Scorpion Whip and Gladius Proficiency???

[FancyBlueBox]

So the Bard has proficiency with the short sword and whip. Most people know that. However, the GM who owns the stuff says "We have to take the Exotic Weapon Proficiency to use the whip without the penalty" (Same goes for the Gladius, but with Martial Weapon) I know I shouldn't agrue with the GM, but doesnt the Scorpion Whip count as a whip for proficiency? (Also Gladius for Short Sword)

-FBB

[The Sideromancer]

In this case, your GM is correct, at least for the whip. A scorpion whip requires separate proficiency, even to use as a normal whip. The gladius entry states that "feats and abilities that affect short swords apply to the gladius." Whether a class-based proficiency applies is ambiguous as to wheteher it is an ability, and thus qualifies. However, taking Martial Weapon Proficiency (short sword) would also apply to a gladius, since it's a feat. You may be able to use this information in a symmetry-based argument on the ambiguous class proficiency.

[Tim Emrick]

The confusion about scorpion whip seems to comes from the fact that the original text (in Adventurer's Armory, Ultimate Combat, and Ultimate Equipment) read, "If you are proficient with whips, you can use a scorpion whip as a whip." That sentence has since been errata'd to be replaced with, "If you are proficient with both the scorpion whip and whip, you can use a scorpion whip in either the normal way (as a light performance weapon) or as a whip. When you use a scorpion whip as a whip, it is equivalent to a whip, but deals lethal damage and can harm creatures regardless of their armor bonus." (The Sideromancer's link uses this updated text for the item.)

That errata is new to me, too, since I've only recently acquired those two Ultimate books. The bard PC in my new home campaign bought and uses a scorpion whip, so I intend to use the original text rather than take that away from him, but your GM would be justified in enforcing the current errata in their game.