"Except" notes an exception, but "other weapons" already implies the exception, so "other weapons except bow" is redundant. More correct options would be "other weapons than bow" or just "other weapons" as it could imply "other than bow".
That said, as another commenter pointed out, the grammatical incorrectness is probably deliberate.
It can be a little convoluted, but if you look at "magic" "other weapons" and "bows" as a non-pro equation, maybe that helps? "Bows" modifies "other weapons", not "magic, and as it's also a weapon type, the correct syntax would look like this, essentially: m+(o^โ^-b)
Therefore, "weapons besides bows" or, the clunkier one (used "other" already), "weapons other than bows" would be a more betterly constructed sentence.
~~except~~ besides/other than*
How is except an incorrect word here? One of it's definitions is with the exclusion of.
"Except" notes an exception, but "other weapons" already implies the exception, so "other weapons except bow" is redundant. More correct options would be "other weapons than bow" or just "other weapons" as it could imply "other than bow".
That said, as another commenter pointed out, the grammatical incorrectness is probably deliberate.
It is slightly less gramatically correct, but that fits the meme.
Fair point. I'll try to keep a better eye on the ghost of my nana, sorry. ๐
Neuman...
It can be a little convoluted, but if you look at "magic" "other weapons" and "bows" as a non-pro equation, maybe that helps? "Bows" modifies "other weapons", not "magic, and as it's also a weapon type, the correct syntax would look like this, essentially: m+(o^โ^-b)
Therefore, "weapons besides bows" or, the clunkier one (used "other" already), "weapons other than bows" would be a more betterly constructed sentence.