Teaching Talents as Skills

[Endrek03]

Hey guys,
So the question came up -- Can a PC with, say, the Melee Weapons Talent teach it to another character as a Skill?
When asked this, I originally gave the answer no, as a Talent represents mystical and magical means. It would be akin to someone speaking German to someone who does not, and therefor getting more and more frustrated as to why the other person can't comprehend his words.

Also, do you need a trainer to learn new Talents? i.e. First Circle, you don't put ranks in a Talent. Do you have to go to a Circle 1 or higher to teach you this Talent (Assuming they have it) or can you just magically learn it?

[Oofje]

Player's Guide, P87 is all about Skills vs. Talents.

There is no specific mention that skills can only be learned from namegivers who have the skill, therefore we may assume that it is also possible to be trained by someone who has the talent version of it. It just takes more time and practice to learn a Skill, than it does to learn a Talent.

As to your second question: You need a trainer for a new talent. Usually, when training for a new circle, you learn these talents from your trainer, which costs 1 week of training (40 hours).
There are, however exceptions to this rule, for example when training for a new Discipline, or a talent via Versatility. In these cases, it is 1 week (40 hours) per talent.
See also Player's Guide, Chapter Fifteen (P236), 'Building Your Legend'

As a character usually starts the game at First Circle, there is normally no need for them to seek out a trainer for initiation. However, there are descriptions in the Player's Guide for initiation at each Discipline (See also Player's Guide, P36, 'On Becoming An Initiate', P37, 'On Initiating Other Adepts', and P38, 'Initiation Into a Discipline').

[Drucifer]

[Telarus_KSC]

I totally allow Adepts to teach the skill version of their Talents (if there is one) to anyone. What you're actually talking about are relationships between these two populations(Adept/nonAdept), and how they interact in the culture of Barsaive. And personally, I want high circle Warriors to be surrounded by large crowds of fighing-men (who would actually have a reason to follow them)/retainers/camp-servants/etc, not isolated loners teaching other loners. I find it balances itself with the max rank caps for skills vs talents.

But yeah, you're going to run into situations where the Master Adept ranks up the Talent like 3 ranks over a weeks time, while some his students are struggling to get to rank 2 in the same skill.

As an undefined setting point, it's all about how your do it In Your Barsaive.

[Endrek03]

Alright, so for clarification:
If you did not put Ranks into a Circle 1 Talent when you created your character, then you need to seek out a trainer (Probably even a Circle 1 with the Talent) to teach it to you. Correct?
This would mean that you need to seek a trainer before you can even seek a trainer for Circle 2, since you need all Circle 1 Talents at a certain rank to qualify for Circle 2.

Next:
The reason why I ask about an Adept teaching a Talent to an Adept wanting to learn the Skill is because of the way Talents are written about.
For example, a Warrior uses the Melee Weapon Talent and see's it as "How hard can I hit my opponent? How does his skin or armor react to my blade? Which angle is best for me to enter my foe at?" Things like that. A Weaponsmith, however, uses the Melee Weapon Talent and see's it as "How did my blade react when it hit him? How did the durability hold up? How can I sharpen it better to deal more damage?"
The same Talent is seen in two different ways.
Thus, when an Adept is teaching his Talent to another Adept as a Skill, would he not inherently try to pass on his views of the Talent, thus confusing the other Adept?
In my game, an Air Sailor wishes to teach Melee Weapons as a skill to a Thief, since the player didn't take Melee Weapons as an Optional Talent nor as a Skill. It's great to RP it out, and I'm okay with it, but it's one of those "Wouldn't the Thief be confused by the way that the Air Sailor sees Melee Weapons?"

[Telarus_KSC]

A) Ranking up a Talent does not require a trainer, only the initial acquisition does. Ranking up +1 takes 8 hours of meditation. This is another split between the skill/Talent system.

B) Sure, but that's not a problem for the Thief as long as the roleplaying lines up with his conception of the Thief Discipline (the classic are selfish/jovial) and either way stealing that sort of specialized knowledge from the experience is right up the alley for a Thief adept. Don't think of skill training as teaching a formalized list of things. I think the Warrior would just hand the Thief a blunted or wooden practice blade, tell him he's a liability in combat right now and hes going to be taking bruises until he gets better at it. Then the advice comes in during the training over the course of a week.

Contrast that to Adepts, who acquire knowledge that would usually take 1,000 hours of practice over a new nights rest and practicing solo forms.

[Avantio]

Well I only allow Adepts that have a said talent as discipline talent to teach it as skill. Because when a talent is discipline talent it means the adept has a better understanding of it than a discipline that has it as merely as an option. So a Warrior can freely teach melee weapons as skill to others but a Theif would have a hard time. To RP that: Warriors can explain the dynamic of the battle, the tactics and can guide to condition the body to wield a weapon. Where a Thief with a talent would say: "Emm basically you take this and stick the pointy end into your enemy, how hard can that be?"