Clarification on becoming an outsider

[Alleran]

I was browsing the outsider typing on d20SRD, and noticed this clause:

"Proficient with whatever type of armor (light, medium, or heavy) it is described as wearing, as well as all lighter types. Outsiders not indicated as wearing armor are not proficient with armor. Outsiders are proficient with shields if they are proficient with any form of armor."

Technically speaking, if you're described as wearing armour (I'll assume that means in your statblock, rather than just in your general description), then you're proficient with it. To clarify this further, it appears that if you are an outsider (even just a native one) all you would have to do to gain the proficiency is put the armour on (even if you aren't proficient with it). You are now wearing it in your statblock. As a result, you're now proficient. And then as soon as you take it off, you're not proficient in it anymore (since you're not wearing it). Until you put it back on, and are wearing it again (you're proficient in it again).

That's basically what it says, correct? If you're wearing armour (or carrying an exotic weapon, since you're also proficient with "any weapons mentioned in its entry") and have the outsider type, you're automatically proficient. You effectively have every weapon, armour and shield proficiency in the game. It's nowhere near as powerful as some advantages, but it's a nice minor boost.

I must be missing something somewhere.

[Khedrac]

One might be able to squeeze a RAW interpretation to your suggestion, but it is likely to get a rulebook thrown at you...

A given "outsider's description" in this context means the entry in the SRD/Monster manual or other original source for that outsider's race - not that specific outsider.

So if the outsider is a hound archon the description is that of hound archons in the monster manual (or SRD), and not the stat-block of Fred, the advanced hound archon in the adventure, or Jack, the hound archon wizard 1 you are playing.

So if Fred or Jack pick up a spiked chain, but do not have the feat "exotic weapon proficiency: spiked chain" then they are not proficient with it.

Yes, this is rules as interpreted, however that is how English works as a language - I work with technical specifications and no matter how carefully drafted there is always ambiguity causing different people to interpret them in different ways. This gets worse when you add in English speakers from different cultures and worse again with people with a different first language.

All that said I think you are probably fully aware of this and trying to see what people think - nice try, some of the TO enthusiasts will agree with your proffered interpretation. :)

[Duke of URL]

First of all, it doesn't say "stat block", it says "entry". It's a humungous stretch to define "entry" as including a character sheet.

Following on with that, even if it had used "stat block", a creature listing in a sourcebook is part of the game's rule set. Your character sheet is not part of the rule set.

RAI certainly says you're wrong, and RAW leans pretty heavily that way too.

[KillianHawkeye]

Have to agree with the others. It's referring to the stat block of whatever typical example of the creature is given in the Monster Manual, not the current stats of any particular PC or NPC.