Monday, May 28, 2012

Thunder and Lightning

Question: Hey John and Anne, I've been using your site as a helpful reference since 2010, and though I own all of the books, I have always found your site and your house rules to be the fix the game needs to really run smoothly. I was very disappointed by your recent changing of the Gods' purviews and attributes, but after reading this blog I can understand WHY you did it and I respect it... but I'm curious why you weakened Zeus so much? Shouldn't the King of the Gods have at least Epic Strength?

A two-part answer: we don't think Zeus should have Epic Strength associated, but we also don't think he's "weakened" in the slightest because of it.

In all frankness, we couldn't find any reason Zeus should have Epic Strength, so it was stricken from his list fairly early in our edits of the Dodekatheon. Zeus is an incredibly potent and powerful figure, but it's not because of the strength of his arm; it's because of his authority over the gods and his position as the preeminent god of the heavens. Zeus rules by right as the unanimously voted and supported king of the gods. He rules by law and decree, by the respect due him from all other deities and the uncontested authority of his position. He doesn't rule because he goes around busting in the heads of people who disobey; in point of fact, almost nobody disobeys, ever, thanks to his incredible ability to just Lay Down the Law, and those few who do usually end up consigned to Tartarus for their sins. That's what his Epic Charisma and Justice associations are about: his incredible force of will and ability to make rules that nobody - not grieving Demeter, not vengeance-bent Poseidon, not unfairly-punished Apollo, nobody - can argue with. Zeus is In Charge, and it has nothing to do with anything as pedestrian as the threat of punches.

Which is not to say that Zeus isn't terribly scary when he wants to murder you, but he doesn't do that with strength, either; he does it with lightning, because he's an epic master of the Sky purview and has a really rad relic thunderbolt (forged for him by either Hephaestus or the Cyclopes, depending on the story) that we assume does horrific amounts of damage. When Zeus starts striking people with lightning, people die; it's as inevitable as the damage lightning causes in real life, the awesome power of which he represents. Is Zeus mad at somebody? Thunderbolt. Does Zeus need to make a point? Thunderbolt. Is Zeus just in the mood to remind everybody of how awesome he is that day? Thunderbolt. But he almost never makes an altercation physical, because Zeus is not a physical combat kind of a dude. It's not really in his skillset.

In fact, in the only major story in which he does a lot of described physical combatting, his titanic battle against Typhon, he gets his ass kicked when he stops using thunderbolts and decides to grapple directly against the monster; he ends up with his sinews ripped out, in a sack stuffed into a cave, where Hermes has to come rescue him and restore his body parts before he can do anything else. Typhon is a great example of a being with Ultimate Strength; he's unbeatable in hand-to-hand combat and during their second battle just rips mountains out of the earth to use as missiles. Zeus, in contrast, does not do these things, and wins through his awesome command over lightning, striking the flying mountains with his thunderbolts to drive them back against Typhon and eventually bury him. That Zeus is an undisputed master of Sky is totally unarguable; he is the most baddest of dudes ever to throw lightning at someone's face. But stronger than everyone else ever who doesn't have the Ultimate? No, he's not.

But this doesn't make Zeus less than powerful! Far from it. For one thing, I'm sure his Strength (and Wits and Dexterity etc., while we're at it) is perfectly serviceable; I'd assume he probably has eight dots of Epic Strength or somewhere in that area, which is nothing to sneeze at. Just because he doesn't have the Ultimate doesn't mean he's limp and noodle-like. For another thing, Zeus has Arete, and if you haven't played with high levels of Arete yet, it's really easy to forget how insanely powerful having an extra 46 dice to your rolls is. Zeus may not be primarily a combatant (and he shouldn't be - that's what he has people like Ares and Athena for, after all), but that doesn't mean at all that he's weak. On the contrary, I doubt anyone wants to get into a fight with him unless they have nothing left to lose.

It's easy to view gods with more associated powers as more "powerful" and gods with fewer as "weaker", but it ain't necessarily so. Our goal is always to give gods the associations that make the most sense for their stories and roles in ancient myth. Among the Dodekatheon, especially (as Greek and Roman myth are very fond of choosing one or two specific things for a god and sticking with them), having few associated powers is the norm; it doesn't mean that they're weak, but rather that they've specialized to be really amazing in a few areas instead of branching out in a bunch of others. Add in the fact that any of them might have Arete maxed in several abilities (which is equivalent, for them, to having more purviews maxed), and they're the opposite of less powerful: they're extremely potent specialists who can kick any other god's ass in the area of their expertise.

Incidentally, I'm sorry you've been disappointed by our changes. That's never our intention.

18 comments:

  1. what makes him affective also makes him a one trick pony. Someone with the brains and modern knowhow of Aiona or Alison can rig up some sort of belt or iron man like armor that can absorb lightning and electricity and fire it back at him. I'm on saying it would let them win, but it could provide a challenge to sky father Zeus.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, but Zeus didn't make The Lightning Bolt; very smart smith people did, so out-thinking their design might be a very difficult task indeed. :)

      Delete
  2. I'm always a little amused at the impulse to preface one sentence worth of question with one paragraph worth of obeisance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Must be all that use of Charisma knacks by John.

      Delete
  3. It wasn't so much an impulse as it was my first question and I'm a fan of these folks. I really admire the time and effort they put into this site, and I didn't want to seem ungrateful for all that work when I asked the question.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No worries - we change a lot of things, so people are bound to have questions. :) We're glad you get some use out of the site!

      Delete
    2. Your argument about Greco-Roman 'overspecialization' makes a lot of sense and I'm becoming won over to your changes on the Gods. But I do have one more question about the Thunderer, which I might as well ask here to save space - why not Animal (Eagle)? Hear me out - the Aquila, the Roman symbol, was meant to represent the might of Jupiter. Zeus is associated with the Eagle in both Greek and Roman myth, and it is widely known to be his totem animal. The Eagle has existed as a symbol throughout history - in Byzantium, in the Holy Roman Empire, in Nazi Germany, and even in the United States today. Sure that's meant to represent Roman influence, but it indirectly also represents Jupiter's influence. Not to mention, the powers line up - Zeus transforms into a ton of animals: a Bull, a Swan, and an Eagle too - which implies that he has Protean Understanding. Sure, you could argue that he might not have THE BEAST, only going up to Animal 10, but when you can argue that Aphrodite has 'Swan' (and I don't see the connection there at all) and Ares has 'Wolf' (an animal more closely associated in mythology with his son, Quirinus,) why shouldn't Zeus have 'Eagle', the symbol with which he is widely known and associated?

      Delete
    3. Alas, Aphrodite and Ares are examples of us having to do something we didn't like much. They were both clearly important Legend 12 gods who needed to be on the roster, and also clearly so specialized (as Greeks tend to be) that they didn't have a lot of things we could really feel justified giving them as associated. Ares gained Wolf from his version as Mars, who is often shown as accompanied by wolves in addition to the story of sending the she-wolf to suckle his sons; we don't love it, but he needed something, and it fit better than most other things we considered (though lately we've been discussing replacing it with Fertility, on the theory that Mars has very strong agricultural connections). Likewise, Aphrodite gets Swan because it's the strongest of the animals associated with her and she's shown riding giant swans now and then, and because the swan is also a very clear totem animal of her Etruscan counterpart Turan. We don't love that, either, but frankly we couldn't come up with anything else that made more sense, and we try to make sure playable parents have at least three associateds at minimum, even if they also have Arete, for the sake of their Scions. (Also, John was really creeped out by the suggestion of giving her the possibly just as reasonable Animal (Clam).)

      So the two of them are actually the two worst examples of the Animal purview on our entire site. They have it because they had to have something, not because they met our criteria; Zeus has plenty enough associations to be getting along with and isn't in the same boat, so he doesn't get the same fudging.

      But, anyway, Zeus: Zeus does indeed use the eagle as a symbolic creature, but he also uses a bunch of other creatures, including goats, bulls, wolves and so forth. The eagle's the strongest, but it's not strong enough to meet our usual criteria for a god of animals; Zeus only turns into an eagle in one story, which does not help us much since he has a habit of turning into a bunch of different animals and things when he feels like it, and there are no stories of him hanging out with or commanding or creating or really doing anything else with eagles. Zeus isn't consistent about a single animal totem the way Athena is, nor does he have stories involving that totem like Hecate or Hera, so the eagle's just not strong enough for us for him to have The Beast. Sure, he probably has Animal 6 or 7 or so, but it's not something he's god of.

      My general assumption for his continual transformation shenanigans is that he has either Beast Shape, a few levels of Illusion, or both. It's not a case of a god being aligned with particular animals, but rather just being great at the transformation of his own form.

      Delete
  4. I figured Zeus has epic strength in the books because of well Hercules. Scion RAW doesn't have any mechanic for making something the parent doesn't have a significant part of your legend until hitting Godhood. So since Hercules clearly always had Strength as favored thing, Zeus has it so you can play Hercules 2.0.


    Suffice to say your system of fatebonds fixes this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eh, I'd never give someone an associated just because I wanted their kids to have it. Herakles could just as easily have been buying Strength unassociated - plenty of Scions do, especially when they're trying to carve out a different niche from their parents. I'm sure it became associated for him and his children at apotheosis, though.

      But yeah, his Strength Fatebonds would be off the chart anyway; he'd be getting that stat whether he liked it or not.

      Delete
    2. I didn't say it was good reasoning, just that Hercules is probably the reason Zeus has strength. Mind you what Attributes a god favors in RAW is whatever they get up to 9 not Ultimate..

      Delete
    3. Of course, but we threw that rule away long ago. :)

      Delete
  5. Maybe this should be a new question, but how do you figure out what epic attributes a god has associated? I mean, you gave Heph int and I'm sure he's pleny smart but ultimate int smart? You didn't give Athena app but wasn't she a contender in the beauty contest? I guess I don't know where you decide the line is between a god having some of an attribute and a god having all of an attribute.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous actually made a lot of our points below, but the general gist is this: being mentioned as doing something or being something a couple of times won't get you the Ultimate. You need to either A) have some stories in which you excel at that thing, B) be specifically said to be incredibly awesome at that thing, or C) symbolically represent that thing to the max. To use your example, Athena is probably very beautiful, but she doesn't have Ultimate Appearance; her hotness only figures in one myth, and, as noted below, she does not win that beauty contest. In contrast, the ladies of the Dodekatheon who do have Ultimate Appearance all have reasons for doing so - Aphrodite embodies beauty and lust as her central function, Persephone's the contrasting embodiment of youthful beauty and is specifically said to be so lovely that all the gods, not just Hades, wooed her, and Hera is repeatedly and definitively referred to as "most beautiful among goddesses" and similar epithets. Athena doesn't have any of these things going on; she's beautiful and people note that, but nobody gets overly excited about it, so she's probably hanging out at Epic 7 or so.

      Or, to use an example from our games, Sowiljr has maximum Epic Appearance, while his wife Eztli hangs out at 7. Both of them are going to be described by the average person telling myths about them as "beautiful", but beauty is what Sowiljr's about and is a major theme in many of his stories, while for Eztli it's just something people notice before they move on to how great she is at breaking stuff. Sowiljr is obviously going to have Epic Appearance associated; Eztli probably isn't.

      It's a little bit subjective, as unfortunately this kind of a process always is, but we try to do our best to be even-handed and make calls that are reasonable for the god or goddess in question. We're always happy to discuss our reasoning, though. :)

      Delete
  6. Ultimate Attributes are like Purviews. Just because Athena doesn't incarnate divine beauty doesn't mean she can't be sexy, it just means that she doesn't PERSONIFY what Appearance as an Attribute means. She can probably kick any mortal supermodel's ass at being sexy, but that's not what she's about. Remember that she LOST that contest (although that was mostly due to Aphrodite's bribe). Similarly, Hephaestus developed and created a whole lot of the Dodekatheon's stuff, as well as automatons. He created robots, back when humanity was still going "alloys? how cool!" He's a forge god who developed the art of blacksmithing and metalwork and taught man. Cue Ultimate Intelligence. Also, sorry for stepping on John and Anne's toes. My bad.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not at all, our toes are totally un-trod! You said most of what we were just talking about anyway. :)

      Delete
  7. In the Iliad Zeus was said to be stronger than all the other gods combined in a tug-of-war. That sounds like Ultimate Strength to me.

    http://mythagora.com/bios/zeusiliad.html

    "The Iliad - book 8, line 21 - Zeus tells the other Immortals that even if they all pulled on a golden rope, they could not dislodge him from the sky"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That sounds like the power of his sky, not his strength.

      Delete