Proficiency and Special Ability

[amphoterik]

Hello everyone, I was wondering if you need a weapon proficiency to gain the special abilities of a weapon. Specifically, I am looking at the Scorpion Claws from Sandstorm. They are an exotic weapon that grants +4 to grapple. Unlike the spiked chain which says something to the effect of "tripping WITH THIS WEAPON", the scorpion claws make no such claim.

Could I have them but not use them as weapons and still gain the grapple ability?

 

[Empirate]

Probably not? How can you even ask such a thing, knowing full well how directly against RAI such an interpretation of RAW would go? A weapon that "grants" a bonus to stuff will likely only do so when you actually wield the weapon to DO said stuff. Like the Spiked Chain grants a bonus to disarm checks only when it is used to disarm, not when you have it safely stowed in your backpack.

 

[amphoterik]

Well, I don't actually believe not wearing the equipment grants me the bonus. I would be wearing the weapon on my arms like intended, but since I am a monk, I would not be using it for my normal attacks. I assume my char would use them for the grappling portion, not the attack portion.

Also, RAI and RAW is a completely different story. Besides, someone told me it did work, and I was looking for official clarification.

So basically, I am wielding the weapon, just not using it for attacks?

 

[Meatboy]

I say no. If you don't know how to properly use something you can't use it properly. Hence no bonuses.

 

[Sekhmet]

I'd probably agree with Meatboy if I were in this situation.
If you don't know how to use it (proficiency), you would be ineffective at using it for it's intended purpose.

 

[the Jester]

Really? REALLY really? You want to know if you can gain a weapon's bonus for not using that weapon?

Ask your dm, but unless she is extremely soft, you're going to get a "NO"- possibly accompanied by a "What, are you stupid?" look. Or, if your dm is a hard-ass, no-nonsense type, a slap upside the head with the dm's favorite book.

 

[amphoterik]

Really? REALLY really? You want to know if you can gain a weapon's bonus for not using that weapon?

Ask your dm, but unless she is extremely soft, you're going to get a "NO"- possibly accompanied by a "What, are you stupid?" look. Or, if your dm is a hard-ass, no-nonsense type, a slap upside the head with the dm's favorite book.

Yep, that response is certainly called for. Thank you.

Look, I'm not an idiot. I realize that this probably doesn't work (though it actually does RAW, but I'm not arguing that). My thought process was less on the "teeheehee, I'm so smert, I'm gonna break this game" and more on the "yes, I am not ATTACKING with the weapon, but grappling is not attacking, it is holding. So while I may not be able to ATTACK with the weapon, I may be able to HOLD with it just fine." Just like I may not be a proficient sharp shooter with a pistol, but if I stuck it into your belly, the gun really does all of the work regardless of my ineptitude.

 

[the Jester]

Yep, that response is certainly called for. Thank you.

No offense intended, truly- re-reading my post it comes across as snarkier than intended.

Look, I'm not an idiot. I realize that this probably doesn't work (though it actually does RAW, but I'm not arguing that). My thought process was less on the "teeheehee, I'm so smert, I'm gonna break this game" and more on the "yes, I am not ATTACKING with the weapon, but grappling is not attacking, it is holding....

Grappling most certainly is an attack. It's in the combat chapter, you can use your iterative attacks, it relies on BAB- I don't see any way you can call it "not an attack" if you're using the world "attack" as game terminology.

 

[amphoterik]

Well, I suppose it says that I can replace an attack action with another action that has a grapple check, not make an attack with my grapple check. For instance, making a grapple check to draw an item is hardly me attacking my opponent. Therefore I could argue that while I am using up an attack action, I am not actually making an attack.

 

[Sekhmet]

It is important to note that the wording of Proficiency is "you understand how to use that weapon in combat," not "you understand how to attack with that weapon."
Although you could potentially argue that grappling is not attacking, you cannot argue that grappling is not a form of combat.