Odd but legal?
James McMurray
First Post
Hypersmurf said:
What's your point? It still doesn't change that you're taking the weapon out of the hand, thus drawing it from a source.
So what you're saying is that if you break a paradigm and introduce something silly that looks legal but doesn't actually fit, the results are nonsensical?
I agree completely, and am glad you finally understand.
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
James McMurray said:
And it still doesn't change that removing a sword from a hand is not an appropriate use of 'draw'.
English synonyms are subtler than that.
-Hyp.
James McMurray
First Post
I'm not talking synonymns, that was merely an amusing afterthought. I'm talking direct definitions. you know, those things I linked to several times.
Since you apparently can't follow the links on your own, I'll spell it out for you:
1) draw: to bring, take, or pull out, as from a receptacle or source
boiled down to its essence, this simply says "to take." If you feel a source is a mandatory part of that definition despite the "as from" part, then it means "to take from a source."
2) source: any thing or place from which something comes, arises, or is obtained; origin
Again, boiled down this simply says "anywhere something comes from."
3) draw therefore means "to take from anywhere something comes from."
4) hand: (noun) the terminal, prehensile part of the upper limb in humans and other primates, consisting of the wrist, metacarpal area, fingers, and thumb.
A hand, being a noun, is most definitely a contender for status of "any thing or place"
Unless you're contending that the sword is not coming from the hand but from some other location, it is most definitely being taken from the hand, and therefore drawn from the hand.
Again, it's your turn to show where two can equal one.
Since you apparently can't follow the links on your own, I'll spell it out for you:
1) draw: to bring, take, or pull out, as from a receptacle or source
boiled down to its essence, this simply says "to take." If you feel a source is a mandatory part of that definition despite the "as from" part, then it means "to take from a source."
2) source: any thing or place from which something comes, arises, or is obtained; origin
Again, boiled down this simply says "anywhere something comes from."
3) draw therefore means "to take from anywhere something comes from."
4) hand: (noun) the terminal, prehensile part of the upper limb in humans and other primates, consisting of the wrist, metacarpal area, fingers, and thumb.
A hand, being a noun, is most definitely a contender for status of "any thing or place"
Unless you're contending that the sword is not coming from the hand but from some other location, it is most definitely being taken from the hand, and therefore drawn from the hand.
Again, it's your turn to show where two can equal one.
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
James McMurray said:
If I drive my car out of the garage, I am bringing it out from a source.
But I'm not drawing it.
English is more subtle than that.
-Hyp.
Moon-Lancer
First Post
he drew the car slowly out from the garage, the dark suspicious van on the other side of the street from last week was still their. They were probably listening to him right now, listening to the fear that pounded in his heart as adrenaline surged though his veins.
seems to work just fine
seems to work just fine
Arugeing over English. the last refuge of the desperate.
D&D rules: drawing a weapon so you can make an attack with it is a move action.
It's really really simple. In the examples I quoted Hyp said he was uncomfortable with what can be done the way he thinks it should work, although fails to find any rules citation to disprove it.
My method: Putting a hand onto a weapon in order to attack using that hand being a draw action makes everything work and disalows all these silly corner cases.
Keeps the sules, simple, clear and consistant.
D&D rules: drawing a weapon so you can make an attack with it is a move action.
It's really really simple. In the examples I quoted Hyp said he was uncomfortable with what can be done the way he thinks it should work, although fails to find any rules citation to disprove it.
My method: Putting a hand onto a weapon in order to attack using that hand being a draw action makes everything work and disalows all these silly corner cases.
Keeps the sules, simple, clear and consistant.
James McMurray
First Post
Hypersmurf said:
Unless the car is a weapon you're readying to use in combat it's immaterial to the discussion at hand. If it is a weapon you're preparing to use in combat, then by both D&D and English definitions you drew it.
I agree that english can be subtle, but in this case the definitions are blatantly clear.
It's still your turn to explain how 2 is defined as 1. Since you've consistently ignored the request, I'll assume you can't do it and your entire argument falls apart.
Thank you for your time.
Ridley's Cohort
First Post
I think the fundamental issue is whether a general principle can be deduced from a corner case. I would not necessarily look to a feat such as Quickdraw for guidance on how I should understand the basic TWF rules.
Similar Threads
