I'm seeing a fair bit of (what appears to me to be) arguing at
cross-purposes. Since people said last time that my summary of the
situation was helpful, I shall venture to do another one. This time,
I'll just lay out the arguments that I think have been seriously
proposed as people's preferred way of playing.
1. The "Joe Dever got it wrong" argument.
* All bonuses for having Grand Weaponmastery with Bow should
be +5.
* All instances of +3 (and that one /ad hoc/ +4) should be
changed.
2. The "Grand Weaponmastery is intentionally worse" argument.
* The Grand Weaponmastery with Bow +3 is correct.
* /Ad hoc/ +4 and +5 bonuses replace this.
* +3 and +4 are worse than a loyal reader's +5, so the loyal
reader gets to use their +5 at all times.
3. The "Grand Weaponmastery is the same as Weaponmastery" argument.
* Grand Weaponmastery with Bow +3 is correct.
* /Ad hoc/ +4 and +5 bonuses replace this.
* A loyal reader who got the Mentora +2 (which is a subtly
different bonus) can add that to Grand Weaponmastery, giving
them a +5 (or /ad hoc/ +6 or +7).
