Weapon Specialization - Bonus Feat vs As Per the Feat


Rules Questions


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

I noticed that every class entry of Weapon Specialization says you gain Weapon Specialization as a BONUS FEAT. However, on pg. 59 in the Weapon Proficiency and Specialization entry, it says you gain it AS PER THE FEAT.

Which is the intended method? I imagine "per the feat" is, but yeah.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think "as per the feat" on p. 59 is just a reminder that Weapon Specialization is a feat. The class entries make it clear that it's intended to be a bonus feat. I don't see that as contradicting the "as per the feat" line.


Tim Emrick wrote:
I think "as per the feat" on p. 59 is just a reminder that Weapon Specialization is a feat. The class entries make it clear that it's intended to be a bonus feat. I don't see that as contradicting the "as per the feat" line.

Whenever Paizo uses "as per" in their language, it's saying it functions as the referenced feature, but you don't actually gain it. This means that "as per the feat" says it functions the same as the feat, but you don't technically acquired the feat.

At least, that's how I've always read and understood it. I know Paizo can be inconsistent with the use of their language, at times.


Efby wrote:


Whenever Paizo uses "as per" in their language, it's saying it functions as the referenced feature, but you don't actually gain it. This means that "as per the feat" says it functions the same as the feat, but you don't technically acquired the feat.

I love paizos worlds and the bucket of leggos we get to play with to make our roaving beings of galactic death, but consistency is not the halmark of paizos rulesets.

The only difference between the two that I'm aware of would be qualifying for adaptive fighting. For that my logic goes like this

Adaptive fighting has a very specific prerequisite.

If you count weapon proficiencies and specializations everyone qualifies.

If everyone was supposed to qualify for it they wouldn't have the pre requisites.

So those built in class features aren't meant to count.


I think a better answer is "Paizo isn't trying to write a legal text, everyone needs to accept that the wording is not going to be 100% consistent and precise".

The Exchange

Metaphysician wrote:
I think a better answer is "Paizo isn't trying to write a legal text, everyone needs to accept that the wording is not going to be 100% consistent and precise".

Or my preferred answer:

Hey Starfinder Design Team:

On page 59 of the CRB under Weapon Proficiency and Specialization, it says

Quote:
This entry lists the weapon types with which you are proficient. See Weapon Proficiency in Chapter 8: Tactical Rules for more information on how proficiency affects you. When you reach 3rd level in that class, you also gain Weapon Specialization (as per the feat) in those weapons, . . .

There has been some confusion about whether or not that means you actually get the appropriate Weapon Proficiency and Weapon Specialization feats or some nebulous ability that is equivalent to the feat but doesn't count as having the feat. Especially since the class descriptions all say you gain the Weapon Specialization feat. It matters because you need the actual feats as prerequisites for some other feats.

Can we please get a FAQ, and an errata in the next printing? My suggestions are:

Quote:
This entry lists the weapon types with which you are proficient. You gain the appropriate Weapon Proficiency feat for each category of weapon listed. See Weapon Proficiency in Chapter 8: Tactical Rules for more information on how proficiency affects you. When you reach 3rd level in that class, you also gain the Weapon Specialization feat for each of those weapons, . . .

-or-

Quote:
This entry lists the weapon types with which you are proficient. See Weapon Proficiency in Chapter 8: Tactical Rules for more information on how proficiency affects you. When you reach 3rd level in that class, you also gain Weapon Specialization (as per the feat) in those weapons, which allows you to add your class level to your damage rolls with those weapons (see Weapon Specialization on page 163 for more information). Proficiency and Specialization granted by a class do not count as having the feat for purposes of meeting prerequisites.

depending on what the intention is.

Personally:
I think the second interpretation would lead to a lot more hiccups in the system as a whole. The first interpretation is much cleaner even if it does mean that every class qualifies for Adaptive Fighting at 1st level and Versatile Specialization at 3rd.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The weapon proficiency feats don't require you to have a weapon proficiency feat. They require proficiency with the weapon, regardless of hope you acquired it.

Advanced Melee Weapon Proficiency's prerequisite is "Proficiency with basic melee weapons." Not "Basic Melee Weapon Proficiency." Same goes for the Focus and Specialization feats. All of these feats are one method of acquiring proficiency/specialization with a weapon type, but not the only.

On a side note, if an ability grants you an additional proficiency via a bonus feat (such as Battleflower Training), unless it states you also gain specialization at a given level, you don't. However, if an ability grants you proficiency without it being a feat (such as Operative's Arsenal), you gain specialization as long as that ability in question is tied to the class and not an archetype or something similar.

Anyway, i agree I'd like an FAQ and/or errata on this.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Efby wrote:


Whenever Paizo uses "as per" in their language, it's saying it functions as the referenced feature, but you don't actually gain it. This means that "as per the feat" says it functions the same as the feat, but you don't technically acquired the feat.

I love paizos worlds and the bucket of leggos we get to play with to make our roaving beings of galactic death, but consistency is not the halmark of paizos rulesets.

The only difference between the two that I'm aware of would be qualifying for adaptive fighting. For that my logic goes like this

Adaptive fighting has a very specific prerequisite.

If you count weapon proficiencies and specializations everyone qualifies.

If everyone was supposed to qualify for it they wouldn't have the pre requisites.

So those built in class features aren't meant to count.

I agree with you. That is all i have to say.


Metaphysician wrote:
I think a better answer is "Paizo isn't trying to write a legal text, everyone needs to accept that the wording is not going to be 100% consistent and precise".

You're right. But they're also putting out a professional product. A literal rulebook and supplementary products to build upon those rules. But those rules mean nothing if there's no clear answer. Not everything needs to be detailed, but the things that are should be consistent. I respect that the truth of these books is that they act more as guide books than rule books, but inconsistencies like these that cause contradictions when interacting with other elements of the game don't help. It's fine that they're prone to mistakes. I would just appreciate some clarity, not perfection. That's all.


I've always seen the proficiency section as a 'Class ability' rather then 'Bonus feats'.


Proficiency is a benefit of the feat or the class. Weapon specialization is a benefit of the feat. Class proficiency does not mean the character has the proficiency feats, but the Weapon Specialization feature specifically calls out that you get the separate Weapon Specialization feats as bonus feats which gives you the benefit of specialization as mentioned in the feat.

At least that is the way I read it as the feats tell you that you gain the benefit of proficiency or specialization as if it weren't the feat itself.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It would seem to me that Weapon Specialization at least counts as the feat for pre-reqs, otherwise what would be the point of the feat Versatile Specialization?


E-div_drone wrote:
It would seem to me that Weapon Specialization at least counts as the feat for pre-reqs, otherwise what would be the point of the feat Versatile Specialization?

I would say that the class ability that grants specialization counts as the pre-req. I would say the feat weapon spec exists purely for future proofing, or is simply a holdover from earlier writing.


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

There is no reason for a single-classed character to specifically select the Weapon Specialization feat. That feat would be temporarily useful to any character who has already multiclassed by 3rd character level.


David knott 242 wrote:


There is no reason for a single-classed character to specifically select the Weapon Specialization feat. That feat would be temporarily useful to any character who has already multiclassed by 3rd character level.

This isn't entirely true... Longarm proficiency on an envoy, weapon specialization longarms is totally valid. No, I wouldn't ever, but it's there...

To the main post point, I think the issue is each class text explicitly says at level 3 you gain a stack of bonus feats. Fixing the text regarding it's "as per the feat" mention later in the CRB doesn't resolve the issue that every class has innate to it (assuming this is an issue).

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Rules Questions / Weapon Specialization - Bonus Feat vs As Per the Feat All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions