Friday, July 13, 2012

The Hits Keep on Coming

Question: Would it be possible to see a roman-centric interpretation version of the Dodekatheon? I mean, while they are often declared "the same" gods, the Romans often had drastically different interpretations of them.

Oh, hey, the Romans are back! This question was actually sent in before our big-time debate the other day, but it just now came up in the Queue of a Thousand Questions. So serendipitous timing, I guess.

Sigh. This is a question that plagues John and me nightly, it feels like lately. The Greek and Roman gods are definitely not what you could term "the same", you're right, but thanks to the wildly determined efforts of the Roman Empire to totally absorb the Greek religion into their own, they're also no longer different enough to stand on their own two feet. It's like if you grafted half a robot onto half a human; of course the original human and the original robot are not what you could call "the same", but they're no longer separable unless you want half a dead human and half a malfunctioning machine.

The problem that Scion has, and the reason that the books take the approach of just declaring the Roman gods (and the Etruscan gods, too, while we're at it) to be the same as the Dodekatheon, is that several of them are just not different enough to try to spin into different people. Zeus and Jupiter are almost unflinchingly identical other than the latter's slightly less rampant inclination toward infidelity, Athena and Minerva could wear one anothers' helmets to work one day and no one would notice the difference, and Hephaestus and Vulcan might as well be the same soot-stained, depressed forge-lurkers. Trying to separate them into different deities in an effort to have a Roman pantheon distinct from the Greek one would just end with both pantheons having an almost identical member - in iconography, in myths, in associations, pretty much everything - which is obviously not particularly useful or helpful for Scion. The game just has no need for both Jupiter and Zeus to be individuals that happen to behave exactly the same and have exactly the same goals and stories written about them. It makes no sense.

But on the other hand, there are those Roman deities who were poorly matched up with their Greek counterparts and really don't fit together as the same deity at all. The Greek Ares' emphasis on bloodlust, rampant craziness and unfettered terror is almost anathema to the Roman Mars' connotations of orderly and regimented war in the service of peace, not to mention his association with the growth of important food crops. The Greek Demeter is an earth mother figure who commands awesome powers over the landscape, but the Roman Ceres is also a goddess of law, order and the rights of the people. The Greek Aphrodite is a rampant adulterer and famous seducer of dudes; the Roman Venus' temples were funded by fines levied on overly promiscuous women in order to punish them. These are people who clearly have different associations, personalities and cults that don't match up, but because they're standing next to the dudes above who are mostly identical, Scion is forced to call them the same as well.

(And let's not even talk about the Etruscans. Sure, Uni and Hera are the same... assuming Hera became a badass fucking warrior sometime in the last few millennia when we weren't looking.)

And all this leaves us in the soupy mess of who should be in the pantheon (what about gods that were important in Rome but not Greece, or vice versa), who should have what associated powers (so Ares has Fertility now? But... but ravening berserker bloodlust) and what social and cultural models they might follow and adhere to. It's an awful mess to try to sort out for Scion so that nothing cool or meaningful gets lost but also nothing gets unfairly syncretized or glossed over. But things are syncretized, because the Greeks and Romans did that for centuries (just to annoy us, no doubt).

So we really have three options when trying to do a Roman pantheon:

1) Use no gods that were associated with the Dodekatheon and instead include only native Roman deities. The problem with this is that native Roman deities are usually way less important and well-known than their famous counterparts, because the Dodekatheon-analogue deities were the major recipients of worship. A pantheon made up of the likes of Janus and Silvanus is possible, but it would be a very inaccurate representation of Roman religion and myth.

2) Declare that the Greek and Roman pantheons are the same and run with it. Which is what the Scion books do, basically, and it's not surprising considering the mess they have to deal with. It's the simplest and quickest solution, especially for players that aren't big historical syncretism buffs (if you suggested to an average person on the street that Mars was a god of agriculture, they'd probably think you were stupid), but it leaves everyone with the eternal questions of why these people who aren't really the same are considered the same. I think in this situation you might have to give them all the associateds of both roles as well, something we've been too waffly to do to this point but probably really should. Alternatively, declare that only the Greek associations count because the Romans are later revisionists, and throw different Roman roles out the window.

3) Declare that they are the same pantheon, but provide extensive different writeups for their different forms, possibly including mechanics for when Mars becomes Ares and what that makes happen differently. But, while getting to have concretely different descriptions for both is attractive, we are in this option inventing totally new and complex game mechanics just to deal with these people. It's probably not the best choice we could be making.

It's a conundrum. I think that the best of a bad situation is to choose option two and apply the associations of both cultures on the theory that their Roman Fatebonds are just as valid as their Greek ones... but, as John points out, that way lies madness in the thicket of the eternally labyrinthine syncretism hell that is otherwise known as the Pesedjet.

Mythology is too hard, you guys, I quit.

29 comments:

  1. There is always the possibility that certain gods just got a little older and became a little wiser. Ares might have been a ravenous berserker but he could have seen the forging of Rome as an opportunity to grab some power for himself.

    An opportunity that accidentally took him through a 'coming of age' and taught him discipline, responsibility, and the importance of keeping troops fed.

    We love the idea of gods never changing, because we play the game to associate with behavior that is familiar to us. But there are plenty of reasons why they could have changed over THOUSANDS OF YEARS, especially when some myths might just support exactly that kind of change.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But that leads us down a horrible Rabbit hole. Does that happen to all the gods? Why haven't the other 200 gods changed and if they have are we just making up stuff for all of them? It's super complicated and should really be thought through and it's impossibility realized.

      Delete
    2. That is John. I logged in from Anne's google

      Delete
    3. That actually makes sense. Look at the shift into modern Hinduism from the original vedic religion, where the big three were Indra, Agni and Surya (with Yama working as a fourth). The Trimurti happened later and heralded huge changes to the religion (poor Indra got dethroned).

      I think it's plausible that the shift from Greek to Roman deities could be a kind of divine coming of age for those gods involved.

      Delete
    4. When you two go to work on a pantheon, you tend to take a snapshot of a certain period of time and use that to stat up the pantheon as a whole. It is safe to say that the gods probably have changed (some more than others), but you are only concerned with that snapshot and frequently reject more modern myths as the work of mortal reinterpretation.

      The Hindu myth mentioned above is a pretty easy example, because you took the snapshop after the religious revolution took place. We literally got to see their fates changing over time. For the Dodekatheon you have an interesting situation because you can also see how fatebonds have changed the gods over time, except the snapshot you took was prior to their being influenced by Rome.

      I don't know if you would ever be inclined to do so, but it might be a fun project if you two decided to do a snapshot after the Dodekatheon was influenced by Rome.

      Delete
    5. Well Fatebinds have the ability to change a God. Everything about the person - his personality, his physicality, and his powers. Rome came after Classical Greece, so Ares could simply have been given more Fatebinds that turned him into Mars. The Ares of long ago is still remembered, but the actual physical God is Mars now. Why didn't it happen to all of the other Gods? Because the Gods went away and escaped to the Overworld so that their fatebinds could stay the same. So the rule of Scion could be that "newest wins" not "oldest wins" because the Gods are ever changing in Scion, since they are real individuals. However, I'm no Egyptologist but I agree that the Pesedjet might suffer from that (EVERYONE WAS LAST SEEN AS RA. EVERYONE.)

      Delete
    6. Fatebindings have the fun problem of mortals running around in the overworld. And, any Titans with half a brain will grab mortals by the handful and bring them to battles involving the gods while whispering in their ears what they should interpret just to screw the gods over.

      Delete
    7. This time it's actually Anne.

      We do aim for the heyday of a particular pantheon's religion, simply because that's the best time to try to get the best view of their religious practices and myths. Sometimes it works better than others (Egyptian change over three thousand years makes them a lot harder than some), but overall it's by far the best strategy for us.

      The problem with saying, "Oh, well, the gods could totally have changed over time, so here's what I'm doing with them now," is that you're inventing new stuff wholecloth. You're saying, "Yeah, that's what they did in myth, but here's what I think they're doing now." There's nothing wrong with that, especially in a modern game like Scion, but it means that everyone and everything has to be rewritten with new, made-up attributes and attitudes and god knows what else. It's not something we want to do - not just because it's hard, but because it changes the fundamental flavor of the game. Our players choose gods because of the stories they know about them and the attributes they have attached; they choose them based on their character as known to us from myth, not whatever made-up character we might come up for them. It's the PCs' realm to get to make up cool new stuff and reinterpret divinity for the modern era; we don't want to steal their thunder by having the STs do it with the NPCs instead.

      So I think you can absolutely do that kind of modern revisionism whenever and however you want, but when you do it on a grand scale, you're playing a different game from the one we are. So we far prefer to stick with the classical interpretations of gods as much as possible.

      And yes, Fatebonds are a huge force for keeping the gods as they were in their most famous periods. The whole premise of Scion rests on the fact that Fatebonds shape who you are as a god, and that the gods have been avoiding the world because of it for time immemorial; they're not accruing new Fatebonds that change them during the past few thousand years, because that's something they've been specifically avoiding. In the case of Mars vs. Ares, it's a weighty conundrum because both are strong and legit sets of Fatebonds - Mars is undeniably different and undeniably influencing, but at the same time Ares and his stories have stayed just as strong over time. Neither can be legitimately ignored, and that's why we end up with the current predicament.

      Delete
  2. When Amaterasu hid in her cave the Sun did not shine on the earth. Yet this has no effect on Ra or Horus. If the scion universe can accept all the things that happen to the Sun being true at the same time it can accept Ares and mars who are different people did the same things.


    On the other hand Gods who transform into other gods completely during certain periods of time DO have a certain amount of precent in other mythologies having a mechanic for that and applying it to Mars/ares might be interesting.

    On the third hand(because I am a sewer dwelling mutant) Roman gods are inherently a more noble take in my mind and thus better use as "good guys". I like grey as much as the next guy but if I have to choose between the Elohim and the Titans, I am starting to seriously consider the Titans. So in this hand I say screw the greeks. Screw the man on the street, I mean he probably thinks Thor has Blond hair and Loki is his brother so why should I Care if he doesn't get that Mars is the god of agriculture?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not that the Scion universe can't accept it; it can do and accept anything. It's that it's not consistent and none of the options above really give us a satisfying way of handling it. It's not an in-game problem, it's an out-of-game one.

      Whether the Romans or the Greeks are "good guys" is all a matter of perspective. Sure, the Romans are less vengeance-bent, but at the same time they are psychotically more conquest-oriented, so it really depends on where and who you are which is more of a bag of assholes.

      Delete
  3. Also may I point how shocked I am that somebody else asked about the Romans? (And please no Roman Pantheon please, there are so many ways you can make Ares Mars other than making them two different people depending on how your ST PLAYS the God. Making a Roman Pantheon on its own is so absurdly unRoman.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will repeat again, the setting already presumes Amaterasu getting mad and hiding in her room will effect the sun as much as Apep eating it. The Dodec having both a Mars and an Ares is much less of a stretch.

      Delete
    2. Yes, but the Romans were all about syncretism. They believed that all Gods who were even the tiniest bit alike were actually just different names for the same Gods. They surely believed that Ares and Mars were the same person, but that Mars was a God and therefore there were many, many aspects of him than just 'wild conqueror' and 'orderly protector.' That's what I meant by it being 'unRoman' to make there be a 'Roman Pantheon' on its own - the Romans just didn't believe that.

      Delete
    3. I understand that, I am saying with all the other contradictions ignoring bits of mythology for gameability etc saying they are two separate people is probably one of the smaller kludges in Scion.

      Personally as I said if I were running it I am all, screw the man on the street and his "all I know about Greek Myth I got from God of War" and run them generally in the Roman vein.

      Delete
    4. ares pretty much has to be mars or every roman believed a big lie

      Delete
    5. That would not be the first or last mythological kludge in Scion. See the grand unified Titan creation myth. Or Ymir's death causing the last ice age.

      Delete
    6. I agree; the entire Roman pantheon is weirdly built on the idea of being the Greek pantheon, and separating them would run totally counter to that. It's a case of conscious, state-fueled and intentional syncretism. It's craziness. Stupid Romans.

      Those aren't really comparable examples, J. Ymir's death causing an ice age is definitely not in mythology, but it also doesn't directly contradict any mythology; it's just a cool idea that someone came up with. Ares and Mars not being the same people does directly contradict Roman myth, and we usually try not to encourage that without the awesomest of reasons.

      Delete
  4. So, if you DID merge the Roman and Greek perceptions of the Theoi/Dei together, who'd get changed and what changes?

    Ares-Mars gets Fertility and Guardian, plus his Greek aspects should end up with Chaos.
    Demeter-Ceres gets Justice
    Aphrodite-Venus would certainly get Fertility and might even get Magic depending on how you want to interpret her being asked for good fortune.
    Hera-Juno gets some Justice added into her mix, too.

    In the last post, John asked where I was getting the idea of Guardian for Mars. I had a professor in college that specialized in Roman culture and he talked about the differences between the Greek and Roman Gods for a while. I could swear I remember him saying that Mars originally was a God of borders and boundaries, which seems very Guardian. Also, his aspect as War-for-Peace seems pretty Guardiany.

    I'd say you can pass on adding in the Egyptian aspects because that was more of a "oh these dudes are the same as our dudes," not the wholesale assimilation of a religion treatment that the Romans gave the Greeks. But the internal merging and splitting of Egyptian gods is.. a bit messy, yeah.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I really hope by now you realize our vetting process is far more intense then " I remember this professor saying this thing one time"

      We would never give a god an attribute based on hearsay. We need first and sometimes second hand sources.

      Delete
    2. Yar, I know y'all're super demanding about your Associations. Before going up against Anne's mighty research skills I'd have rubbings of ancient Roman carvings and three reputable experts on Skype or something.

      In the case of the Greeks, I'm pretty giving when it comes to their Associations since they usually have about 3-5, which is REALLY skimpy. Mars' function as a protector of the peace feels Guardianish to me. Set has Guardian and all he does is punch a giant snake.

      Delete
    3. I think the broken brain below was in reference to Set. His job is specifically to guard and protect Ra and the sun, every day, all the time, from the biggest and baddest foe in the pantheon. He's the epitome of a Guardian god, despite his shenanigans when it comes to the royal line of succession. In contrast, I think Mars definitely has some Guardian, but he's definitely not in the same league.

      Delete
  5. Honestly, I think it would be wise to have a /writeup/ for the varying roman aspects, just to have the option, again as many have stated, the roman aspects and iterations were, by and large, more positive and civic minded than the greek versions and this could be attractive to both ST and player alike.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Honestly, I.m certain that isn't gonna happen.

      Delete
    2. What I think may be the best plan is to do something similar to what we're planning for the Loa rewrite - give the god's basic original form (probably the Greek one in this case), but mention that the alternate forms (Etruscan, Roman, etc.) are just as valid expressions of that god. That way a Scion of Ares might build it into his backstory that he interacts with his father as Mars, just as a Scion of Legba from New Orleans might think of his father as Saint Peter instead of as an unfamiliar African god.

      Delete
    3. And even if you don't want to actually GIVE Ares the aspects of Maris or Mars, surely he wouldn't have a problem producing Fertility relics for his kids, especially the ones he fathers when wearing his other hats.

      Same for Legba who might be handing out Relics that are more appropriate for Eshu Elgeba, or any of the others with highly divergent faces.

      Delete
    4. Your gonna give me a brain hemmorage. Please tell me you're joking.

      Delete
    5. ? Why? Even if you don't give Fertility to Ares as an Associated Purview, shouldn't he have enough connection to it that he would have some Relics to give out?

      Scion: Yazata may not be the best thing ever, especially when it comes to Stars, but it does specifically mention a buncha Gods that while they may not HAVE Stars as an Associated power (Tyr) they have some connection to it and could probably give their kids Stars Relics.

      Or did I hurt your brain with the Legba-Eshu thing? Now my brain is sad...

      Delete
    6. What does relics to give out mean? We give that power to anyone who has any god level boon in a purview. So...probably? Im not in the business of completely statting out gods to know everything they might have. 1 dot relics with just purview access on them are insanely easy to find.

      Scion yazata is in the running with companion for worthlessness. Its horrid....why would it matter if a god had a star relic...those things should be pretty easy to get. We always have the craft demigods making any purview access relic they might need by legend 6.

      Delete
  6. It replyed to the wrong thing. This was a response to the Set comment. That seriously broke my brain.

    ReplyDelete