Talk:Gauntlet of Attack (3.5e Equipment)

Categorization

I'm not certain how to categorize this (or any) magic gauntlet. I've created a new feat Forge Gauntlet for the purpose of creating a new sort of magic item, and it doesn't really play well with the existing categorizations. For the time being, I've put it in the category I want it (Gauntlet even though that category doesn't exist as well as in Rod and Weapon (since those are the alternate item creation feats for games that really want Gauntlets but don't really want Forge Gauntlet). Not sure what to do about this! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roszlishan (talk • contribs) 09:33, 9 December 2007 (MDT). Please sign your posts.

First off, will this not work as a Wondrous Item? If not, should a new category be added to accommodate this and, potentially, other item creations like this? --Green Dragon 18:39, 9 December 2007 (MST)

I've been continuing to think about this. If I absolutely had to choose one existing category, I'd probably go with Rod rather than Wondrous Item as far as 'fit' goes for this sort of item. It's not really either, being pretty much entirely its own thing. I've got more alternate item creation feats to enter (Craft Fetish Token, Craft Spelldust) but those don't pose this issue in the sense that they are spell-completion or spell-trigger variants so there aren't ‘items’ to enter (and categorize). Adding a category ‘Magic Gauntlet’ would fix this particular issue, but presumably there are other equally generalized item creation feats. Additionally, I'd like to keep them under Ring/Rod/Weapon as well, because those are the alternate creation feats. Probably the best thing to do is solve the immediate problem by creating a 'gauntlet' or 'magic gauntlet' category, and see if any other similarly complex alternate item creation feats show up. Roszlishan 23:26, 9 December 2007 (MST)

Your section has been added. Is that what you had in mind? Also, could you add all your gauntlets to the correct category? --Green Dragon 22:34, 15 December 2007 (MST)

gollark: I disagree.

gollark: You could be caused to be caused to have been bees if I did that.

gollark: That would be COMPLETELY ridiculous.

gollark: One of the communications neutrino inputs was being scattered too heavily. I think I fixed *that*, at least.

gollark: We'd have to divert one of the polarized muon beams.

This article is issued from Dandwiki. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.