Judo is a striking skill

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by Spartan506

...

I'm a lawyer too, and I don't subscribe to your analysis, which appears to me to err by turning to contextual and esoteric interpretation without giving due regard to the plain meaning of the words found in the skill description, quoted in the OP while getting hung up on the non-specialist usage in the OP refering to Judo as a "striking skill".

And I would note that there is no particular reason why GURPS rules should be interpreted according legal canons.

[InexplicableVic]

Originally Posted by Donny Brook

I'm a lawyer too, and I don't subscribe to your analysis, which appears to me to err by turning to contextual and esoteric interpretation without giving due regard to the plain meaning of the words found in the skill description, quoted in the OP while getting hung up on the non-specialist usage in the OP refering to Judo as a "striking skill".

And I would note that there is no particular reason why GURPS rules should be interpreted according legal canons.

I find this response peculiar, because:



1. The plain meaning of the terms "grapples" and "throws" do not include strikes such as punches or kicks. There's no "esoteric interpretation" there.


2. I fail to see a distinction in interpreting statutes, rules, contracts, or GURPS rules. In the end, it's all about logical interpretation of what someone has written.



3. Since Kromm's answer in the uFAQ seems to agree...I'm not clear on what the issue is here. How is Kromm's answer different from Curmudgeon's (or mine)? Or, more importantly, how does your answer differ from Curmudgeon's (or mine)? Seems to me that we all agree that in close combat, Judo can substitute for DX. That still doesn't make it a "striking skill," which was the OP's premise.

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by Spartan506

I find this response peculiar, because:
... 3. Since Kromm's answer in the uFAQ seems to agree...I'm not clear on what the issue is here. How is Kromm's answer different from Curmudgeon's (or mine)? Or, more importantly, how does your answer differ from Curmudgeon's (or mine)? Seems to me that we all agree that in close combat, Judo can substitute for DX. That still doesn't make it a "striking skill," which was the OP's premise.

While I disagree with your points 1 and 2, it appears I misunderstood your position as described in 3. (In fact I am surprised by it, given what you say in your point 1.)

I thought you were concluding that Judo cannot substitute for DX for strikes in close combat. Still, I don't think the OP's main point is about the nomenclature of whether Judo is a "striking skill" (a phrase which nothing turns on, btw). I think he was remarking on being surprised to find Judo can be used for strikes and he expressed that surprise in an off-the-cuff phrase.