Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

[CoreBrute]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

My least favourite ones are weapon masters, especially Gunslingers.

 

I always think, unless they've got something else, like super agility as well, then their nothing but a guy who lets his gun talk for him. Not really that heroic.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

My least favourite ones are weapon masters, especially Gunslingers.

 

I always think, unless they've got something else, like super agility as well, then their nothing but a guy who lets his gun talk for him. Not really that heroic.

 

I've never fully understood the anti-gun bias for Supers. You can have characters running around with swords, a bow and arrow, a skull crushing hammer or a bazillion different types of ray guns or blaster pistols, but as soon as gunpowder is involved, suddenly the sky is falling. I wonder if it's just because people think that a player that wants to play a gunslinger type weapon master is aiming to be the next Punisher...

 

That said, I lump Weapon Masters in with Martial Artists.

 

Of course, many weapon masters are also Gadgeteers (Green Arrow, Hawkeye, Captain Boomerang), but just as many get buy on fancy tricks more than gimmicked weapons (Bullseye, Vigilante, Connor Hawke).

 

One key thing to keep in mind though is the source material though. That's where you get your "something else" right there.

 

It's not very superheroic to play some random dude with a gun. But to be a proper weapon master you need to be really, really good at what you do... to the point that you never need to actually kill anyone with your guns/arrows/razor sharp boomerangs/what have you. A Weapon Master should have the highest OCV of anyone in the game, usually a similarly high DCV and a bunch of tricks that are less than lethal. Even a psycho like Bullseye can do things like pin you to the wall, disarm you at range, jam a gun, blind you, or hit pressure points with thrown objects to paralyze or disable.

 

I played my trick arrow archer for almost a year without doing a single point of BODY to anyone. No one would say he wasn't pulling his weight with all the stuff he did in combat though... Entangles, Flashes, Darkness, Drains, Dispels, Change Environment, the list goes on and on. I didn;t need to use the pointy stick most of the time. And when I did finally pull out the proverbial big guns, I think everyone was kinda surprised just how lethal the character could be

 

Overall,in my experience a Weapon Master plays very much like a Martial Artist, there's just always has a Focus involved in the mix. I don't honestly think they should be considered a separate AT.

[The Main Man]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I can agree with that.

 

Weaponmasters could generally be folded into Martial Artists while Power Armors could be folded into Gadgeteer (the earlier segragatory(?) rationale isn't totally sound - the same situations can apply to gadgets in general).

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I've never fully understood the anti-gun bias for Supers. You can have characters running around with swords' date=' a bow and arrow, a skull crushing hammer or a bazillion different types of ray guns or blaster pistols, but as soon as gunpowder is involved, suddenly the sky is falling. I wonder if it's just because people think that a player that wants to play a gunslinger type weapon master is aiming to be the next Punisher...[/quote']

 

Well, I've yet to see a character who used 'conventional firearms' in a supers game who wasn't also suffering from an incredible case of testosterone poisoning. I've even dealt with one who used a gun that was SIGNIFICANTLY less damaging than his actual super-powers, but insisted on using it despite the fact that it almost invariably plinked off his opponents.

 

Most of the examples you list are (or can be) normal damage, which tends not to do Body damage to most targets, whereas a regular gun can't do anything BUT kill. They're rather boring.

[Vulcan]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Well, I've yet to see a character who used 'conventional firearms' in a supers game who wasn't also suffering from an incredible case of testosterone poisoning. I've even dealt with one who used a gun that was SIGNIFICANTLY less damaging than his actual super-powers, but insisted on using it despite the fact that it almost invariably plinked off his opponents.

 

Most of the examples you list are (or can be) normal damage, which tends not to do Body damage to most targets, whereas a regular gun can't do anything BUT kill. They're rather boring.

 

I would argue that, in this modern age of 'less than lethal' ammunition. Rubber bullets (convert DC's of KA to normal) make a gun no more lethal than any other E-Blast.

 

But then, if I play a gun guy, usually he has a M-16-Frame 30-06 or short .50 with an underslung M-203. And scads of specialty grenades (concussion, gas, smoke, rocket net )...

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I've even dealt with one who used a gun that was SIGNIFICANTLY less damaging than his actual super-powers' date=' but insisted on using it despite the fact that it almost invariably plinked off his opponents.[/quote']

 

 

Long time ago, back in the days when the guns list was a single small table with damages in both normal and killing examples, played in a game where another player bought ALL of them. Had a pistol, a rifle, a carbine, an autocannon, etc. The max any of them did was like 9d6 normal damage.

 

Plinked away at the bad guys through most of the fight with them, ran out of ammo/guns got trashed/disarmed/whatever...eventually had to resort to hand-to-hand combat...and promptly whalloped the villain with his 65 STR and finished him off.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Well' date=' I've yet to see a character who used 'conventional firearms' in a supers game who wasn't also suffering from an incredible case of testosterone poisoning. I've even dealt with one who used a gun that was SIGNIFICANTLY less damaging than his actual super-powers, but insisted on using it despite the fact that it almost invariably plinked off his opponents.[/quote']

 

Sounds like a player issue to me.

 

Most of the examples you list are (or can be) normal damage, which tends not to do Body damage to most targets, whereas a regular gun can't do anything BUT kill. They're rather boring.

 

Hawkeye and Green Arrow both use normal broahead and target arrows, but don't necessarily kill with them. They also use trick arrows. They employ trick shots to disarm or pin. Or they simply wing their opponent, inflicting thoroughly nonlethal wounds.

 

The same can apply to a gun in the hands of a Weapon Master.

 

And there are plenty of less than lethal rounds out there, including the classic rubber bullet, as well as things like bean bag or taser rounds. And that's just real stuff... we're not even talking fictional gadgeteer stuff here...

[Pól Ruadh]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Speedsters. Because so much of their powerset tends to rely on game mechanics. It doesn't HAVE to, but as someone who doesn't tend to quantify distance in a game except for the whole "He's standing about 20 feet away" general description, speedsters usually end up being a little dull.

[Psistrike]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

One I know my GM hates, especially in my hands, is a broad category summoner. The power to summon forth any character from an image, especially when the character is designed as a highly creative artist, is a bad idea to give to a creative player. Can come up with a character with the exact powers needed for any situation.

 

Myself, I find it hard to play normal archetypes without expanding on the concept. A normal brick, mentallist, speedster, etc. All ones I don't like to play without giving them something extra to make them stand out from the norm.

[Peregrine]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

On the "Patriots aren't a valid archetype" meme the proponents of the idea appear to be operating according to the following logic:

 

Archetype = Powerset

 

However, as I read Champions 5e, the following more accurately reflects the TAW (text as written):

 

Archetype = Concept != Powerset

 

By this logic, Patriot is a valid Archetype, because it is a coherent Concept, even though the Concept does not lend itself to a particular Powerset.

 

Back to the original topic, I don't have much problem with any of the archetypes. My main beef is that I was never able to play my preferred archetype in the last group I gamed with (play-by-chat), because another player always beat me to the draw on choosing archetypes, and the GM had an unbreakable "no stepping on schtick" policy. Still, it was a good group to game with.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

On the "Patriots aren't a valid archetype" meme the proponents of the idea appear to be operating according to the following logic:

 

Archetype = Powerset

 

However, as I read Champions 5e, the following more accurately reflects the TAW (text as written):

 

Archetype = Concept != Powerset

 

By this logic, Patriot is a valid Archetype, because it is a coherent Concept, even though the Concept does not lend itself to a particular Powerset.

 

The isue I have with that is that by that same logic things like Spunky Sidekick and Brooding Loner would be valid AT's...and would definitely bring up a whole slew of new tings for peopel to hate playing

[Arkham]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Going to have to pile on to the Mentalists.

 

The only time I find them particularly interesting is when they are something else + a mental power or two.

 

Even worse are when my players choose to play mentalists, they almost always want a totally vanilla build. All the mental powers at as high as they go, and not much else. Add to that the effect they have on usable plots, and they start to sap the fun for me from running the game.

 

As to conventional firearms... I had a player who in one game made a 'zen sniper' who could use a sniper rifle in various non-lethal ways. The character looked and sounded like Virgil Earp from the movie Tombstone and 'aimed to stun' with his sniper rifle.

[Spence]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

It's just Acting and a lot of choreography, isn't it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Run away...!!!!

 

Nope incorrect. It is choreography without being able to act....

 

 

 

*snicker snicker*

[Spence]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Going to have to pile on to the Mentalists.

 

 

Me too. Mentalists as characters are meh to me.

 

 

as villains on the other hand......

[Lamrok]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

For me, it would probably be any super-powered hero who depends on a melee weapon to be effective. I just don't find this intriguing or interesting. I won't support this with any good reason, because I don't really have any.

 

Wishy washy reason include:

- Having to worry about having it grabbed away

- Feeling unheroic when dealing with some villains

- Feeling like I should be playing in a Fantasy game

- Trying to find some semblance of sanity in limitations and powers on the focus.

 

I've built characters like this, but don't remember ever actually playing one (and if I did, not for very long.) Actually, I once did have a guy who would snatch his own arm off and use it as a weapon, then re-attach it when done. But this only added a few dice, and he had to make an ego roll to pull the arm off (because, you know, it really hurt.) Mostly he used other methods in combat, saving this one for presence attacks.

 

Characters with guns don't bug me. Characters with bows don't bug me. Wimpy mentallists don't bug me. It doesn't bug me if anyone else plays a weapon-based melee character.

 

Hmmm... Now that I think about it, I might have had a sword-ninja super in a game fifteen years ago. If I remember right, he really sucked - from his name to his combat effectiveness. Maybe that's why.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Sounds like a player issue to me.

 

 

 

Hawkeye and Green Arrow both use normal broahead and target arrows, but don't necessarily kill with them. They also use trick arrows. They employ trick shots to disarm or pin. Or they simply wing their opponent, inflicting thoroughly nonlethal wounds.

 

The same can apply to a gun in the hands of a Weapon Master.

 

And there are plenty of less than lethal rounds out there, including the classic rubber bullet, as well as things like bean bag or taser rounds. And that's just real stuff... we're not even talking fictional gadgeteer stuff here...

 

This is true. However, I've never seen it happen. Every firearm user I've ever seen in a game has received the nickname 'Obviously Compensating For Something Man'.

[Bloodstone]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

This is true. However' date=' I've never seen it happen. Every firearm user I've ever seen in a game has received the nickname 'Obviously Compensating For Something Man'. [/quote']

 

Must... post... Remjin's... sig!

 

"I like big weapons. I don't care what it says about my manhood."

[hfergus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I've got two if played straight - Mentalists and bricks. Both can be one trick ponies if not tweaked (brick tricks help a lot). A player of mine has a one command ("be confused") mentalist with a decent (9d6) tk as backup if the command fails. (and also can do explosion of command. Not bad as crowd control, as most stand around going "huh? What do I do now?") I had a density indrease brick who could also increase gravity in small locales. Interesting tweak - brought a weak flier he could not reach down to the ground.

 

I also personally have a hard time playing martial artists, but have seen it done well.

[Guest steamteck]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I've never fully understood the anti-gun bias for Supers. You can have characters running around with swords, a bow and arrow, a skull crushing hammer or a bazillion different types of ray guns or blaster pistols, but as soon as gunpowder is involved, suddenly the sky is falling. I wonder if it's just because people think that a player that wants to play a gunslinger type weapon master is aiming to be the next Punisher...

 

.

 

Everything else you named is exotic or martial artsy. If they've got conventional firearms they're just a guy with some guns. Pretty mundane. If he's a big deal, why do we need superheroes?. IMO he Should head back to his own genre where his brand of action and heroism excels if he wants to be one of the leads. Supers just doesn't mean John Woo to em.. Now I've got characters in my supers game like that. They just don't pretend to be superheroes. The interaction between them and the supers can be very interesting in fact.

[Hagadorn]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I Too hold a special contempt for Martial Artists.

 

They just peeve me.

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

re: Martial Artists and eyerolling

 

I never get that. You can barely hear the GM over the sound of the sounds of shattering laws of physics but someone has their Ryu clone pull of a "Chi" powered Hurricane Kick and it offends someone's sensibilities sometimes to the point they can't just shut up and deal with it.

 

Which is then followed by them having their character produce enough power to light a small city for 5 minutes from nowhere or pick up a car one handed by the bumper and use it as a fly swatter without so much as blinking an eye. But a Martial artist superhero has to be limited to whatever works in the UFC.

 

 

Edit: Last time I had something similar happen to me I spent the rest of the game poking holes in every thing the offending player did that violated "realism" even slightly. It was petty and childish but extremely satisfying.

 

Sorry, that's am immense pet peeve of mine.

 

But on topic.

 

I've never liked playing mentalists. They all seem to have the same power set, the same special effects and the same basic tactics.

 

Edit: I don't think Mentalists are Badwrongfun or having them in the game at all. I just don't enjoy playing them.

[The Dude]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I Too hold a special contempt for Martial Artists.

 

They just peeve me.

 

Hey, as long as they don't pee ON you or your rug.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Characters pigeonholed into just one archetype.

 

I'd love to play Martian Manhunter in a game just because he fits into so many.

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I've never fully understood the anti-gun bias for Supers. You can have characters running around with swords, a bow and arrow, a skull crushing hammer or a bazillion different types of ray guns or blaster pistols, but as soon as gunpowder is involved, suddenly the sky is falling. I wonder if it's just because people think that a player that wants to play a gunslinger type weapon master is aiming to be the next Punisher...

 

This is one I don't get either. A Weapon Master using a Firearm is no more a "Guy with a guy" than a Iron Man is "A guy with some guns" or a Swordmaster is a "Guy with a pointy stick".

 

The Lone Ranger is pretty much a Superhero with a gun in a Western setting. Anyone that can do the kind of gun tricks someone like John Preston or Rushuna Tendo (from Grenadier) can pull of is pretty darn super compared Joe the beat cop with his service revolver. I don't buy into the idea that being sepremely skilled with a sword or a baton or a bag of marbles or for that matter just being given and somewhat skilled with a Super Plasmatic Blasto-rifle that really doesn't do anything more than a firearm makes you a "superhero" but being supremely skilled with a firearm makes you a "guy with a gun that shouldn't pretend to be real superhero".

 

But I guess we all have our biases.

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

And there are plenty of less than lethal rounds out there, including the classic rubber bullet, as well as things like bean bag or taser rounds. And that's just real stuff... we're not even talking fictional gadgeteer stuff here...

 

Yep. And it's a comic book game. If you can have characters with swords, claws and fiery bolts of plasma and radiation that somehow do "non lethal" damage, why can't you say your gunslinger is so good that can avoid lethal injury?

Assuming you're running a classic four color game where it matters in the first place.