PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Odysseus- Statting the Master Mariner



Human Paragon 3
2009-02-02, 12:16 AM
I've been listening to the audio book of the Odyssey, read by Sir Ian McKellan, if you're interested, and as most things do, it got me thinking about D&D. I began mentally statting up Odysseus, that great leader of men, sacker of cities and master mariner.

I decided right away that he would need levels (probably 3) in the Human Paragon class, because if he's anything, he is a true paragon of humanity. The good skill points, HD, bonus feet and stat boost fit. Adaptive Learning would probably be used for Survival, or possibly Diplomacy since its harder to get with warrior classes.

Beyond that, ranger seems in order for BAB, survival, skills, and a few other tidbits. Favored enemy could be magical beasts, giants, humans, or perhaps favored terrain instead.

But I think a better place to begin might be outlining his actual abilities.

1- Wisest of Men. He would need good wisdom, but Intelligence might be a better fit. He needs good skills points to do most of the things he does.

2- Ranged Combat Capabilities. He anhilates suitors with his spears, claims to have been outshot by only 1 man on the battlefield (distance-wise) and hurls a discus much further than any phoecian men even though they are half his age. This says the farshot feat to me.

3- A clever combatant. He outsmarts the cyclops, as well as many other enemies. Maybe swashbuckler levels, or rogue levels, could represent this.

4- A Master Mariner. Odysseus is called this epitath frequently and earns that title on the high seas, despite his constant wreckage. He's an expert navigator and swimmer as well as a sailor and ship builder.

5- Unbreakable Will. He listens to the syrans, resists the wiles of a nymph, and most of all never loses hope. Human Paragon could help with that will save.

6- Endurance. The man never quits, whether that means swimming for days on end, fighting for hours on end, wrestling, running, or otherwise going far beyond normal human endurance. Ranger gives you the endurance feat, but I think Odysseus needs Die Hard. There are a couple PrCs and variants that key off this as well, Boar Totem Barbarian for instance. Good skills come into effect here as well.

That's all I can think of right now. Did I miss anything? How would you stat up Ulysees?

Arros Winhadren
2009-02-02, 07:11 AM
Actually he would have a massive Bluff check. He's a chronic liar - he lies to his son, his wife, his dad and ATHENA. Because he can.

He's boastful (see his foolishness with Polyphemus). Most importantly, his life blows. Seriously, his character has to be that he's awesome and badass but his life just plain sucks.

He's also a Dapper Dan man. He don't want no damn Fop.

EDIT: As far as builds go, maybe Swashbuckler/Dread Pirate? The Dread Pirate would be re-flavored of course.

paladin_carvin
2009-02-04, 02:59 AM
All I'll comment on is alignment. One, he is not good. He used deep deceit and was unable to forgive the suitors. Arguably, you could say this means he has no honour either, so he wouldn't be lawful. Further than that, I don't know... but I've never liked the character. I've felt he was through and through evil. Most don't agree with me, it seems... but I don't blame the gods for cursing him, and I don't think he learned anything from it.

But I was the kid that hated every book he had to read in school but never because he had to read it.

MickJay
2009-02-04, 08:18 AM
I'm not going into much alignment, other that he most likely wouldn't be lawful; by the then-standards, he could have been good, why not; he isn't any worse (even by modern standards) than the rest of the characters in the story (except maybe the two suitors who are portrayed as clearly bad, and some of the "monsters" he encountered). An essentially lawful and good goddess is his patron, that should count for something as well. I'd probably end up making him chaotic good-ish (with a neutral tendencies) or a good-ish CN.

Very high intelligence, average wisdom, though; he's arrogant and doesn't think too much about consequences of his actions. He may be the wisest man, but that's not the D&D-wisdom, that's more of being very clever and crafty.

He's slightly less courageous than other warriors, that could be reflected by choice of class, I guess. He's a typical "ranged" character, could be ranger-ish, could be rogue-like.

Despite being very strong and fit, he's got a protruding belly, but I can't really think of a way of statting that (he's clearly very charismatic).

I wouldn't be so sure about the will, he resisted the sirens' call because he was tied up to the mast, and he did stay a number of years with Kallypso. Seriously, 8 out of 10 years when he was supposed to be returning home, he spent with an extremly attractive female who fulfilled his every desire, only his growing longing for Ithaca and the intervention of gods made him move on.

Swooper
2009-02-04, 08:26 AM
You're forgetting that he's phenomenally strong. I'd say strength at least 18, likely 20 (raised via levelling). He had a bow that none of his wife's suitors could string, let alone shoot. This says 'Mighty Bow with a hefty strength mod' to me.

Kaiyanwang
2009-02-04, 11:20 AM
Well, Odysseus is not cruel, but he generally does things for himself.

Further, he dos not follow honor, even if when "he must", he follow the rules (i.e, he didn't want to go to Troy to fight, but once tricked to leave is home, he fought 10 years and Troy fell thanks to his ingenuity).

About his alignment, I'll say that he's true neutral.

He's a man of multi-shaped ingenuity, and a trickster, so high mental stats, and a lot of skill points.

I'll definitively go for Rogue. In my mind, Odysseus is THE epic rogue.

P.S. he did to polyphemus one of the most spectaculer Sneak Attacks ever :smallwink:

Muad'dib
2009-02-04, 11:48 AM
Well one thing, no matter what story, the aspect of Odysseus' character that was most emphasized was his intellect. I'd go factotem all the way here. It allows for him to always have an option for any given situation. Of course you might need to take away the spell like abilities factotem gains and maybe replace them, but I think that otherwise it's a dang fine fit.

Human Paragon 3
2009-02-04, 12:50 PM
One point about calypso- people often overlook that he literally was not allowed to leave the island no matter how much he wanted to. He was compelled to stay and fulfill calypso's wishes, not the other way around. She offered him immortality and he refused. She only let him leave because Zeus asked for him to be released. She didn't care that every night he cried on the shores of the island, dreaming of his home.

About Factotum- this is actually a great idea as long as his STR is also high. The spell like abilities could stay as long as you picked stuff like True Strike, Endure Elements, Cause Fear and other spells that could be fluffed into non-magical.

Maybe lay on hands and turn undead could be removed, or you could multi into ranger before you get those abilities. I still think human paragon is necessary, because that's what he is. Maybe something like Factotum 4, Human Paragon 3, Ranger 4. That would give you the feats, skills and abilities necessary to represent him, I think, with maxed out STR and INT.

I'd also use the PHBII Distracting Shot Variant for Odysseus since he doesn't get an animal companion, and I imagine getting shot by him would indeed be quite distracting.

paladin_carvin
2009-02-04, 04:00 PM
I still say he is evil, by my outlook, since he is both selfish and unforgiving. He is ingenious, but his plans take advantage of other people and don't put himself at risk (The horse was an insult to hospitality; one of the cherished acts in Greek culture. His fights with monsters always involved sending other men into danger, which he did without great trouble). But, you could argue that these were just necessary acts, 'for the greater good', etc. etc.. Though, the interests of those fighting Troy weren't really good... and possibly evil. I would call him NE, but I am biased. True Neutral is probably the most accurate.

KevLar
2009-02-04, 06:47 PM
STATS
Odysseus is the quintessential Cunning Hero. His highest attribute is definitely Intelligence. He's the man of many crafts, an engineer, a sailor, a MacGuyver of the Iron Age. He's the man who evaluates a situation, thinks of a solution, makes a plan and fights against all odds with his wit.

Strength is certainly something that makes an impression, as the bow incident shows (the bow none of the suitors can even bend, but he can shoot accurately). But he's not phenomenal, like Aias (Ajax), who is indeed strong as an ox. However, when Odysseus beats even Ajax in wrestling, it's not because he's stronger - it's because he doesn't rely on brute force exclusively, otherwise he would hit the dirt on round one.

He's also a man with a silver tongue. He lies and he cheats. He can bluff his way out of anything. He can disguise himself adequately, fooling Achilles (not a big feat, but still...) that he's a traveling peddler. (Achilles, for his part, was disguised as a woman at the time, to avoid going to war. I love Greek mythology). And of course, he's a king, a leader, a commander.

The rest are not something to bask at - at least for a Hero. Because even when a Hero doesn't excel in a particular field, he's still better than the common man. (Both the commoners of his time, and the warriors of latter times, when he was long dead and it was up to the bards to tell the tale of the Silver Age, the time of mortal Heroes.)


CLASS LEVELS
Leaving aside Aristocrat levels (because this aristocracy is not medieval and doesn't fit) and Paragon levels (because the concept of a Paragon is a given for every hero anyway - the rest don't even have class levels, it's either Hero or Nobody for now)...

I'd first give Odysseus 3 levels of Factotum. It's not a very "heroic" class, but shows the diversity of his abilities. Also, it gives tons of skills, which he should definitely have, and Brains over Brawn, which seems tailored for him. We ignore the spells, of course. There may be a couple of sorcerers around, but in this setting, when something weird is going on, it's a god that did it.

And then, I'd go straight Warblade. No matter how impressive their mental stats are, these Heroes are primarily warriors, until they grow too old to fight. This is an age of "might makes right", mixed with divine heritage and/or a noble lineage only for spice and a seemingly lawful justification: the nobles and the elite warriors are still the same group of people. Warblade gives Intelligence synergy, which is fitting, maneuvers which make him very powerful in combat without seeming too supernatural (like Shadow Hand or Desert Wind would), maneuvers fitting to a leader from White Raven, and maneuvers that rely on concentration. It may be constitution-based, but still produces a "mind over body" effect.

ALIGNMENT
In D&D terms, every single immortal god and mortal hero of the Greek mythology is evil. Yet another reason to throw this concept out of the window and never look back. (Yes, I'm biased. So sue me. :smalltongue:)

So.....


ODYSSEUS
Human Factotum 3 / Warblade 11
Fort 9, Ref 7, Will 4
BAB +13/+8/+3
Str 16, Dex 12, Con 12, Int 20, Wis 11, Cha 14
(That's a 40-point buy at level 1)

Abilities:
Inspiration
Cunning Insight, Knowledge and Defense
Brains over brawn
Weapon Aptitude
Battle Clarity, Ardor, Cunning and Skill
Improved Uncanny Dodge

Feats: Able Learner, Point Blank Shot, Far Shot, Knowledge Devotion (he is the protégé of Athena...), Improved Unarmed Strike, Improve Grapple, Athletic, Improved Initiative

Skills:
Swim, Climb
Hide, Move Silently, Use rope, Sleight of Hand, Ride
Concentration
Knowledge (all...), Craft (engineering, wooden anything), Appraise
Sense Motive, Profession (sailor, farmer), Survival
Bluff, Diplomacy, Disguise, Perform (oratory)

How does it look?

J.Gellert
2009-02-05, 04:46 AM
I like it. I don't know about Warblade, isn't it a bit... flashy? Call me old-fashioned, but I'd stat him as just fighter.

Good choices on feats and skills.

Very good point about the alignment. I find it's kind of silly trying to assign "black and white morality alignment values" to people from real life (even "real myth"). It's hard to call anyone strictly evil or good after 10 years of war, anyway.

If I wanted a more "reasonable" point buy, I'd lower his Int a bit (dropping Craft and/or Disguise) and drop his Wis in the negatives, since he's so famous about unwisely commiting hubris, but who wants a reasonable point buy when statting a legendary hero anyway?

Tengu_temp
2009-02-05, 12:38 PM
I like it. I don't know about Warblade, isn't it a bit... flashy? Call me old-fashioned, but I'd stat him as just fighter.


Depends on the schools. Iron Heart is 100% gritty fighting and 0% flashy moves out of Wuxia.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-02-05, 12:41 PM
Depends on the schools. Iron Heart is 100% gritty fighting and 0% flashy moves out of Wuxia.I'd think of him as closer to White Raven, really. He's a tactical leader more than a fighter. Though iron will but still unable to break free of domination does sound like IHS.

Tengu_temp
2009-02-05, 01:02 PM
Yeah, I was just giving the most archetypal example against the "all ToB = flashy shonen anime" notion.

paladin_carvin
2009-02-05, 02:37 PM
I don't think it's fair to say no one is good in Greek myths. Ajax is good from all I've seen. Hercules, while not perfect, is mostly good. Apollo is also a very good God for the most part. There are also many many neutral gods and personality. To just write off the concept is quite simplistic.

Archpaladin Zousha
2009-02-05, 02:55 PM
I agree that it's simplistic to write off Greek mythology's figures as all evil, but I don't think any of them could be considered good. All of the gods were petty, immature beings, even Apollo. Heracles did heroic things, yes, but they were to atone for mass murder, not to mention the fact that he commited numerous other sins. Odysseus threw Hector's baby son, Astyanax, from the top of Troy's walls during the final battle. And one other thing. I'd object to saying Odysseus had indomitable will. While yes, he survived the Siren's temptation, that was because he had the sense to make sure his men were protected with the wax stoppers, and that he commanded them to tie him up beforehand and not to untie him until they were safe. And just because he was trapped by Calypso doesn't mean he didn't enjoy her "attentions" during the seven years he stayed there. Same with Circe too. He could not keep himself away from pretty ladies.

Vargtass
2009-02-05, 03:01 PM
Hector of Troy - Lawful or Neutral Good
Actually, in a work where the trojans are conciously rendered as morally better that the achaeans, it's very difficult to discuss alignments in a D&D-ense at all.

In fact, I would rather say that alignments normally do not apply. In any great literature.

And I fully agree on the late replies on Odysseus' "indominatible" will, especially concerning women. Also, his charisma is maxxed.

paladin_carvin
2009-02-05, 03:04 PM
I agree that it's simplistic to write off Greek mythology's figures as all evil, but I don't think any of them could be considered good. All of the gods were petty, immature beings, even Apollo. Heracles did heroic things, yes, but they were to atone for mass murder, not to mention the fact that he commited numerous other sins. Odysseus threw Hector's baby son, Astyanax, from the top of Troy's walls during the final battle. And one other thing. I'd object to saying Odysseus had indomitable will. While yes, he survived the Siren's temptation, that was because he had the sense to make sure his men were protected with the wax stoppers, and that he commanded them to tie him up beforehand and not to untie him until they were safe. And just because he was trapped by Calypso doesn't mean he didn't enjoy her "attentions" during the seven years he stayed there. Same with Circe too. He could not keep himself away from pretty ladies.

Hercules worked his repentance. He worked to make repair the evil he had done. I think he was fooled into it in the first place, wasn't he? That's the actions of a good man, without a doubt. And yea, the gods were petty many times, but remember that the gods were really quite human- they made mistakes but many tried to be above their mistakes.

quick_comment
2009-02-05, 03:29 PM
Odysseus was a master thief and liar, as well as a skilled swordsman and seaman.

I would say he is an epic rogue/warblade with high int, and maxed out bluff, and professor: sailor. He also has high wis, cha, str and con.

Maybe a custom PrC, Chosen of Athena, which would render him immune to fear, transmutation (yeah, it was an herb, whatever), amongst other things.


How about statting out Achilles?

He probably has DR0. He has to be high enough level to fight a greater diety and cause the diety to flee. (He fights Apollo into retreating). However, he is nearly defeated by a river god, until his mother begs Hephaestus into smiting the river god with what amounts to a meteor.


Id say the Myrmidons are all level 15ish warblades. Achilles I would stat out as a human paragon/epic warblade. His shield would be a greater artifact level item.


It is worth noting however, that if it were not for Athena and his uber-shield, Hector would have killed him. Hector hit Achilles square in the shield with a strike that would pierce a normal shield. Achilles missed. Athena then teleported his spear back to him so that he could have a second shot.

KevLar
2009-02-05, 04:38 PM
Why, of course it's simplistic to write off Greek mythology's figures as all evil! That's my point, basically. But it's also RAW, so maybe, just maybe, it's the rules that are simplistic. Here's a little story.

Once upon a time, there was a queen named Niobe. She had seven sons and seven daughters, all beautiful. And in a moment of motherly pride, Niobe boasted that she was a luckier mother than Leto herself, who only had two. Leto was furious, and sent her two children to punish this foolish woman. Apollo and Artemis took their bows and quivers, and flew to Phrygia. There, they proceeded to slay all Niobe's children, one by one. When only the youngest son was left, Niobe fell wailing on her knees and begged the two gods for forgiveness, acknowledging her foolish mistake, imploring them to spare at least this one and take her life instead. Unflinching, Apollo sent his last arrow through the child's heart, and Niobe turned to stone from her grief.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Niobe2MountSypilusManisaTurkey.jpg/250px-Niobe2MountSypilusManisaTurkey.jpg
So, killing innocent children in order to punish their mother... In D&D, this is objectively evil. And it isn't an isolated incident either, but is completely in accordance with the gods' eagerness to rain death and destruction on anyone that annoys them that way. Apollo never repented or atoned for this act or any similar one. (Marsyas, whom he flayed alive, comes to mind.)

By RAW, that's Evil Alignment. Period. But the conclusion isn't that Apollo is evil. The conclusion is that D&D alignment simply cannot be applied to any figure of the greek mythology - or any other similar one, for that matter. Why?

Because the morality is different. There's no Heaven and Hell as we know it. There's no Good and Evil as we know it. There's punishment aplenty for hubris, disobeying divine laws, breaking oaths and failing to observe holy customs. None of these is necessarily evil, though. And pure "evil as we know it", no matter how cruel and selfish, so long as it doesn't break any of the above rules, is left unpunished and mostly even unnoticed.

In the myths, Niobe and Marsyas are portrayed as very foolish to piss off the gods like that. They are arrogant, guilty of hubris, and both got what they deserved. But you know what? They aren't portrayed as evil either. Or take the Iliad and the myths of the Trojan war. The atrocities committed are described in full, gory details, and I don't mean just killing and maiming on the battlefield. Corpses defiled. Babies thrown off the walls. Widows raped. Are the culprits portrayed as evil? Negative. Why?

Because Evil, as a concept, doesn't even exist, it's not even a word. Please stop trying to squeeze it in such a world, it makes no sense at all.

hamishspence
2009-02-05, 04:50 PM
true. Nonetheless, D&D stats for Greek deities, with alignments, exist- maybe they take a certain latitude with the alignment system, or Disneyfy the gods a little. Still, its there.

At the beginning of the Epic Handbook, Odysseus is mentioned as an example of an epic hero. So, in D&D, he should probably be statted out as 21st+ level.

He's also one of the most Scoundrelly Greek heroes- Complete scoundrel might be a place to start.

bibliophile
2009-02-05, 05:14 PM
Why, of course it's simplistic to write off Greek mythology's figures as all evil! That's my point, basically. But it's also RAW, so maybe, just maybe, it's the rules that are simplistic. Here's a little story.

Once upon a time, there was a queen named Niobe. She had seven sons and seven daughters, all beautiful. And in a moment of motherly pride, Niobe boasted that she was a luckier mother than Leto herself, who only had two. Leto was furious, and sent her two children to punish this foolish woman. Apollo and Artemis took their bows and quivers, and flew to Phrygia. There, they proceeded to slay all Niobe's children, one by one. When only the youngest son was left, Niobe fell wailing on her knees and begged the two gods for forgiveness, acknowledging her foolish mistake, imploring them to spare at least this one and take her life instead. Unflinching, Apollo sent his last arrow through the child's heart, and Niobe turned to stone from her grief.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/Niobe2MountSypilusManisaTurkey.jpg/250px-Niobe2MountSypilusManisaTurkey.jpg
So, killing innocent children in order to punish their mother... In D&D, this is objectively evil. And it isn't an isolated incident either, but is completely in accordance with the gods' eagerness to rain death and destruction on anyone that annoys them that way. Apollo never repented or atoned for this act or any similar one. (Marsyas, whom he flayed alive, comes to mind.)

By RAW, that's Evil Alignment. Period. But the conclusion isn't that Apollo is evil. The conclusion is that D&D alignment simply cannot be applied to any figure of the greek mythology - or any other similar one, for that matter. Why?

Because the morality is different. There's no Heaven and Hell as we know it. There's no Good and Evil as we know it. There's punishment aplenty for hubris, disobeying divine laws, breaking oaths and failing to observe holy customs. None of these is necessarily evil, though. And pure "evil as we know it", no matter how cruel and selfish, so long as it doesn't break any of the above rules, is left unpunished and mostly even unnoticed.

In the myths, Niobe and Marsyas are portrayed as very foolish to piss off the gods like that. They are arrogant, guilty of hubris, and both got what they deserved. But you know what? They aren't portrayed as evil either. Or take the Iliad and the myths of the Trojan war. The atrocities committed are described in full, gory details, and I don't mean just killing and maiming on the battlefield. Corpses defiled. Babies thrown off the walls. Widows raped. Are the culprits portrayed as evil? Negative. Why?

Because Evil, as a concept, doesn't even exist, it's not even a word. Please stop trying to squeeze it in such a world, it makes no sense at all.



I'm sorry but I must politely disagree. The concept of evil existed in greek society, their definition of it was different, but they certainly had the concept. Messing with the gods was seen as not only stupid, but presumptuous and wrong. Sisyphus and Tantalus were not punished because the gods were bored and needed a laugh. They were punished because they had commited grave crimes.



They are arrogant, guilty of hubris, and both got what they deserved. But you know what? They aren't portrayed as evil either.

Both got what they deserved? Doesn't that imply their acts of hubris deserve punishment, mking them evil acts?


it's not even a word

Huh? Do you mean there's no word for it in greek?


As a further example, let's look at orcs. In orcish culture raiding, raping and killing aren't evil, yet their alignment is Evil. In DnD one's culture is irrelevant to one's alignment. The alignment system is objective, not subjective.

Human Paragon 3
2009-02-05, 07:47 PM
KevLar,

I like your factotum/warblade build. I would still give it 2 ranger levels for free endurance and archery feats, a favored enemy (Human, Magical Beast or Giant), as well as the three human paragon levels for a bonus feat (possibly die hard) and an extra +2 to INT.

I agree with everything else you did, and especially love how odysseus could beat ajax in a wrestling match thanks to improved grapple and brains over brawn, making his grapple modifier... at least +26 at level 12.

Between the extensive skills, ranged combat ability, grappling and warblade manuevers you'd have one versatile dude.

Tacoma
2009-02-05, 08:16 PM
I think the D&D alignment system creates characters who are simple. They respond in somewhat predictable ways to stimuli based on their motives and ethics.

Our problem in trying to give a real person or a well-written fantasy character an alignment is that alignments don't reflect reality at all. No person is always the same thing.

On one day a person might act one way, another day he might act differently. If the conditions are just slightly different it might change his outlook. People have very complex ethical guidelines whether they have examined them or just use what society imprints on them wholesale. The whole system of weights and balances in decision-making in a real person is so remarkably complex that it absolutely cannot be encompassed using two words. Any two words. Even the most creative two words cannot fully describe the simplest of real people.

Furthermore even when a person has a strong ethical reason to do one thing, he sometimes gets it wrong for whatever reason and does the other thing. This doesn't make him a different person. His actions do not define who he is internally - it's who he is that defines who he is. What he does is something else. That part is just what everyone sees him do.

That said, look at what the Greeks fighting Troy were dealing with. Many like Odysseus had no reason to go but an obligation to some Greek king who was going. They had been gone on a sea journey that probably killed many and could look forward to the same when they left. They might certainly die fighting Troy. And by the end they had spent ten long years away from their homes watching their friends die.

Under those circumstances it's reasonable to expect that a Greek like Odysseus would be willing to do atrocious things. It's perfectly reasonable to say that the average nice modern person would be willing to do atrocious things under similar circumstances. Anything less might be ethically very Good, but shows a person who is miserably weak otherwise.

Let's use a different example. Let us say you're on a cruise ship and you're captured by pirates. You spend ten years enslaved in some kind of labor camp while they try to ransom you off in exchange for political prisoners. You can escape but your only escape option will result in the prisoner cell block being destroyed and all the other prisoners dying. If you stay, you will be killed the next day but they will survive for some time.

I argue that it does not make you Evil in those circumstances to choose to escape. While it may be Good to sacrifice yourself for the others, your circumstances are so extreme that one could argue it to be ethically acceptable to escape.

Finally, we cannot look back on historical figures and complain that they weren't up to our ethical standards. By the ethical standards of Western intellectual philosophy today humans for most of their history really sucked. Simply the way they treated women and children would be enough to make us scrunch up our noses and dismiss them. The founders of our modern civilizations were generally pretty vicious people, slaveholders, etc.

The only true Good heroes are created, invented, because real people are too complex. But if you accept heroism as doing the best you can in a tough spot and coming through with an incredible result, in a way that people can look up to the hero as an example to be followed, then we have many wonderful heroes in our history.

But if you want all your heroes to be one-dimensional LG Paladins, your only recourse may be Saturday morning cartoons.

KevLar
2009-02-05, 08:28 PM
Sorry for derailing, but politely disagreeing is one of my favorite activities. :smallsmile:
And I think I'll answer bibliophile's last question first, because it will (hopefully) put things into perspective.


Huh? Do you mean there's no word for evil in greek?
Short answer? Yes. Long answer.

The closest thing to "evil" is the adjective κακός (kakos), and the closest translation of kakos is ill (as in "ill-gotten") or bad. Not evil. And while this word can mean morally wrong, it can also mean anything at all that could be wrong, bad, ill, not the best, unfortunate, difficult, dangerous. There are more than 300 compounds which begin with it, and I don't think any of them refers to morality. It carries none of the "weight" of the word evil, and the simplest way for me to show that is this:

In the English language, there are no degrees of comparison for evil. There's no eviler, nor evilest. You either are evil, or you aren't, right? Language itself urges you to think in terms of black or white.

In Greek, there is κακός/κακώτερος/κάκιστος or κακός/χείρων/χείριστος. Two distinct ways to basically say bad/worse/worst. Language itself prevents you from thinking in terms of black or white. Does that make sense to you? (I realize how easy it is to get lost in translation when concepts are not defined the exact same way in both languages, hence this wall of text. :smallsmile: )

So, with that crucial piece of information in mind...


The concept of evil existed in greek society, their definition of it was different, but they certainly had the concept. Messing with the gods was seen as not only stupid, but presumptuous and wrong. Sisyphus and Tantalus were not punished because the gods were bored and needed a laugh. They were punished because they had commited grave crimes.
First of all, we're not talking about greek society, we're talking about greek mythology. Important difference there. :smalltongue:

Second. There certainly was a distinction between right and wrong, acceptable or unacceptable, honorable or dishonorable. In short : in accordance with the divine laws or not. The gods themselves had to obey these laws, and no one could revise them, not even Zeus.

Breaking a law like that meant you would be dishonored, and at risk of suffering the wrath of the gods. It still didn't make you evil on its own. You weren't seen necessarily as a bad person. A few examples:

Orestes kills his mom. This is an unacceptable crime. He is the culprit. Does it make him evil? Is he ever portrayed as a bad person? NO. He had his reasons, he was avenging his father. He did break the divine law though (the Furies don't give a rat's ass about his reasons), so he must cleanse himself. He does so, and lives happily ever after.
Oedipus kills his dad and marries his mom. This is an unacceptable crime. He is the culprit. Does it make him evil? Is he ever portrayed as a bad person? NO. He didn't know, the poor fellow! Of course, that doesn't really matter, so he loses everything and ends up blind and bitter.
Prometheus steals the fire of the gods and gives it to Man. This is an unacceptable crime. He is the culprit. Does it make him evil? Is he ever portrayed as a bad person? NO. He did it from the kindness of his heart. He suffers for quite a long time bound to that rock before Hercules frees him and Zeus finally forgives him.


You see, this isn't about alignment. It's about Justice. And Justice doesn't care about your personality and allegiances, and whether you're a "good" or "bad" person. Who can judge that? No one can judge that. The only concern of justice is your acts. (And there are ways around that, by the way.)


Both got what they deserved? Doesn't that imply their acts of hubris deserve punishment, mking them evil acts?
No. There's no word for evil, remember? :smallwink: Hubris indeed deserves Nemesis. But the act which constitutes hubris may very well be considered good. It may also be considered foolish, arrogant or despicable (Tantalus fits this profile), but not unconditionally. Not... objectively.


As a further example, let's look at orcs. In orcish culture raiding, raping and killing aren't evil, yet their alignment is Evil. In DnD one's culture is irrelevant to one's alignment. The alignment system is objective, not subjective.
Well, yes. Which is why I said that the entire roster of Greek mythology is evil. Would that be in accordance with RAW? Yes. Does that makes sense? No.

Unless you mean that, if we come up with an entirely different definition for alignment, one fitting to Greek mythology, we could proceed applying it to gods and heroes etc. That's... that's very interesting, actually. I'm not sure if it would serve any actual purpose or do gameplay any good, but it's still an interesting... err... mental exercise. Just don't expect that system to look anything like the one of D&D, with two axes and the "evil" brand on one side. :)

Arros Winhadren
2009-02-05, 09:51 PM
As for Orestes, it's a little more complicated than "he was avenging his father". If that's all there was to it then he would have been drained by the Erinyes and everyone would have been fine with it (except for maybe Electra). What made his act acceptable was that Apollo told him it was okay. If he hadn't gotten the go-ahead from a god first then I'm sure that Orestes would be a little more vilified. Let's not also forget that Athena had to intercede for him before the Erinyes gave up on getting Orestes.

So you could take this to mean that good and evil were simply defined by what the gods wanted from you. Doing what the gods told you to and honoring them was good, whereas mocking them or ignoring their wishes was evil.

Archpaladin Zousha
2009-02-05, 10:43 PM
And as for Prometheus, he wasn't released because Zeus forgave him for his crimes. Prometheus told Zeus he knew the secret that would be his downfall, and Zeus arranged for Heracles to release him in exchange for the secret. Prometheus told Zeus not to have any relations with the nymph Thetis, for it was her destiny that her child would be the greatest of all. If that kid was Zeus's, he would be overthrown like he had overthrown Cronus before him and like Cronus had overthrown Uranus before that. So Zeus arranged for Thetis to marry King Peleus instead. Their son was Achilles, the greatest of mortals.

Olo Demonsbane
2009-02-05, 11:30 PM
So, killing innocent children in order to punish their mother...

Huh... (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0628.html)

This reminds me of something...

KevLar
2009-02-06, 07:00 AM
About Orestes and Prometheus, I don't see how any of this makes them "objectively good" or "objectively evil", however you may want to define good and evil. And objectively. :smalltongue:

What made his act acceptable was that Apollo told him it was okay.
Whoah, whoah, his act was not "acceptable". He was a matricide. He broke a divine law. Apollo didn't tell him it was "okay", he just told him to do it anyway. And after that, he needed to make a BIG production to save him from the Erinyes - who didn't really care what Apollo thought.

This was a classic case of a god intervening to help a hero he favors. But the gods were consistently inconsistent about these things and vigorously disagreed with each other. The only objectivity you'll ever have in Greek mythology is whether an act breaks a divine law or not. But what that means exactly, what it makes of the man who did it, how many gods would approve regardless and how many gods would disapprove, what the audience would think of it... that was complex, nuanced, not entirely reasonable at least as far as gods were concerned, and in the end subjective.

It's hypothetical of course, but I'm fairly certain that Orestes wouldn't be "vilified", as you say, if Apollo hadn't given him the green light. Compare with Oedipus. No one, god or oracle or mortal, gave him the green light. But he's not portrayed as vile either, no matter how serious his crime was. He is portrayed as the toy of Fate, the tool of a prophecy, the prime example of tragic irony. Not as an evil man.

Because in the end, the only thing that's above gods and mortals is Fate. And Fate, by its nature, has nothing moral or immoral about it. It just is. For Orestes, it was his lot in life to be redeemed. For Oedipus, it wasn't. There are ways to escape Nemesis (a god favoring you, a rite of cleansing or blind luck among other things), but there is no way to escape Fate.

ON TOPIC!


I would still give it 2 ranger levels for free endurance and archery feats, a favored enemy (Human, Magical Beast or Giant), as well as the three human paragon levels for a bonus feat (possibly die hard) and an extra +2 to INT.
If you want to go so high level, sure, it's a very nice choice. For Epic all the way, I think I'd finish with Exemplar. To be honest, I arbitrarily chose to make Odysseus 14th level, simply because I wanted Cunning Skill from Warblade - with Ajax in mind.

I would be equally pleased with the "Gandalf is a 5th level wizard" approach, and make him 5th or 10th level tops. It's completely dependent on what power level we decide to give to the average soldier. :)

bibliophile
2009-02-06, 06:50 PM
I think the D&D alignment system creates characters who are simple. They respond in somewhat predictable ways to stimuli based on their motives and ethics.

Our problem in trying to give a real person or a well-written fantasy character an alignment is that alignments don't reflect reality at all. No person is always the same thing.


That's not what alignment is. Alignment is what you are overall, on average. To quote the SRD:


Alignment is a tool for developing your character’s identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character. Each alignment represents a broad range of personality types or personal philosophies, so two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other. In addition, few people are completely consistent.