Regarding training and combat skill

[Theglassman12]

Just wanted to double check on a situation. Say there's a group that values talent and skill over everything, and in a worldwide competition to see who's the best, you're ranked among the best in that group. Later on you decided it's necessary to be under the tutelage of another legendary warrior who's been around for ages to teach you more, and your rival character has been under his training for a long time compared to you. Would that remotely imply that this legendary warrior's training would allow your combat skills to match if not surpass the other group's training on "who's the best and most talented in the world"?

 

[First_Witch]

This is an oddly specific thing to ask for.

Say there's a group that values talent and skill over everything, and in a worldwide competition to see who's the best, you're ranked among the best in that group.

Does the previous group partake in that competition? Or is it just seniors finding their next junior?

Later on you decided it's necessary to be under the tutelage of another legendary warrior who's been around for ages to teach you more, and your rival character has been under his training for a long time compared to you.

Is said legendary warrior superior to the previous group?

Would that remotely imply that this legendary warrior's training would allow your combat skills to match if not surpass the other group's training on "who's the best and most talented in the world"?

Without knowing anything about the verse you are talking about, at face value no. For victory to be a combat feat, the fight must have been decided by skill (Because fights are comprised of a myriad of factors that are not skill). If the previous group partook in the competition and were ranked below your character then that would, if the outcomes were decided by skill, answer your question.

For the second point, even if the legendary warrior is undoubtedly superior to the group, that would still be only his feat, not the that of the character you're talking about. Training under someone does not net you his combat skill, unless stated otherwise. Far more feats would be required.

 

[Theglassman12]

Said group partakes in this competition all the time, they literally take people from all around the world to test their combat skills to see who's the best and who can lead them.

Yes he's considered one of the legendary heroes of the series.

For the context of the legendary hero, the rival character who's trained under him can go on a one man army against a bunch of high ranking soldiers, including those under similar training and mindsets as the group.

 

[First_Witch]

Said group partakes in this competition all the time, they literally take people from all around the world to test their combat skills to see who's the best and who can lead them.

So your Character A does well against the group in combat?

Yes he's considered one of the legendary heroes of the series.

For the context of the legendary hero, the rival character who's trained under him can go on a one man army against a bunch of high ranking soldiers, including those under similar training and mindsets as the group.

Training under someone still doesn't imply that they are as skilled as their mentor. Even if Legendary Hero LH > Skilled Group SG and Rival (Trained by LH) > soldiers (trained by SG) doesnt mean that Rival > SG. That is, viewing this point in a vacuum.

You said that A already fought and performed really well against SG in that tournament, so A would be <= SG. If the implication is that A trained under LH is > Regular A then it would be okay to assume that A trained under LH is at least =, likely > SG.

Now to list some counterarguments ala Devils advocate because I know jack about the verse youre talking about, and if you can answer them based on your knowledge then A it at least =, likely > to SG:

1. Is regular A <= SG based on his performance in the competition? Just doing well in it doesnt necessarily mean he is compareable in skill. In a fight, many factors take place, skill is only one of them. Considered false if A fought members of SG and did well based on skill (Either by being stated or by being reasonably inferred from the fights)

2. Even if LH is > SG, that doesnt mean that anyone training under LH becomes > SG, because training doesn't guarantee that you become compareable to the one you train under. Considerd false if training is implied to make characters compareable to the one they train under.

3. Even if Rival trained under LH = to LH and Soldiers trained under SG = SG and thus Rival trained under LH is > SG, doesn't mean that A is also > SG, as training isn't some static equippable that raises anyone to the same level or even raises everyone by the same amount. Different grow rates and limits exist for any person afterall. Considered false if A = Rival (Both trained by LH)

 

[Theglassman12]

1. If you’re familiar with Danganronpa’s Byakuya Togami with his background on how he became the ultimate Prodigy. Character A’s rise to being the leader of SG is very similar to that where it’s literally a competition on who’s the most skilled of the group, and by default who’s the most worthy to lead.

2. The context with LH is that character A needed LH to train him in certain aspects he’s missing that his original group is incapable of training him on.

 

[First_Witch]

1. If you’re familiar with Danganronpa’s Byakuya Togami with his background on how he became the ultimate Prodigy. Character A’s rise to being the leader of SG is very similar to that where it’s literally a competition on who’s the most skilled of the group, and by default who’s the most worthy to lead.

Can't say I am, but noted. If A is leading SG on the merits of skill then that answers your question no? Unless I misunderstood it and what you are specificly asking is if LH training can be blankedly stated to be enough for you to be > SG, which would be no based on the information provided.

2. The context with LH is that character A needed LH to train him in certain aspects he’s missing that his original group is incapable of training him on.

So his training makes you more skilled in the ranges of your repertoire, but that would be insufficient if the question is "Does getting trained by LH make you more skilled than SG"

 

[Theglassman12]

It is based on the merit of skill yeah.

For the LH, as I mentioned the rival character was trained by him for most of his life and he essentially can take on and defeat a wide variety of soldiers who have similar kinds of training to the SG. Would that be in any ground be for a comparable skill feat if the rival can match similar types of soldiers in combat and win?

 

[First_Witch]

It is based on the merit of skill yeah.

Well you can put a check on that then.

For the LH, as I mentioned the rival character was trained by him for most of his life and he essentially can take on and defeat a wide variety of soldiers who have similar kinds of training to the SG. Would that be in any ground be for a comparable skill feat if the rival can match similar types of soldiers in combat and win?

The issue is that you have 4 distinct parties whose relationship does not form grounds for a feat. The fact is that you are not automatially compareable to your mentor just because you have trained under them. So LH being > SG is not really relevant for Rival. Nor is Rival being > Soldiers trained under SG. Because neither of these proof that Rival is >= SG. For that to be the case you would have to proof either Rival = LH (Tutelage under LH is not sufficient as explained before) or Soldiers = SG (Again, tutelage alone is not enough).

Right now the relationship looks like this: Soldiers < Rival ??? SG < LH

 

[Theglassman12]

So the cross scaling for skill for the rival is too ambiguous to remotely try to argue a "scaling chain" for skill then.

 

[First_Witch]

Forgot to reply, sorry pookie bear.

So the cross scaling for skill for the rival is too ambiguous to remotely try to argue a "scaling chain" for skill then.

That specific scaling chain yeah.

 

[Hypertornado099]

Just wanted to double check on a situation. Say there's a group that values talent and skill over everything, and in a worldwide competition to see who's the best, you're ranked among the best in that group. Later on you decided it's necessary to be under the tutelage of another legendary warrior who's been around for ages to teach you more, and your rival character has been under his training for a long time compared to you. Would that remotely imply that this legendary warrior's training would allow your combat skills to match if not surpass the other group's training on "who's the best and most talented in the world"?

No, it depends on how well the training goes and how you apply that skill in combat. Skill scaling isn't really straightforward