D&D 5E Mythic Odysseys of Theros Reviews

[Parmandur]

I'm not getting into the weeds here, but I would totally play a Sun-Soul Monk that has been blessed by Apollo and Hermes.

So, still winding my way through Theros, and reading up on Piety. It's a fascinating system, but I do feel it needs some fine-tuning. I like the Gods having "Do X to gain piety, Y to lose it", and I like that they aren't all the same. But it is notable that some gods are way easier to gain piety with than others. I'd probably try and find some minor and major ways to gain piety, performing major deeds nets more piety. Or just give each one a point range, or a die roll. Like a minor act that gains piety gains 1d4, while a major act gains 1d10. Still grokking the system, but it is interesting.

Really, some gods are just more likely choices for being Adventurer patrons.

 

[Vael]

Really, some gods are just more likely choices for being Adventurer patrons.

You're not wrong, but I'm kinda liking some variability anyways, it models the fickle nature of the Gods.

 

[Parmandur]

You're not wrong, but I'm kinda liking some variability anyways, it models the fickle nature of the Gods.

Yeah, exactly, a little narrative asymmetry is nice.

Reading the rules, it makes me think of Laura Bailey's Cleric in the current Critical Role campaign: she would be killing the Piety score using this...

 

[Weiley31]

The Piety system can be tweaked and that's the great part about it. Heck if you wanted to, you can do some 3E style power restrictions if your Piety decreases to a certain point. Or making customized Holy Avengers or whatever item wise.

 

[Weiley31]

You know, I realized just now the Theros book doesn't give you rules for playing as a Returned. So to do that you would:

-Choose your Race/Folk/Kitchen Sink

-Keep all your abilities and what not the same.

-Give said Returned character the "Hollow One" Supernatural Gift.

There ya go: you have a Returned PC.

Bonus option: page 125, the Erebod section, shows a number of Returned masks that correspond to a number of the Theros races. Well you can probably make out which ones are for which.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

OK, whatever. If we can't agree that wisdom means wisdom, I don't think this conversion is going anywhere.

Wisdom in D&D is not real world wisdom. Being wise in the real world means "having knowledge, experience, and good judgement" and in D&D it mostly means "perceiving things and acting correctly based on those perceptions" but to an extent.

Wisdom in D&D truly is not real world wisdom. No one is arguing that Spartans were wise in the real world, but that it kind of fits in D&D terms.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Wisdom in D&D is not real world wisdom. Being wise in the real world means "having knowledge, experience, and good judgement" and in D&D it mostly means "perceiving things and acting correctly based on those perceptions" but to an extent.

Wisdom in D&D truly is not real world wisdom. No one is arguing that Spartans were wise in the real world, but that it kind of fits in D&D terms.

I don't know. If we were to ask Aristotle (Nicomachean Ethics, Book 2), he might agree that "perceiving things and acting correctly based on those perceptions" is, in fact, wisdom.

I still don't think it fits the Spartans. Aristotle, certainly, would not have called them wise.

I also think the Buddhists would agree that "perceiving things and acting correctly based on those perceptions" is at least a major component of wisdom (What the Buddha Taught, Walpola Sri Rahula).

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

Heh. To be fair. There are Ancient Greeks who think their gods are jerks, and so want nothing to do with them.

Some of those people wrote the myths and were accused (by their contemporaries) of writing false stories to demonize the gods.

A lot of it also has to do with the function of religion in early societal development as well, particularly in the context of how each culture was in a different environment geographically speaking. The groups of people we collectively label under the "Norse" umbrella had very harsh environments to live in, particularly in the winter, which does much to explain why their gods are all largely more serious and most of their mythology is centered around preparing for an oncoming cataclysmic event; interdrama does still occur, but it ultimately ends up meaningless in the end when the endless Winter arrives.

The greeks, conversely had a much milder and less varied climate, outside of the storms/uncertainties of sea travel and the inevitable results of stuck in a bunch of warring city states and nearby countries; their gods are therefore used as examples of the dangers of being a terrible person (in their eyes), or to explain freak acts of nature like volcanoes or storms in the sea. Yes, the norse had sea gods as well (which were also some of the more unpredictable one), but there's a reason the more "hostile" gods to humans in the greek pantheon were related sea travel and warfare, or just used as a scapegoat for lampshading societal sexism; because nothing says 'women' like vain flighty goddesses who turn women they think are prettier than them into animals, or grow insanely jealous and blame them for their husband's philandering, and even claim that the very existence of women was to be made out of clay and perpetually unhappy as a punishment to men for their crimes against the gods...am I right fellas? (sarcastically rolls eyes)

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Are facts absolute truth or our best guess given what we currently understand?

I would not use the word "fact" as a synonym for "best guess". It leads too much confusion, the current virus issue a prime example, with politicians expecting scientists to give them "facts" when that is something that science fundamentally cannot do.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I would not use the word "fact" as a synonym for "best guess". It leads too much confusion, the current virus issue a prime example, with politicians expecting scientists to give them "facts" when that is something that science fundamentally cannot do.

Wouldn't you then argue that those politicians do not understand the nature of facts?