OK. I don't get it. I'm doing a conversion of a Hulk-like character who controls his transformation. I can't see any reason why I would choose (or why anyone would choose) the Divided Archetype. Can anyone help me out?
This is not just about "optimization." The Divided Archetype requires a hero to spend an action to change...but gets absolutely no compensation for it - except *maybe* a different choice of Principle, which just isn't good enough in itself.
If the defense is, "Yeah, but the concept of some heroes is that they have to change," that applies to most other heroes that have to put on a costume.
I'd love to use the Archetype for my character because it fits, but I can't limit the character just to support an unnecessary narrative reason.
Am I missing something or does this just suck?
From a strictly mechanical viewpoint, there's no advantages to taking Divided over any other archetype. You get the same abilities as whatever archetype you select within Divided, and you limit your use of powers and qualities between your different forms. It's very much for a specific narrative.
As a counterpoint to "heroes having to change" being putting on a costume... Okay. Most heroes have a costume. But, comic book logic. Your average hero takes maybe 1 panel, 2 to put on their costume. For them, switching from civilian to heroic mode isn't a major thing most of the time. The Divided Hero makes a much bigger distinction between their civilian and heroic forms, which is why they get Green abilities reflecting how they change between their very different forms.
If you're really hung up on the fact that it takes you an action to change forms... There are options that let you transform and take an action with your Min die.
Overall, I don't see Divided as just bad. But, if you want to run a character with the Divided archetype, really put some thought into what options from it you will be taking. You are playing someone who is 'Divided', more than most.
I personally not a big fan of the Divided archtype either, though I might change my mind once a proper character sheet for it becomes open. It seems like a lot of extra book keeping to give mechanical weight to a thing that can be roleplayed even without the mechanics to back it up.
But i don't really care for the modular archtype either for similiar reasons, so there you go.
I've tried modular in actual play, and while I felt like the power level was... fine... it was way too fiddly for what it did. In hindsight I'd've made the character without modular. I've not tried Divided or Form-Shifter in actual play, because each time I try to make one I find myself recoiling in horror at how wierdly weak they make you!
There may have been changes since GtG released Ch. 3 to us (that was quite a while ago, after all), but according to their own timetable, we're past the time of any rules changes, so here's hoping for some refinement.
catDreaming, I appreciate the insights you have from your experience, but you didn't convince me on this one. It simply isn't good design to make a *mechanical* option that has no *mechanical* benefit just to suit a very limited *narrative* experience.
It could have been as simple as an extra Quality choice or even an increased die size on a Quality for the "normal" side. Something. But unless this changes, this won't be used unless a character is much more significantly two different characters in one person.
I've already made my opinions known in my own thread: I gave Modular a 1/5 and Divided a 0/5. I agree it should have included at least some incentive, maybe larger dice like Form-Changer. For instance, a couple of slightly larger Power dice in Super form and several larger Quality dice in Civilian form.
Well, there's not much of an advantage to Controlled or Device transforms. Merge/Possess is interesting from a conceptual standpoint. Especially how Possess lets you take a minion off the board. But you don't get to do the Jericho or Deadman thing of taking over villains.
But Uncontrolled Transform (the Hulk example earlier). That lets you do some ridiculous things. I built the Hulk as a Divided Powerhouse. In Banner form, he gets to double up on his Qualities (and with a Science d12, it's pretty sweet), and in Hulk form (and of course he's got a d12 in Strength). Now, being so specialized means that he's not good at anything else.
Of course, if he was the "Angry All The Time" Banner who controlled his transformations, then there's no mechanical benefit. It's just cool. Which is pretty much the SCRPG ethos, as far as I can tell.
I can see that. And I could appreciate it if it has no mechanical benefit but was just cool (probably wouldn't use it, but I'd get it at least).
However, the issue in the current rules is that a character with a controlled transformation suffers a full action liability with no mechanical benefit, and arguably not even much of a narrative benefit. I think this is a bit of bad design.
I'm playing as Muerto right now with friends in the Legacy one-shot, and I'm finding him pretty difficult to use. He has no easy-to-use green abilities that don't force you to change form, and his yellow and red abilities are only ok too. I find myself often doing basic action attacks, which is fine but not exactly inspiring. At the cost of creating these ways of changing form (which is only occasionally narratively congruous), he is a bit of a clunky clunker.
Your options for abilities are from Form Changer works and not really Divided. However, I'd say being Divided makes things more complicated to use abilities for sure.