Precog - Future Training and Weapon Specialization

[The.Vortex]

The Precog has a Temporal Anomalie called Future Training, which grants proficiency in weapon categories like Advanced Melee, Heavy, etc.
Unfortunately it doesn't say anything about Weapon Specialization. And, unlike for example the Nanocyte, who's Weapon Spec entry states

Quote:

You gain the Weapon Specialization feat as a bonus feat for each weapon type this class grants you proficiency with, including any weapons for which you gained proficiency through a nanocyte knack.

the Precog's just reads

Quote:

You gain the Weapon Specialization feat as a bonus feat for each weapon type with which this class grants you proficiency.

Is there a general rule somewhere that lets class abilities count for the class granting the proficiency or is the Precog out of luck here and doesn't gain the Weapon Specialization for those weapons?

[Garretmander]

No, hence the nanocyte's additional text. That might be a mistake, but I don't know that for a fact. Until then, versatile specialization at level 3 has you covered.

[Xenocrat]

This is a big open question in the rules that applies to a lot of things where some class ability later grants you weapon proficiency. Does "the class" grant you proficiency, given that you got that proficiency through a class granted ability?

I tend to think the answer should be yes (except in rare cases like the Technomancer proficiency granting hacks that explicitly says you don't get specialization at the same time), so that's what I go with. Paizo has declined to clarify this.

[The.Vortex]

One indication to me that RAI it should grant specialization is that the Time Worn Warrior (Galatic Magic pg. 16) doesn't list Versatile Specialization as a feat, but has Future Training listed as the first (and obvious) anomaly.

The RAW part is what is unclear to me, and I had hoped there would be a clarification for a similar case somewhere, but it seems there isn't :(

[Metaphysician]

Ambiguities like this are why I increasingly lean in the direction of just getting rid of "specialization" as a concept entirely, and just making the damage bonuses flat, automatic, and universal. You don't add your level to damage because of a feat, you add your level to damage because that's how damage works, for everyone. I'd even add magic to this, you can add your level to damage rolls from spells, too.

Maybe to avoid some balance issues, something like this:

Small Arms, Operative Weapons, and Area Attacks? Add half your level.

Something that specifically tells you to add 1.5x your level? Add 1.5x your level.

Otherwise? Add your level.

[Garretmander]

Metaphysician wrote:

Ambiguities like this are why I increasingly lean in the direction of just getting rid of "specialization" as a concept entirely, and just making the damage bonuses flat, automatic, and universal. You don't add your level to damage because of a feat, you add your level to damage because that's how damage works, for everyone. I'd even add magic to this, you can add your level to damage rolls from spells, too.

Maybe to avoid some balance issues, something like this:

Small Arms, Operative Weapons, and Area Attacks? Add half your level.

Something that specifically tells you to add 1.5x your level? Add 1.5x your level.

Otherwise? Add your level.

I think the only way it works the way it does is to try and prevent melee characters being so dominant at early levels... But they still are, so yeah, why bother waiting until level 3?

[Xenocrat]

It’s also to limit dipping soldier. A single feat tax isn’t much, but it’s there.