[larsdangly]

It is hard to disagree with the 'white room' analyses of the seemingly over powered properties of some of the special weapons (Boomerang, Lasso, Sha-Ken, Whip). On the other hand, it is noticeable how rarely they show up as weapons in real play (i.e., outside of test matches constructed specifically to show them in a good or bad light). People seem not to gravitate toward them.

I think it is because as special as they seem, they also lack a lot of other things that you get with the more standard weapons. None of them are any good once you are engaged, so you don't really want to have them in hand when a foe is within striking distance of you. Yet they require specific 'builds' to fully take advantage of them, so you are investing in something that you often can't use when you need it. Also, there are some pretty normal weapons with some pretty great traits. A 34 point character (accessible after just a couple sessions of play, or even in character creation if you use 'flaws' from the Companion) with a long bow and MW3 is going to deliver 2 adj.DX 16 , 1d+2 damage attacks every turn. That is pretty serious - like an almost sure-thing battle-axe blow delivered at anyone in sight on a standard battle mat. It's pretty much a fight ender. Explain to me how that is worse than a boomerang or whip. You could make similar arguments about pole weapons. Or UC specialists. Or 'tanks' with 9-10 points of protection (totally accessible to characters with moderate stat totals).

The point is, these weapons sit in a very competitive ecosystem, and they don't really stand out as particularly winning recipes in real play.