multiple damage, weapon master and other weirdness

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

Ecape 'natrual weapons' is not a adjunctive noun, is GURPS bust a compound now,

natrual is part of the noun, not a descripter of it.

Chucky Cheese, is not Cheese that is Chuck like.

and is not a member of the Cheese stores, but a member of pizza stores.

Nope, natural is an adjective modifying weapons, and natural weapons are weapons, just as organic produce is produce.

And you're right about Chucky Cheese, but only because it's not only a proper noun for the chain of kid-themed restaurant arcades, but actually a proper noun as in a character name. Although even then, such names can be descriptive... the Burger King is indeed supposed to a King, specifically of Burgers.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

Nope, natural is an adjective modifying weapons, and natural weapons are weapons, just as organic produce is produce.

again WRONG... Red Robin is compound noun as soon as the Robin was named 'Red Robin' as apposed to merely being a Robin that is Red.

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

again WRONG... Red Robin is compound noun as soon as the Robin was named 'Red Robin' as apposed to merely being a Robin that is Red.

It's named after a robin that is, indeed, red, in the sense of being red-breasted.

[roguebfl]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

It's named after a robin that is, indeed, red, in the sense of being red-breasted.

look a female Red-headed Woodpecker does stop being a Red-headed Woodpecker just because it does not have a red head like the male.

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by roguebfl

look a female Red-headed Woodpecker does stop being a Red-headed Woodpecker just because it does not have a red head like the male.

True, but the salient point is that both the male and female, red-headed or not, are..... woodpeckers. Just as natural weapons are.... weapons.

;-)


This is fun. A few more rounds?

[lexington]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

It's named after a robin that is, indeed, red, in the sense of being red-breasted.

Are you really arguing that the Red Robin restaurant is a bird?

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

Sorry, no. Red birds are a subset of birds, flightless birds are a subset of birds, carnivorous mammals are a subset of mammals, bladed weapons are a subset of weapons, mild steel is a subset of steel, totalitarian regimes are a subset of regimes... yep, if you take a general category noun and modifiy it with an adjective, then the resulting phrase is indeed generally a proper subset of the general category. There are certainly exceptions, but nobody's given me a good reason to think this is one of them.

I think you fail to understand* that rules definitions set up a frame-work within said rules, irregardless of the word's meaning in English. For example, "Block" in GURPS is defense with a shield, but in general usage, it can also refer to a parry, or a square chunk of material. However, you cannot use your Block stat to defend yourself with a sword, whatever "block" means in English.

If the writers state that natural weapons do not fall under Weapon Master, then that is so, and no amount of grammatical legalese will change that.

*Either that or you're arguing in bad faith, which looks increasingly likely.

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by lexington

Are you really arguing that the Red Robin restaurant is a bird?

What part of 'named after' did you not understand?

[vitruvian]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

If the writers state that natural weapons do not fall under Weapon Master, then that is so, and no amount of grammatical legalese will change that.

*Either that or you're arguing in bad faith, which looks increasingly likely.

If they stated it in the rules, I would agree with you. They haven't, or that is my contention. That's what we're arguing over.

I'm not arguing in bad faith. I'm saying that since there's nothing in the rules as written and published to indicate that 'natural weapons' are not a proper subset of 'weapons', standard English usage applies and they presumptively are. The term 'unarmed combat skills' (which as a subset of 'combat skills', which itself is a subset of 'skills', is another example of this standard usage) is not in itself a statement that natural weapons don't count as weapons, since the unarmed combat skills are used with things like the cestus which definitely are external weapons as well as with natural weapons such as punches, kicks, claws, and teeth, so the argument that 'unarmed combat skills' can't be used with 'weapons' is on its face invalid.

[lexington]

Originally Posted by vitruvian

What part of 'named after' did you not understand?

But your thesis is that an "adjective noun" is necessarily part of the "set of all noun". So either Red Robin is an actual robin or it is at least possible for a natural weapon to not fit the GURPS use of weapon.