Book specific versions of weapons.

[blackbloodtroll]

What are the rules for book specific versions of weapons?

I am looking to use a Chakram, but some books have slightly different descriptions.

I would like to use the version from Adventurer's Armory, which has this description:

Adventurer's Armory wrote:

Chakram:

The chakram is a simple, elegant, and highly
portable thrown weapon. It is a flat, open-centered
metal discus with a sharpened edge. You can wield the
chakram as a melee weapon, but it is not designed for
such use; you take a –1 penalty on your attack roll with
the weapon and must make a DC 15 Reflex save or
cut yourself on the blade (half damage, no Strength
modifier). You do not need to make this save if
wearing heavy armor or a gauntlet.

Now, the portion mentioning a Gauntlet, is not listed in some other sources.

Can I use this version?

[Kalindlara]

In home games, ask your GM.

In PFS, I believe it's most recent source (other than specifically called-out weapons like scorpion whips). Once my browser finishes loading, I'll fish around for references. ^_^

[Jeff Merola]

What source is it in other than that, the APG and UE? Because the APG and UE have the exact same text:

APG and UE wrote:

Chakram: The chakram is a simple, elegant, and highly portable thrown weapon. It is a flat, open-centered metal discus with a sharpened edge. You can wield the chakram as a melee weapon, but it is not designed for such use; you take a –1 penalty on your attack roll with the weapon and must make a DC 15 Reflex save or cut yourself on the blade (half damage, no Strength modifier). You do not need to make this save if wearing heavy armor.

[Kalindlara]

After vigorously searching the PFS Guide and giving the site a search, I've concluded that this issue is not addressed.

I'm sure that, if you have Adventurer's Armory and use it as your source, any reasonable GM will let you use it as such. Any disagreement you have with a GM is beyond the reach of my advice. If this is insufficient, please hit FAQ. ^_^

[Kalindlara]

Jeff Merola wrote:

What source is it in other than that, the APG and UE? Because the APG and UE have the exact same text:

APG and UE wrote:

Chakram: The chakram is a simple, elegant, and highly portable thrown weapon. It is a flat, open-centered metal discus with a sharpened edge. You can wield the chakram as a melee weapon, but it is not designed for such use; you take a –1 penalty on your attack roll with the weapon and must make a DC 15 Reflex save or cut yourself on the blade (half damage, no Strength modifier). You do not need to make this save if wearing heavy armor.

The AA version adds "or a gauntlet" to the final line; the APG and UE do not. Check the original post to see.

As a result, this means that the AA version would allow the weapon to be wielded without heavy armor, as long as the character was wearing a gauntlet. ^_^

[Jeff Merola]

Ah, yes, I missed that. Please ignore me.

[blackbloodtroll]

I do have Adventurer's Armory.

I also have all other books containing other versions of the Chakram.

Outside of Modules/Scenarios/Adventure Paths, I pretty much have every Paizo Pathfinder book.

[Kalindlara]

Well then, there you go. ^_^

[blackbloodtroll]

I am not going to be forced to use other versions?

[Kalindlara]

I couldn't tell you. I see no official reason why they would force you to, but I couldn't find anything set in stone preventing them from doing so, if they have the crushing need to do so.

I think it's pretty reasonable in any case, I believe they will too, and as Jeff helpfully showed*, even if they check the other source, they might not see the difference.

*<3

[Ascalaphus]

People occasionally bring up the "most recent source" argument, but I've never actually seen that written down as a rule. I half suspect people know it as a rule from other games and assume that it applies here as well.

But it's somewhat strange to apply it here: why would additional resources list something as legal if you have book X, if you have to use the rules for it in book Y?

[Andrew Christian]

I suspect later versions dropped the "or gauntlet" because heavy armor comes with a gauntlet and they didn't want you to be able to do this with a spiked gauntlet.

[GM Lamplighter]

Perhaps related question: if you don't have medium or heavy armor proficiency, are you proficient with gauntlets as armor? Seems to me that having your hands wearing heavier armor than you know how to use would be an issue.

[Kalindlara]

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Perhaps related question: if you don't have medium or heavy armor proficiency, are you proficient with gauntlets as armor? Seems to me that having your hands wearing heavier armor than you know how to use would be an issue.

While I'm with you on the logic side, this is well outside what the rules cover. Except maybe in the Piecemeal Armor system, I suppose. ^_^

[Imbicatus]

There is no gauntlets armor proficiency. They are simple weapons, and if you have proficiency in all simple weapons, you should be covered.

[Andrew Christian]

Gauntlet shows up on the weapon chart in the CRB as a cost of 2gp under simple weapons. Which means anyone with simple weapon proficiency can use a gauntlet normally.

[Nefreet]

This same issue comes up regarding Mithral shields.

The CRB lists them as +1000gp, while UE lists them as +1500gp.

The last time a GM told me I'd paid too little for my Mithral Buckler, I just told him I didn't own Ultimate Equipment, and that I could only operate using the source I had.

For the Chakram I'd suggest printing out its page from AA, and if someone gives you grief, just show them the printout and say "this is the source I have". Whether you actually own the others or not.

It shouldn't be a point of contention. Their claim is no more valid than yours. If someone has a problem with meleeing a Chakram, they're probably not worth stressing over.

[GM Lamplighter]

Can everyone with martial weapon proficiency use shields without requiring the shield proficiency, because they show up on the weapon chart as well?

[UndeadMitch]

I would say so, but they couldn't get a shield bonus to AC with it without having Shield Proficiency.

[Streamwalker]

GM Lamplighter wrote:

Can everyone with martial weapon proficiency use shields without requiring the shield proficiency, because they show up on the weapon chart as well?

As a weapon, I'd say yes, but one would still take Armor Check Penalty to Attack Rolls. Although, most classes that have proficiency with martial weapons also have proficiency with shields, so that is a rare problem.

UndeadMitch wrote:

I would say so, but they couldn't get a shield bonus to AC with it without having Shield Proficiency.

Eh, no. Shield Proficiency doesn't work like that.

[Sniggevert]

FAQ on using shields as weapons

Long story short, shield proficiency and martial weapon proficiency are completely separate.