's with it completely valid. Does that make more sense. Hell no. I believe there is an rule in one of the books that it is a swift action to change grip on a weapon, and I remember in one of the books it talks about Krusk switching the grip on his greataxe to a one handed grip, and throwing a javeling at an enemy. Now bows are normally held in one hand, but at most I feel you could punish him by making him use a swift action to "one-handed grip it" if you think it's overpowered for him to make attacks of opportunity. However, I want you to think about these scenarios. Fighter A: Fighter A dual wields bastard swords. He gets an opportuinty to charge his opponent in the first round and does so swinging his Flaming bastard sword in his main hand at the foe. He successfully hits the foe, but when he does so the wound from the sorcerer's magic missile closes up and it smiles at him letting loose a howl of laughter. Now the foe tries to trip fighter A and fighter A has the opportunity to take a AoO. Does fighter A have to use his flaming bastard sword, or can he use his off-hand bastard sword to make the AoO? Fighter B: Fighter B is the true Definition of cheese. He charges into battle dual wielding his oversized Kasari-Gamas. he spends his first two actions double moving to the fight. Before his third action a demon runs straight through his threatened area. Does Fighter B gain an AoO? With Which weapon? Archer 1: Archer 1 made the mistake of playing an archer. Fighter A and B get pampered with a plethora of new feats in every supplement and do vastly more damage that Archer 1 can possibly dream of. They also don't have to worry about getting cornered and being easy to disarm or hurt in melee. Archer 1 has decided to buy a spiked guantlet since realistically it makes since for him to punch people with his nocking hand, and it shouldn't be too hard to buy one with no fingers to interfere with the bowstring and arrow nocking. He could have gone with spiked armor, but he doesn't like the thought of being able to shoulder thrust 5 ft. in a split second, it doesn't seem to make as much since and punching someone that run up and swing at his bow. Now a pesky goblin tries to disarm Archer 1, does Archer 1 get a AoO? Now, you can interpret RAW in different ways, and I'm not the person to tell you you're right or wrong (unless you're charging move actions to switch grips which is just ludicrous) but if you answered any of those three situations differently then you're being completely inconsistent and that is the mark of a bad DM.
Molitor 05-30-06, 10:01 PM	Well, how many of you would change your minds if the archer had 'improved unarmed strike', and was only punching or kicking on the AoO? As for my DMing, I would let it fly. BTW this need not be discussed at all considering that the archer could use his bow or even an arrow as an improvised weapon and that is totally legal.
BranWheat 05-30-06, 10:13 PM	In my game, any two-handed weapons require a move action to go from holding the weapon in two hands to holding it in one. Then they cannot use the weapon until they do another move action to go back to two handed. So of you use a bow (which is two-handed), and even if you are a monk or wear a gauntlet, you cannot make any attacks of opertunity. The rule aloo makes most two-handed weapons really hard for spell casters to use, but many two-handed weapons are the better weapons, so this balances them out. Also to note in my game the quick draw feat allows you to change as a free action one per round. Will Really? What about dropping a weapon then? I'm just not sure I can agree on a situation like that. Dropping a single hand from your weapon is equivalent to moving 20-40ft?
Arganis 05-31-06, 01:01 AM	Hello! Buckler! Man I hate it when your post is the last on a previous page.
Dragon Snack 05-31-06, 02:58 AM	You have GOT to be kidding me... I played an archer who wore a spiked gauntlet so he could threaten. It didn't break the game at all. It did keep my bow from getting sundered though. Gee, is THAT why this is "game breaking"? Because you won't be able to destroy his schtick? :nonono:
Senevri 05-31-06, 03:11 AM	Grip switching is a swift action, right? However, once more... By default you're holding a bow in one hand after an attack. Using the bow requires two hands. If you're not using it, you need just one hand to hold it. A longbow is, well, long, though. (too... lazy... to... link... wikipedia...)
Leilond 05-31-06, 07:06 AM	I use the bow firing 3 arrows Then I "quick draw" my sword in my right hands, with the bow in the left. I'm able to AoO Next turn I leave the sword to the ground "free action" and use again my bow for 3 arrows Then I "quick draw" my dagger. I'm able to AoO And so on util i've got weapon to "quick draw", by the RAW A spiked gautlet is ALWAYS ON and I really cannot uderstand why i can make AoO with a "quick drawed" weapon but not with a spicked gauntlet... it should be EASYER!!!!
Lincoln Hills 05-31-06, 12:44 PM	Well, how many of you would change your minds if the archer had 'improved unarmed strike', and was only punching or kicking on the AoO?... This is the nub of it, folks. If the game's designers had thought that 'attacks of opportunity' should be entirely unavailable to missile-firing characters, the rules would include a passage that "a character firing a missile weapon has no reach and cannot make any attacks of opportunity." I congratulate the original poster's player on being cunning enough to find a way to reduce one of his vulnerabilities. A touch, a veritable touch!
Senevri 05-31-06, 03:32 PM	Indeed: In conclusion - it's not game-breaking and it helps the poor archer a bit - allow it. That seems to be the general consensus. ...Personally, I'd still prefer if it were at least a masterwork, custom gauntlet, or something...
Molitor 05-31-06, 04:57 PM	This is the nub of it, folks. If the game's designers had thought that 'attacks of opportunity' should be entirely unavailable to missile-firing characters, the rules would include a passage that "a character firing a missile weapon has no reach and cannot make any attacks of opportunity." I like what you added. This is it, in my opinion.
Otto the Bugbear 05-31-06, 05:51 PM	In fact, the rules do cover it. A character wearing a spiked gauntlet is wielding a weapon that threatens the squares around him. Since he threatens the squares around him, he can make AoO. Done and done. Anything else is just a house-rule designed to ignore the rules for threatening and AoO. Oh, and the whole, "spiked gauntlet would interfere with plucking a bow string" means that characters in full plate would be forbidden from using bows, right? Gauntlets come with plate armor. Cheers Otto :)