1) Peter/Chris = P&C = PC and Dave or Mike = D&M = DM. Me feeling witty in a bizzare way. Don't read anything into it.
Only if you're determined to have the only roles that determine what happens and what influences the story and whether or not the PCs succeed or fail be PC roles.
Gandalf doesn't make the rest of the Fellowship useless at all at any point. Certainly, Gandalf, if he used his full power, would be stronger than the others, but it is not probable that even if he could/would, that he would make the others useless.
The point is that the PCs are among the people who can kick ass and take names. They are not the only ones who do so and they are not the only people who are interesting.
2) Try not to assume I'm insisting you're compensating for something. It was stated as a "Either: 1) You're missing (see what I said in 1) or 2." Could it have been clearer? Ja. Is it an insult? No. My appologies if it came off as one.
3) Both. Sir Gawain is stronger than "better than average". Sir Gawain is quite a lot stronger than "better than average". Doesn't mean that he has a shield of invulnerability, but being his equal, let alone his superior, would take the PCs being the same...which is not a given. At all.
As for Star Wars and LotR:
The PCs ought to be people capable of something like oh, and I'm using this as an example of competence, Faramir's rangers. Their contributions are certainly valuable and there aren't many who are their equals or superiors, but they're not the best and they're not the only stars. If you play in the Rebellion, Luke is likely to be the guy who gets the Death Star. You are not likely to be Force sensitive.
On the other hand, you are likely to be one of those people who the Imperials really wish would be dead already, and you are not merely one of the nameless multitude. But when telling what Luke did (which is what inserting the PCs directly in movie events would be), Luke will get more of the glamorous scenes.
And in terms of the Rebellion overall, it is likely that more of the New Republic will recognize the name Luke Skywalker than PC name *here*. You'll be one of the gallant captains/colonels/generals/whatever who the Republic is deeply grateful for (or not, but that's a different problem). You'll be responsible for keeping some devilry by the Empire that we don't know about in a movie focused on Luke+Leia+Han from wreaking havoc. The sky is the damn limit.
But you are not going to be the greatest Jedi ever (that role is taken), the greatest shot in the galaxy (tough competition there, though if you win in a shooting contest with Han I won't mind at all.), or something like that.
PCs are special. So are SEALS. PCs-as-the-only-characters-whose-actions-matter makes everyone else's actions irrelevant. This is a bad thing. When/if you're working with Han Solo, expect Han to be capable of kicking tail and impressing you. If you're not very experienced yet, he may be able to overshadow you.
As for PCs and encounters: I could, give some time and an idea of what exactly one wanted to represent, make a perfectly valid "Cavalryman" PC. Hell, even light or heavy. Will that character always have something to do? No. Tough SHIT. There are times in which being a great pilot is simply not relevant. It does not help. Players need to deal with that.
Now, I don't think characters should be made so that their only skills are "do painful things on horseback". That would be too limited.
But having a character who fights primarily on horseback, who is very experienced with sword, spear, and horsebow and proficient but no more than that unarmed, who can sneak about (but not very well, which may be very important) and who can spot those sneaking about (but not as well as someone dedicated to it), is a perfectly fine role.
If you're playing a cavalryman, you don't go into things that require the skills of a ninja. And if you do run into those things despite your intentions, then you're unprepared to deal with them.
Waaa, poor Cavalryman.
So, if anyone is interested in my sketch of "Cavalryman" as to what he'd be able to do (or not), I'll post it. Specific numbers not included, but I can give a general idea of what I'd write up for a horse-using Armsman without much trouble, including what areas he can't contribute much at but isn't so incompetent as to hurt the party (most of the time.).
As for ground up and role protection and so on: Here's my goal.
Each class has some situations where it pwns at. You want to have a rock to handle scissors situations. Rocks PWN scissors situations.
Each class has some areas it can handle proficiently. It won't win if it has to rely on that, but that's okay, the PCs are a group and this level of proficiency is good enough, particularly if someone else is pwning these situations, to help out and make things easier.
Each class has some areas that it does with a medicore level of ability. It isn't inept...a thundering cavalryman isn't actively antistealthy, but he has about the basic proficiency level and isn't likely to improve that much. Nor will he need to.
Each class has some areas it doesn't know what to do at. A knifeman in a contest involving long ranged sniping is going to feel out of place. He should! This is the area that someone else pwns HIM. Ideally, he'll have something to do to justify his existance, but he does not have much to do.
Action heroes can get away with having skills everywhere, because Bond, for instance, relies on his personal ability to succeed. If a team was doing the things Bond did, not all of them would be as good as he is at all things. It wouldn't be necessary.
Most (80%-90%) things a character does, he should be medicore or better at. And for the record, I'm using medicore to mean the low side of average. This includes the very good when calculating "average", so versus ordinary situations, even a cavalryman may be able to be stealthy enough, but you wouldn't want to stake lives on it.
As for levels: Sometimes you'll be in a situation where Aragorn is present. Aragorn will have more impact, roll per roll, on the battle of Helm's Deep than you. If you're reasonably skilled (and not novices...and frankly if you agree to start as a novice you're agreeing to accept this), your contributions will not be irrelevant, but you won't kill as many orcs as Legolas and you will probably have a smaller part in the Saga. But you will have a part. You will be able to say that if you and thirty others hadn't bought time for the King to fall back, who knows what would have happened.
So maybe it wasn't so small a part.
But having the Big NPCs sit back and let the PCs solve the situation despite the fact that the NPCs by all rights would be more able to do so, and have both the time and inclination to act, is absurd.
To use the Fellowship, there's a reason that the hobbits go. And I don't think it was Tolkien preaching how power is a bad thing.
Who really accomplishes more? Aragorn? Or Samwise?
In the end, that's a valid question, even if Aragorn is more obviously badass and probably kills more orcs, Sam is as fully able as anyone could be for what he has to do.
I wouldn't want to cover the Fellowship with people who wanted to be doing something right now with that mentality, but you could tell the Return of the King with both looking quite good.
Going back to a role: Quoting Frank (and if you disagree with him this strongly, our ideas on how to rewrite the game are too distant for us to work on the same project)
"...a party with diverse abilities has a rotating star in different battles and generally wins even though specific characters would get schooled by some of the monsters they face in a cage match."
Brutes - different from Warriors, in that they have attacks and numerical bonuses larger than warriors can. And nothing else. These are the Giant Spiders of the world, and they automatically win a pissing contest and automatically lose tic tac toe.
Magic Warriors - not really spellcasters, usually because they only have a trick or two, and no sleaves. These guys punch pretty hard, and have a secondary arsenal of (usually) spell-like abilities instead of having Warrior skills and/or equipment.
Puzzle Monsters - like the Golem, the Spectre, or the Black Pudding. These creatures are invulnerable to large varieties of attack forms, and require specialized techniques to combat. In reference to their limitations, they usually kind of suck, but their limited vulnerabilities make them walk all over many player characters (and completely unplayable as player characters).
Traps - Whether it's the CR 10 vorpal guillotine or the Assassin Vine, these challenges may or may not even be creatures. They can be quite deadly, but usually must rely upon the player characters to fail a search check or be in a hurry before they can even trigger.
And then, of course there's monsters which actually are Warriors (Giants), Spellcasters (Mind Flayers), or Rogues (Dark Ones).
A Fighter ought to be able to beat some of those handly, struggle against a couple, and lose against a couple. A Wizard will beat/draw/lose against a different set. A rogue will win/draw/lose against a different set. A cleric will win/draw/lose against a different set.
K:
RPS seems to me to be bad model. Rather than have one star per combat, an ensemble cast approach means that everyone has fun during a combat rather than have two thirds of a miserable party. I feel like a cheater when I "win" and encounter alone, and I'm sure the party thinks the same.
The last time I fought an Animated Object I was a rogue. While I couldn't get past its DR, my party and I kept the monster prone with Trip attacks and blinded while the Barb Power Attacked past the monster's DR. We were useful during the combat and we all felt like stars.
Frank: Actually, that animated object encounter fit perfectly into the RPS model. Remember, the Barbarian probably could have beaten that thing alone, but with everyone else busily aiding him, it became extremely one-sided.
That's what the RPS model is supposed to look like - in the battles where one character is dominant and the other characters are at a disadvantage, the other characters aid the dominant character. Essentially the "star role" goes round and round, and the rest of the party are "supporting cast" - they don't sit out the encounter altogether.
Bolding is mine.
Appologies for the very long post, but please read in full. If I can find a way to shorten it, I will, but I'm trying to cover several statements.
