Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Then what is the issue exactly? I suggested paying for it back at the very beginning.
Okay, but why is it an abuse to not separate your hypothetical 'style' and 'non-style' skill investment, but not an abuse to count the same investment several times over toward perks in different skills?
There is no point in the rules where you'd need to or even be able to declare that you are using a particular style in your attack.

A punch is neither Goju Ryu nor non-Goju Ryu. It is a particular technique (or lack thereof) and is thrown by a character with particular style familiarities (or lack thereof)...but ascribing a particular style to it doesn't arise.

(Except maybe in secret techniques/calling your attacks type stuff? I don't remember those rules well.)
I did that 28 posts ago...
I figured as much. It's just that that's different in almost every respect from what a style familiarity perk as written does. Assuming, of course, that it's not supposed to grant the social benefits and no-questions-asked training and perks either.

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Just out of curiosity, has anyone addressed the issue that the self-created style may be worthless (or, at least, very ineffective)? Most martial arts are the result of generations of people figuring out what works and what doesn't. One person working on their own (specifically to avoid being too like any existing martial arts style), may not have had time to refine it.

Pretty sure Martial Arts has rules for this...

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Maybe there should be a Style Knowledge perk for those styles one can use, and a Style Familiarity for those styles one has studied to know the enemy.

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Well, then what are you trying to convince me of? You've got the answer you need for your games . . .

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Well, when I proposed it back in post #23, you disagreed in post #29. The rest seems straightforward enough...

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Thanks.

Based on what I had read in this thread... it didn't seem that different, at least relative to the specific things I have commented on. I have not, for example, worried about "Perks". I will point out that I regularly used English words that had a common root to deduce the meaning of Spanish words (and then learn them) in Spanish, and did the same with both when taking Latin. ;)

So now someone needs to explain to me why some of the "abuses" are abuses... or at least abuses when following both the letter and the intent of the law. One of the purposes of recognizing martial arts styles it to allow more depth and realism within the game. I don't understand how, once you go into that territory, someone can have "no style".

In game terms, what does the penalties from facing (bonuses from using?) an unfamiliar style against an opponent represent?

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

The effect is that if you have Style Familiarity, and your opponent also has Style Familiarity with every style you do, your Deceptive Attack's effectiveness is reduced by one (unless you use a technique that doesn't belong to your style).

I believe what it represents is that they know pretty well how people who fight like you fight, so they can anticipate the ways you try to get around their defense.

You can have no style by not having any style familiarity. Really nothing complicated about it. Using styles in a game does not forbid not using styles. (Somewhat akin to how using powers does not forbid 'wild' advantages.)

Re: Why learn a martial art?
 

Not sure if I am following, but I definitely see the folly of interjecting myself into this conversation, for which I do apologize. It is too much like referencing one language to try and comprehend something similar (me posting, not the topic at hand); while some terms match up, others don't. Useful term by term, but not for anything overly complex, which I now understand would be this situation.

Yes... I was being rather thick. >.>

Just to explain where I am coming from... Style Familiarity used to be an Advantage for styles the character was not proficient with; without it you defended at -1 against attacks from someone using a style you didn't know. It was not associated with the character's own proficiency in the style.

If a setting was bothering to use "Styles" as more than flavor, any given method of combat technically had a style; it is just that outside of real world "martial arts" there often was little reason to dwell on the differences. It may be a "double standard", but to a degree it was justified; players weren't really worried if how one culture used a sword was different from another unless the differences were already extreme enough (re: different skills or different "styles" of the same skill) to bother keeping track.

So getting back to the topic at hand... even if RAW states you can have a "generic" martial arts style, I'd personally would require the player back it up or pay for any advantages generated (as compared to having a specified style). Unlike a wild version of an advantage, we are discussing how one represents the performance of a related series of actions and utilizes a body of knowledge. It is one thing to have (for example) the "wild" generic version of Luck in an "all in" Powers heavy setting - Luck there can still just represent the manipulation of game mechanics, of exchanging points for a more desirable outcome.

This feels more like trying to get a second Native language for free... though I don't remember how 4e handles that (for 3e it was just a Special Effect or Unusual Background cost similar in price to simply buying the language up to that proficiency). The difference is being born into a bilingual family (or environment) is a lot more likely than inventing your own form of advanced combat skills.