Weapon Specialization and Class Features with Proficiency

[Kamyr]

Do class features that add a weapon proficiency give weapon specialization if they don't explicitly say so? Or phrased another way, does the proficiency have to come from the ones a class gives at level 1 for the typical 3rd level weapon specialization to apply?

My RAW reading is they don't give specialization, with a couple relevant examples included, but I'd love to have an official answer.

Quote:

Your exocortex provides you with enhanced combat ability, granting you proficiency with heavy armor and longarms. At 3rd level, you gain weapon specialization in longarms just as if your class granted proficiency.

Quote:

You gain proficiency with two special weapons, you can select special weapons when learning new major forms, and you learn one special weapon as a bonus major form. At 3rd level, you gain weapon specialization in the two selected weapons just as if your class granted proficiency.

[Xenocrat]

I think all class features that give weapon proficiency weapon specialization unless they explicitly say they don't. (E.g. a couple of Technomancer hacks give temporary proficiency but say they don't give specialization.)

I don't give too much credence to your examples vs other abilities that didn't include such language because I think space limitations and copyfit drive a lot of what is included for things like this, beyond the possibility of simple oversight or mistakes by Paizo staff writing it in the first place.

[Tim Emrick]

At 3rd level, every class gains this feature: "Weapon Specialization (Ex): You gain the Weapon Specialization feat as a bonus feat with which this class grants you proficiency."

A few class options add additional proficiencies, and Weapon Specialization would apply to them at 3rd level. That is explicitly stated in the exocortex example you quote, but it should also apply to similar class features that permanently grant proficiency.

If you gain a new weapon proficiency through a feat instead, then you don't automatically gain Weapon Specialization for it. That's what Versatile Specialization is for.

[Metaphysician]

Basically, you shouldn't try to read some implied meaning into the text based on how things are phrased, and especially based on how other unrelated rules are phrased. Starfinder is not, and never was intended to be, a legal text.

[Kamyr]

The copyfit/space limit argument supports my RAW reading. Why waste the space if the class feature works as the class?

It isn't a legal text, but it is a rule set with definitions. 'Class' and 'class feature' are not used interchangeably. Any class feature that grants proficiency is definitely related. 'Class features that grant proficiency grant specialization' is only achievable by implication.

Here's the class features that can grant proficiency, excluding grenades since they're not relevant to specialization. Should be all or at least most of them. I'm not adding links sry D:

E: formatting failed, haphazard fix added

* - Those that grant spec explicitly: esoteric edge, heavy weapon edge, explorer's lash, shuriken assassin, Crusader 1st power, exocortex combat tracking, quick study

* - Those with no specialization language: technomantic proficiency, operative's arsenal, experimental weapon prototype, future training, exocortex mod for weapon proficiency, soldier combat feat for prof, operative combat trick for prof, solar connection (and technically mystic flare)

* - Unique: Fabricate arms (explicitly no spec), biohacker weapon spec, resonating biohack, heavyweight skirmisher (alters base class profs so definitely gives spec)[/list]

Biohacker spec is particularly relevant here.

Quote:

You gain the Weapon Specialization feat as a bonus feat for each weapon type this class grants you proficiency with. For weapons you have gained proficiency with only through the injection expert class feature, rather than the normal Weapon Specialization benefit, you instead add half your character level to damage you deal with those weapons.

The clear class/class feature distinction is present in the standard first sentence shared with all 3rd level class weapon specs, but the second sentence makes things slightly ambiguous. Mentioning the 'normal' benefit could be implying that the normal benefit would be spec, but it could also be overly explained. This and fabricate arms are the only counterexamples, and they're not explicit.