Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

[Spence]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

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' date=' 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.[/quote']

 

Yes again.

 

Your on a roll. How about you just keep posting and assume I agree I let you know when things change

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

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.

 

You can do that, yes.

 

Has anybody ever actually seen anybody do it?

 

Another point, for me, is that my definition of a superhero actually requires, well, super-ness. I don't call Batman a superhero because he doesn't have superpowers and doesn't use supertech (that, and he's a total jerk, but that's tangential). Someone with a regular sword doesn't qualify for me, either ... now, a sword with a built-in blaster, or a magic sword works. A super-tech blaster or trick-bullet kind of gun works for my supers game; a 'go down to Wal-Mart and buy a shotgun' character doesn't.

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Has anybody ever actually seen anybody do it?

 

Yes

 

Several times in role playing games and a few times in fiction. Or such characters can use an array of non lethal options provided by both realistic technology and comic book ubertech. And again, that assumes that particular game draws on the tropes of four color supers comics and not other styles.

 

Another point, for me, is that my definition of a superhero actually requires, well, super-ness. I don't call Batman a superhero because he doesn't have superpowers and doesn't use supertech (that, and he's a total jerk, but that's tangential). Someone with a regular sword doesn't qualify for me, either ... now, a sword with a built-in blaster, or a magic sword works. A super-tech blaster or trick-bullet kind of gun works for my supers game; a 'go down to Wal-Mart and buy a shotgun' character doesn't.

 

I'd consider the kind of skill and ability needed for a character with "mundane" weapons and skills to hang with supernatural beings pretty "super". I haven't seen many gunslinger, martial artist or weapon master characters with backgrounds like "I spent a couple of hours on the firing range one week then picked up a cheap .22 at Joe's House of Guns and Military Surplus."

 

I can admire someone with the dedication, skill and focus to master something "mundane" and push it into the legendary or use skills, wits, tactics and intelligence rather than handwavium driven technology (which generally boils down to the ability to shoot things and be protected from being shot in return) as a superhero as they are definitely beyond the common or normally skilled individuals I meet on a daily basis. It doesn't take the power to shoot lasers out of their eyes or whatever to make them a superheroe YMM (and apparently does)V.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I'd consider the kind of skill and ability needed for a character with "mundane" weapons and skills to hang with supernatural beings pretty "super".

 

On the other hand, I consider that nobody who isn't superhuman has the ability to 'hang with' superhumans. Call it a glass ceiling, basically. Unless we're talking about some pretty weak (200pt or so) supers, a normal can only train so far, and can't get over that plateau (IMG).

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

On the other hand' date=' I consider that nobody who isn't superhuman has the ability to 'hang with' superhumans. Call it a glass ceiling, basically. Unless we're talking about some pretty weak (200pt or so) supers, a normal can only train so far, and can't get over that plateau (IMG).[/quote']

 

If that's a restriction you choose to impose in your own games and settings, that's fine but I'll point out it's hardly universal one in rpg settings or the source material. A number of "superhumans" have little reason to have outrageously high physical abilities in the first place beside authorial fiat. AFAIC, there isn't a hard line between "Normal" and "Meta". Someone with the power to shoot lightening out of his butt isn't going to automatically trump a NAVY seal or even a experienced cop because he happened to sit on magical lightening rod at some point.

 

That also ignores the weapon master, martial artist, etc who's backgrounds do make them "more than human" since they've been enhanced or have tapped into ability and powers Joe Average hasn't or even can't by going to the gym twice a week.

 

Edit: It seems like this is an issue we're on polar opposite sides of and we're aren't like to hash it out here nor is this the appropriate thread for it.

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I'm not sure if this counts an archetype but I'm not found of playing "cosmic" style characters: Space Gods and that sort of thing. The power level doesn't appeal to me.

[irchris5000]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Another point, for me, is that my definition of a superhero actually requires, well, super-ness. I don't call Batman a superhero because he doesn't have superpowers and doesn't use supertech (that, and he's a total jerk, but that's tangential).

 

I disagree, have you ever seen what happens when batman is shot at. He runs, and no matter where the badguys are aiming, the bullets always trail his feet. If changing bullet trajectories isn't super I don't know what is.

[Tom]

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.

 

Hmmm, my usual source of 'eyerolling' with MAs have nothing to do with the laws of physics. You're playing an MA in a supers game, I expect over-the-top wire-fu/mystic master stuff...

 

On the other hand, dealing with a player (or GM) who plays MA character actions in a manner which would adequately describe a schoolyard brawl at caveman elementary makes my teeth hurt. Needless to say, I don't play MAs very often (at least not as a primary schtick) and am fairly careful about allowing them in games I GM.

 

Also not a big fan of mentalist. Too much of their ability is dependent on GM interpretation, and their abilities in general lend themselves more to hanging WAAAAAAAAAAY back and nudging the fight from a distance than mixing it up close with the rest of the group. You almost have to mix them with something else to run them with a team as a general rule...

[AmadanNaBriona]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Had to think a bit to come up with an honest answer, as I generally enjoy playing most any archetype. Well... lets be honest... most of my characters are similar on a meta-concept level... I tend to play The Tragic Hero. There will always be another archetype/powerset below that, but that's the foundation.

 

Of the standard list, Speedster is prolly my least favorite archetype to play, because I can't ever seem to get my head out of "This has all been done before" headspace.

 

If that's a restriction you choose to impose in your own games and settings, that's fine but I'll point out it's hardly universal one in rpg settings or the source material. A number of "superhumans" have little reason to have outrageously high physical abilities in the first place beside authorial fiat. AFAIC, there isn't a hard line between "Normal" and "Meta". Someone with the power to shoot lightening out of his butt isn't going to automatically trump a NAVY seal or even a experienced cop because he happened to sit on magical lightening rod at some point.

 

That also ignores the weapon master, martial artist, etc who's backgrounds do make them "more than human" since they've been enhanced or have tapped into ability and powers Joe Average hasn't or even can't by going to the gym twice a week.

 

Edit: It seems like this is an issue we're on polar opposite sides of and we're aren't like to hash it out here nor is this the appropriate thread for it.

I've played lots of weaponmasters, gunguys, martial artists and the like, and am totally resisting the urge to wade in on the tangent, But I agree with Nexus here... we need to start a new thread for the topic.

I'm coming up blank on good titles....

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

On the other hand, dealing with a player (or GM) who plays MA character actions in a manner which would adequately describe a schoolyard brawl at caveman elementary makes my teeth hurt. Needless to say, I don't play MAs very often (at least not as a primary schtick) and am fairly careful about allowing them in games I GM.

 

Brawling is a perfectly legitimate martial art.

[Pól Ruadh]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

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

Run away...!!!!

 

Yep.

Like every single martial arts or action movie you've ever seen.

And while we're at it, I should mention that Jackie Chan and Jet Li's fights are choreographed, too, and the outcomes are predetermined.

Oh yeah, and those bullets that John McClane uses in 'Die Hard', totally fake.

And you know those robots in Star Wars... guys in suits.

 

Hate to have to break this to ya.

[DJ Blackrock]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I have to continue the hate for Mentalists. Well, Mentalists in the hands of one particular player. This player is a math superfreak, who takes weeks to fine tune a character, and even with hard caps in place, still manages to bend the rules system over a table and have his way with it.

 

We wound up with a mentalist so damned powerful that he could sit in his apartment, Mind Scan this entire corner of the Milky Way galaxy, find a villain, and mind-**** him or her so badly that they became a drooling idiot and unfit for further use. Villains eventually began wearing psionic dampeners, but he just made his powers Armor Piercing to get around it. He also had no problems with Mind Controlling the villains to kill each other, and then commit suicide (25d6 Mind Control ((pushed and Haymakered)), plus 5 CSLs for ECV only can screw over most anything out there) I pleaded with him, please, I have no way of even touching you, and you're obliterating the plot. You're five seconds away from being NPCed.

 

We eventually agreed on a radiation accident involving nano-machines that turned him into a human shaped blob of sentient nanites. He was still insanely difficult to hurt, but at least he had to be at the actual fights.

[Blackberry]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Straightforward martial artists have always been just something that doesn't click for me.

[The Dude]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Straightforward martial artists have always been just something that doesn't click for me.

 

Give 'em KS: Tapdancing and some appropriate shoes and they should click fine.

[CrosshairCollie]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I have to continue the hate for Mentalists. Well, Mentalists in the hands of one particular player. This player is a math superfreak, who takes weeks to fine tune a character, and even with hard caps in place, still manages to bend the rules system over a table and have his way with it.

 

We wound up with a mentalist so damned powerful that he could sit in his apartment, Mind Scan this entire corner of the Milky Way galaxy, find a villain, and mind-**** him or her so badly that they became a drooling idiot and unfit for further use. Villains eventually began wearing psionic dampeners, but he just made his powers Armor Piercing to get around it. He also had no problems with Mind Controlling the villains to kill each other, and then commit suicide (25d6 Mind Control ((pushed and Haymakered)), plus 5 CSLs for ECV only can screw over most anything out there) I pleaded with him, please, I have no way of even touching you, and you're obliterating the plot. You're five seconds away from being NPCed.

 

We eventually agreed on a radiation accident involving nano-machines that turned him into a human shaped blob of sentient nanites. He was still insanely difficult to hurt, but at least he had to be at the actual fights.

 

This is why I always buy my Mindscan either in the same Multipower as my attacks, or with the limitation 'cannot be attacked through', so it's just a (maybe) people-finder. As a side note, it depresses me that so many people abuse mentalists so badly that GMs hate the powers rather than the twink who built the character.

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I have to continue the hate for Mentalists. Well, Mentalists in the hands of one particular player. This player is a math superfreak, who takes weeks to fine tune a character, and even with hard caps in place, still manages to bend the rules system over a table and have his way with it.

 

We wound up with a mentalist so damned powerful that he could sit in his apartment, Mind Scan this entire corner of the Milky Way galaxy, find a villain, and mind-**** him or her so badly that they became a drooling idiot and unfit for further use. Villains eventually began wearing psionic dampeners, but he just made his powers Armor Piercing to get around it. He also had no problems with Mind Controlling the villains to kill each other, and then commit suicide (25d6 Mind Control ((pushed and Haymakered)), plus 5 CSLs for ECV only can screw over most anything out there) I pleaded with him, please, I have no way of even touching you, and you're obliterating the plot. You're five seconds away from being NPCed.

 

We eventually agreed on a radiation accident involving nano-machines that turned him into a human shaped blob of sentient nanites. He was still insanely difficult to hurt, but at least he had to be at the actual fights.

 

This sounds like more of a player issue than a problem with the archetype, bluntly he was power gaming. Also remember Pushing and Haymakering are "dramatic" manuevers, essentially desperation gambits not just ways to get more dice. The GM is perfectly free to disallow them when he sees fit. The character is in no danger and under no pressure sitting in their apartment miles from the battle.

 

Also where your opponents built to work in a campaign that had 25d6 Armor Piercing Mind Control? Remember as the GM, you don't have a point limit. There's also the fight fire with fire approach. He can do it, so can any other mentalist, there are always Automatons, snipers, etc. But really in the end that just aggravates the problem. Best to shut the power gamer down out of the game.

[bubba smith]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

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' date=' 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.[/quote']

thats one way to put it

[nexus]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I've played lots of weaponmasters, gunguys, martial artists and the like, and am totally resisting the urge to wade in on the tangent, But I agree with Nexus here... we need to start a new thread for the topic.

I'm coming up blank on good titles....

 

Might be for the best after all, its a topic that boils down to differing taste and you can't really debate that one way or the other. And unfortunately, it can get tense online when you try with the limitation of the medium.

[bubba smith]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Had to think a bit to come up with an honest answer, as I generally enjoy playing most any archetype. Well... lets be honest... most of my characters are similar on a meta-concept level... I tend to play The Tragic Hero. There will always be another archetype/powerset below that, but that's the foundation.

 

Of the standard list, Speedster is prolly my least favorite archetype to play, because I can't ever seem to get my head out of "This has all been done before" headspace.

 

 

I've played lots of weaponmasters, gunguys, martial artists and the like, and am totally resisting the urge to wade in on the tangent, But I agree with Nexus here... we need to start a new thread for the topic.

I'm coming up blank on good titles....

how about "whats your favorite figher type?"

[Doc Samson]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Expanding on my Patriot comment, I don't much like Mystics, Powered Armors, Weaponmasters, Metamorphs, or Speedsters as ATs either.

 

Please hang in there while I explain. Being one of the above doesn't really tell you much about the character in question, at least not as much as the designation Brick, Mentalist, Energy Projector, Gadgeteer, or Martial Artist does. Putting aside that almost all comic book character fall into multiple categories, I think many of us could agree that they usually have one "main" AT.

 

For example; Thor could be Weaponmaster, EP, Brick, Mystic, Patriot (Asgard), ect. but if you were forced to pick one, I think many would say he is a Brick as he is one of Marvel's physically strongest characters and has high defenses to boot.

 

Here is another example; Rhino and Juggernaut both use a movement power as their primary means of attack, but I think many would agree they are not Speedsters. For that matter, is anyone a Speedster? Is the Flash really a speedster or is he just a super fast Martial Artist? What makes the two different in terms of powers? Nightcrawler's primary power (and several power tricks) are based on Teleportation, but I think many would call him a Martial Artist.

 

All of Absorbing Man's powers are magical in nature, but is he a Mystic? Same with Black Knight. What seperates them from Dr. Strange? Their powers, not their backgrounds.

 

I lost my train of thought...need coffee.

[Tech]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I don't like playing Mentalists as characters. The rules for mental powers seem broken to me and make certain powers next to useless unless you pump up the number of dice you have... but I'm not going to touch that in this thread.

 

Otherwise, I play Bricks, Energy Projectors, Martial Artists, Power Suits, Gadgeteers and... one I simply call Other.

[Tom]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Brawling is a perfectly legitimate martial art.

Yep. In the UMA and everything...

 

Play a brawler around me, and describe his actions in 'brawling' terms, I won't have any issues...

 

Play a character raised by monks in a secret temple in the orient who's mastered the secret arts and describe his actions in brawling terms and I'll have to resist the urge to hit you with a stick.

 

My issues with MAs have more to do with other people's ability to play the character within my expectations than any issue with the character itself...

 

While the same is true to an extent with my dislike for mentalists, the root is as much with the actual rule mechanics as my expectations/interpretation.

 

Another 'pet peeve' in terms of archtypes is the PA with no background justification/support. The Warlord makes sense to me: he's a wealthy arms merchant with access to alien tech and an extensive support base. He can maintain a high-tech tin can. Ankylosaur makes no sense at all. It took him 'months' to figure out how to pronounce the name, saying the suit's controls must be extremely intuitive is something of an understatement. How he keeps it running, and why he hasn't been tricked out of it, is a complete mystery to me...

[Grimble]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

I never got into playing Martial Artists. I've had Bricks and Gadgeteers who had martial arts skills, but never played a straight up Martial Artist (Chi-powered or not) and I have no plans to ever play one.

 

For me, there is no question...Pirates over Ninjas every time!

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

You can do that, yes.

 

Has anybody ever actually seen anybody do it?

 

If I applied that criteria to all abilities on a Champions character sheet, my games would be very different. Would any published characters pass that test?

[Supreme Serpent]

Re: Which is your least favorite archetype to play?

 

Another 'pet peeve' in terms of archtypes is the PA with no background justification/support. The Warlord makes sense to me: he's a wealthy arms merchant with access to alien tech and an extensive support base. He can maintain a high-tech tin can. Ankylosaur makes no sense at all. It took him 'months' to figure out how to pronounce the name' date=' saying the suit's controls must be [b']extremely[/b] intuitive is something of an understatement. How he keeps it running, and why he hasn't been tricked out of it, is a complete mystery to me...

 

For this sort of guy to work you have to assume or introduce something in the setting like the Tinkerer in Marvel. With the Tinkerer to supply tech support to lower-tier villains, AIM to provide it to higher-tier ones and Taskmaster's thug academies Marvel set up a decent supervillain support network.