[MA] Southern Kung Fu, the Common Folk and Tong Hatchetmen

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by aesir23

I like the style over all, but I have two suggestions. The first is that you should narrow down the number of techniques, especially Targeted Attacks. This just seems like WAY too many, especially since nobody will be taking more than one or two for their character.

On the other hand, I find more detail good, less detail bad. And while it may be true that few or any characters will raise even a fraction of all the techniques, having a long list of them serves two purposes. First, it provides a 'menu' of techniques for stylists to attempt in a fight, even if they haven't improved them. Second, it allows two stylists to focus on very different combat tactics, by mastering completely different aspects of their art, but still remaining within the same continuum of expertise and showing similar combat philosophies.

It suits some martial arts to have few strikes be Targeted Attacks, instead focusing on the torso or even random hit locations (representing attacking whatever the foe leaves open). Wing Chun, however, due to the emphasis of controlling the rhythm of the fight, having strikes lead into others by forcing a reaction from the opponet, opening two gates, etc. feels like one where Targeted Attacks are the norm.

It does look rather cluttered, however. So I've broken Targeted Attacks away from the main Technique list and into their own sub-heading. Hopefully, it now looks cleaner and nicer.

Originally Posted by aesir23

My other suggestion is that since this is now a primarily armed style using edged weapons, Pressure Points and Pressure Secrets are no longer very appropriate Cinematic skills. I'd drop them.

Agreed. And done.

Dropping the 'mystical' secret strikes, both Pressure Points and Lethal, also provides a handy way to distinguish this Wing Chun style from Praying Mantis or Crane style. I know that 'normal' Wing Chun has a lot of the Crane hand forms, but it makes sense that a primarily armed variety would de-emphasise them.