DMF - Dumbass Melee Fighter. This term was originally referred to the stereotypical D&D character who was completely useless outside of a fight because that's all that they could do. The classic image is that of Krusk the Barbarian, who is your go-to guy if you want something chopped down but used for ANYTHING ELSE he's useless.
The term was supposed to encompass two concepts but upon reflection I overreached and caused needless confusion. It was supposed to put down characters who didn't have any real superpowers outside of fighting. If the conflict doesn't directly involve beating someone in a fight then they're useless. But the game where this problem was the worst (Dungeons and Dragons) obfuscated this issue because the rules overly glorify fighting. You can see this in 4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons: the previously-failed fighter archetype didn't get more schticks and ability to contribute, the scope of the game just went down.
And because 4E D&D tried to pretend that because it drastically lowered the standards on what it meant to have the ability to advance the plot after taking toys out of the hands of the players (while still pretending that you could do this for 'epic' level plots without nerfing the epic-ness) and claimed that as a victory for balance it pissed me the fuck off. So I lashed out at the character archetype that created this stealth-nerfing in the first place. So I originally tried to get across the point of: the reason why you can't have interesting characters in 4E is because this game stupidly insists that motherfuckers like the Barbarian and the Fighter could contribute to high-level plots after all! I originally talked about this problem here and I think this is where the term got popularized. http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=50 ... sc&start=0
But anyway, what I tried to get across is that characters of this unintended 'the plot needs to babysit you!' archetype consistently fall into the pattern of being:
- Dumbass because they have no fallback schticks like masterplanning or diplomacy, so they just stand around like idiots if something can't be sworded. This wasn't to imply that these characters are actually stupid, it was to say that outside of their expertise you might as well have someone retarded because someone as sensitive and intelligent as Roy advances the plot with their class abilities as much as Thog. If they were, say, clerics Roy would be immensely more useful than Thog (like Haley vs. Crystal) but because of their unfortunate choice of roles they aren't. So either consciously or unconsciously these characters were all dumbasses and those who weren't fell under the 'but I didn't eat the mousse!' clause.
- Melee because the vast majority of these characters have an emphasis on melee fighting because it's really easy to understand and has an immediate and visceral appeal to newbies. A lot of people don't or won't understand your complex magic system or can figure out how to use traps to their advantage, but everyone can understand hitting something with an axe. It was poking fun at the Leeroy Jenkins types who might not be able to come up with a plan to save their life but by GOD they know how to run up to something and make an attack roll!
- Fighter because classes like the fighter, barbarian, ranger, etc.. are the worst victims of the above two things. Even a wizard who was only concerned about killing things with fireball could theoretically move out of the realm of being 'lol explosions', but fighter-types have such limited special effects that even if you really try they can't rise above the first two limitations.
I realized the problem with this term in future debates when people decided that in order to 'solve' the problem of the Dumbass Melee Fighter was to give them a ranged weapon and a +40 sword. Because the 'fighter' part implied that they were useless because of the class mechanics (as opposed to the concept) and also because melee combat is generically underpowered all things being equal. See the Video Game Cats' comic on Instant Rape Zone.
Their suggestions of course fixed the problem of these characters being unable to contribute in combat, but what I was also trying to get across was that these characters are unable to contribute in non-combat, especially as D&D's power level increases. So I came up with another term: Vanilla Action Hero.
Vanilla Action Hero was supposed to cover heroes who star in action-adventure fiction without any kind of phlebtonium to help them get by. Characters such as Conan, Indiana Jones, etc.. It was supposed to function as an explanation as to why characters like Krusk and Lidda aren't able to break out free from the shackles of the Dumbass Melee Fighter bindings and also separate them from people who could also literally fit the definition of Dumbass Melee Fighter (such as Teen Titans Robin or Jotaro Kujo) but would contradict the point the term was trying to get across (because he can credibly contribute to the plot without it having to babysit him). Unfortunately, me wanting to switch over to this term allowed characters like Ichigo and Starfire to escape the implied criticisms of this term. So now I regret it, too.
So fuck it.
So. I need the TGD's help coming up with a third term. The term is supposed to refer to two concepts:
1) A character who is unable to generically contribute equally to the extent that their teammates can because their schtick is limited. For example, having a character that can manipulate fire versus shoot lasers out of their eyes. The former character can simply do a lot more things with their power (flight, shields, mass blinding, smokescreens, etc.) than the latter. So if you have someone who can shoot eye lasers and someone who can manipulate fire on the same team, all other things being equal the latter guy is going to be more useful and be able to advance more plots.
2) A character where their inability to contribute to equally to the plot as their teammates isn't immediately obvious because they can still bring on the combat pain or they get role-protection for things that shouldn't be role protected. Whether they're actually competent at their contribution without author babysitting (such as Ichigo or Starfire) or not (such as Sokka and Batman) is irrelevant. The point is that the plot gets on their knees to suck off these worthless bitches when it doesn't have to for other characters.
In other words, here's what I'm trying to get across with this term: These are characters an action-adventure plot has to regularly go out of its way to babysit in order to let them contribute and the reason that this is so is because their power set is limited but the story still pretends that the character contributes equally or has the potential to contribute as much as the other differently-powered characters.
So these are the characters who would get included under this term:
- Justice League of America Batman: Because the plot has to role-protect things for him like his intelligence and also say that his throwing Batarangs is a useful contribution to a fight that can challenge Superman.
- Starfire: Because even though she fights as well or even better than her teammates the plot has to center around fighting in order to make her useful, because that's all she can do. So even though the plots Teen Titans regularly go through require some sort of non-fighting skill from the other team members unless it the plot involves mundane shit like 'take care care of mutant silkworm' Starfire can't advance it. But she's supposed to be the equal of her teammates.
- D&D's Krusk the Barbarian: See Starfire. Even though in D&D canon be can't contribute as much even in his area of expertise as Mialee and Jozan, even if you gave him a +100 sword and armor he would still have the underlying problem of not being able to advance the plot unless it involved fighting. Even though this is supposed to be a team-based game where everyone contributes equally. But because most people seem to think that you can 'fix' the barbarian and fighting just by making their numbers bigger they miss the underlying point entirely. So more than anything else, this term is supposed to sneer at them.
- Sokka: See Batman. In his own words he's the only one allowed to do universal shit like navigate and come up with plans because that's his only major contribution to the plot. If he wasn't there, Katara and Aang and Toph and Zuko could rotate the role of 'person who comes up with killer plan that totally defeats the bad guys this episode' because it wouldn't take away from their screentime.
- Superman: His ability not to be able to contribute to most plots outside of fighting isn't because he has a limited power set, but because of either Plot Induced Stupidity or because of the other characters.. In the hands of a competent writer, he'd be able to do a lot more.
- Main Series Batman: in his own series he's actually an extremely useful character, because his low-level sneaking, hacking, intimidation, and inventing skills along with his martial arts are a huge help. The plot doesn't have to babysit Batman in order to get him to contribute because he's fighting people who could logically be taken out by tear gas or Batarangs. The few times he doesn't, such as against Clayface, he has to find alternate solutions but the plot doesn't have to magically hand him one. He doesn't need to have stuff role-protected for him in order for him to contribute. While he's a genius martial-artist, he doesn't have to be the only genius martial-artist in the story in order for him to get screentime where he can advance the plot under his own power.
- Ma-Ti: Like Superman, he actually has a very strong power but is a victim of plot-induced stupidity. While his motif doesn't directly lend itself towards visceral violence unlike his other teammates, that doesn't mean that he's useless or that the plot needs to protect him.
- Kenichi the Strongest Disciple: Because that series is about nothing other than the character fighting to become the strongest person in the world. His world literally revolves around doing nothing but fighting in melee combat. Even though he'd be this as-of-yet unnamed term if placed in most plots of action-adventure fiction, even the low-level plots like in Conan the Barbarian, as long as he stucks to his own series he isn't.
- Haruno Sakura (Part One Naruto): This term wouldn't encompass her because she was deliberately designed to be useless. What I'm trying to get across with this term is that the label is supposed to highlight the deceit inherent in the trope. But because the story makes no bones about her being underpowered and useless in a fight she doesn't get babysitted by the plot. The plot doesn't go out of its way to give her screentime; it just treats her as a useless hanger-on.
