Is Vash a good basis for a PC?

Is Vash a good basis for a PC?
Or would it rely way too much on being ten levels higher than everyone around you?

>Is Vash a good basis for a PC?
Nothing is a good basis for a PC

>would it rely way too much on being ten levels higher than everyone around you?
Exactly

Facets of characterz have the potential to be interesting. A skilled Western gunman is always a neat idea, and in the right system with the right group, I could easily see a "Pacifist Combatant" done well, particularly in an M&M campaign.

Beyond that, wholesale use of a particular character is indeed a bad idea.

No, unless your PC is supposed to be an overpowered goofy Mary Sue.

I assumed it was a solo game, with the two insurance agents following him around were NPCs.

Probably a game of Deadlands or something.

It depends very, very much on setting. He'd work fine in a game using the Dogs in the Vineyard system, but a whole lot less so in DnD.

>Mary Sue

This term has lost all meaning.

>Super powerful alien energy being thing
>Can't age and is 180 years old
>Amazing pistol skills, wins at everything
>Can destroy cities in an instant
>Moral high ground, never made any meaningful mistakes (was forced to commit the one that pains him)
>All the relevant parts about the character background are told in like 2 episodes and have no relevance in over half the episodes of the series that are almost episodic in nature. During most of the series he is just "le joker pacifist gunslinger that is amazing when he gets serious"
I hear the manga is better though.

...

If anything Vash is good example of DMPC.

the manga is definitely better
for one they actually give knives a reason to hate humans
in the show, knives hates humans because "I'm better than everybody else, therefore everybody should die"
in the manga, there was another half plant half human person that was born before knives and vash that was probed, tortured, and studied by the humans until it died. Knives discovers this and gets pissed that that humans kill one of his "siblings"

>at the start of the series, everyone wants to hunt him down
>has failed countless times, and has a body riddled with scars and a list of hundreds of people to mourn for
>his philosophy is constantly tested and he suffers endlessly for holding onto it

Also, some of the later chapters of the manga are some of the finest examples of the medium.

Vash would work pretty well in Savage World's deadlands. Gunslinger with a minor pacifism. Take your merits based on evasion from there. I'm pretty sure deadlands has some, or see if you can use a arcane background to grants you a few spell effects that grant you evasion vs ranged weapons. fluff as appropriate (deal with a devil, cybernetics, act.)

Though I don't agree Vash is a Mary Sue, the anime is held back by having a lot of that be background info. There'd be a stronger effect, I think, if we saw him lose a bit more often in the show.

Of course, it could be argued that half of the fun is seeing Vash be a stupid badass, like in the movie where he steals all the bullets from the mercs so they can't shoot up the bar.

>Of course, it could be argued that half of the fun is seeing Vash be a stupid badass
I've always argued Trigun was at least 1/4 a comedy.

Ok, lets say he's Mary Sue. Does this make anime/manga bad? No. It's still fun and interesting. So I don't see any problems with his sueness.

The anime is bad. Take off your nostalgia goggles and give it a rewatch some day. Then again you're probably one of those people who likes any shounen no matter what.

Has anyone managed to make Mr No Killing Allowed to work in actual play? Not specifically as Vash, but this character concept could go so wrong when you start saying "no, you're not allowed to do that" to the other players.

Looking specifically at Vash, the rest of his party seems to be just as capable of shooting someone unconscious as Vash is. Really, Meryl is just as good as he is at disarming people, she just makes less of a fuss of it. If that's how your party dynamic worked you'd be fine. If one character insists that their character kills people, then you've got an immediate PvP situation or else someone has to abandon their character concept.

From personal experience, I've tried to get enemies to surrender five or so times in different games with different GMs and players, and every single time I've attempted it another party member has killed them before they could do anything. Normally with a
>lol it's just a game! :D
attitude, just to make it clear that they're completely uninterested in your character or your attempt to bring morality into the game. Best of luck trying to hang an entire character on that concept.

Watched it not so long ago. Pretty good stuff. And no, I usually do not watch shounen.

>ten levels
Fuck off with your shit system already.

Shadowrun
Gun adept with a cyber arm
That one way that lets you deal with minor ess loss. Burnout?
Hawkeye trait
Minor Pacifist and Wanted drawbacks
Then just take a fuckload of rubber bullets
Dip into Krav Maga for aim as a free action and ready weapon as a free action

I'm currently playing a true Hero character who has a moral ground so high it's in a different plane.
Deals only nonlethal damage, and that's only if he somehow fails diplomacy first.

So far it's been pretty fun.

One of my characters maintains that he only kills monsters, and he usually gives bandits a chance to run and rethink their lives on the grounds that you have to be very desperate and very dumb to mug a group of heavily armed heroes.

It was nice seeing a few actually go rethink their lives, most do not and the other characters thought mine naive, but the other players had no problem.

Sometimes its fun to play an unequivocal good guy.

I watched it a month ago. Still enjoyed it.

I wanted to make a character like this, but I realized it would cause problems with the rest of the party because they really like murdering bad dudes. So I settled half way and just tried to avoid violence the best I could.

I played a few. It's the best when the system doesn't penalize you, but actually lets you fuck it up (like in World of Five Nations, where you can get guaranteed knockout with taijutsu, but you can still accidentally a person with ninjutsu).

>From personal experience, I've tried to get enemies to surrender five or so times in different games with different GMs and players, and every single time I've attempted it another party member has killed them before they could do anything. Normally with a
>lol it's just a game! :D

Play in less awful fucking games with less bad people. Why do you do this to yourself? Do you have no friends that would actually listen to your talks about this sort of a thing to play with?

I watched a few episodes of trigun a few months ago and was not super into it. Is it worth going deeper? or should I just read the manga.

>mad about D&D on a D&D board

You're going to be mad forever, man.

The series basically divides into sections. The first four episodes are about Vash the happy cartoon character, the next 7 look at Vash the legendary gunslinger and introduce the world and the effect he's had on it, and then starting from episode 12 his backstory comes back to kill him. It all builds on itself, and not liking the first few episodes doesn't necessarily mean you won't enjoy the second half.

Hey, if I want to have a serious no-killing encounter and the rest of the party doesn't, then I'm wrong. That's how that works; whoever insists that the rest of the room does things their way and refuses to compromise is the That Guy of the moment.

I did have fun with the concept once, because I figured out a way to flip it on its head and not mind whether the rest of the party joined in with me. I played an assassin in Shadowrun, and his quirk was that he refused to kill anyone he wasn't specifically being paid to kill. Everyone else can be a crude thug to their hearts' content, but that wasn't my guy. I eventually managed to gain a Deadshot-style reputation and an anti-materiel rifle, both of which were immense fun to use in play. Knight Errant can go fuck themselves... you know, from very far away.

read the manga

You'll notice this has nothing to do with the writing style of the author or the place of the hero in the world unduly influencing the plot and everything to do with superficial traits instead of what an actual sue is.

No, but I want to make one really badly.

I want to have an old cleric who refuses to hurt others unless he literally has no other choice in the matter, and even then he won't kill because "everything deserves a chance at life". In battle I'd try and use him specifically for crowd control and healing, and that's it. I want to make him a paragon of good, giving all the gold he earns in town to charities and churches, even knowing he will get nothing back. I'd love to see a GM interact with a true pacifist character, since I imagine most GMs are used to "KILL HIM BEFORE HE GETS TOO CLOSE" players.

This. The term went from

"A fanfic character who is unrealistically competent at everything and is loved by the main cast no matter what she does" to simply

"Any character of exceptional competence in anything, who I do not happen to like."

Superman? Mary Sue
Alucard? Sue
Gilgamesh? Sue
Hercules? Sue
Jesus? OH you better believe it.

Its ridiculous.

I played a Cleric that placed value in all life and only killed if there was no other choice in a group of murderhobos.
>go hunt some orc bandits
>kill the boss and most of them
>the rest surrender
>edgelord tiefling player wants to torture and murder them
>cleric objects
>propose bringing them to the law
>after arguing and standing my ground, manage to convince the rest
>tie them up, heal the one bleeding to death
>the orcs escape prison anyways and try to kidnap the cleric
>edgy player is butt blasted about it to this day

The GM made it fun, but I didn't stay long with them for obvious reasons.

One game of D&D 5e I played, I realized as a party we were going full chaotic "good," using scummy tactics to take advantage of the villians' honor and murder and assassinate them. I was playing a bard from a non-warlike background.

Every time we had a boss on the ropes, I would start compelling him to surrender and end the bloodshed, even trying to make diplomacy checks and spells. They were all far too zealous, though, and made a point of fighting to the death. It got to the point that even the paladin of vengeance said, "I will offer you one chance, for the sake of the bard, surrender and I will spare your life."

By the end, everyone knew it was my MO. The last few encounters went something like,
"Please surrender."
>You know I can't do that.
"I know, but you know I have to ask."
It got to the point were I was wondering why I was even doing it. I just felt that, if nothing else, we had to set a precedence as the inheritors of the world. Despite being jaded, I knew I had to cling to virtue. At that point, I wasn't even sure why. I just knew I had to.

hacksaw ridge?