Before this gets moved back we'll need more details as per How To Write An Example. What do these characters tell us about the trope, specifically? The trope's the point, and the reader is not expected to necessary know the work.
- True Companions: This is why the soldiers were such good friends.
True, he does become emperor, but the very last scene of the show is Titus Pullo taking advantage of Octavian's trust and telling him Caesarion is dead. He's probably closest to a Magnificent Bastard, but someone WAS openly lying to his face and defying his orders.
I guess the sympathy would be YMMV.Regardless, the definitions of SS, MB, and CM are pretty much relative to each other, so he could not be all three.
Edited by micguar Hide / Show Replies
True, but Octavian had no way to know that Caesarion was Pullo's son. If he knew he wouldn't have sent Pullo to do the job. It was something beyond Octavian's knowledge and thus his control. And ultimately it made no difference anyway. If there was a moment Octavian made a misstep it was with Cleopatra, but even that made no difference in the greater scheme of things.
For the record, I don't think he's a Smug Snake, but IMO he qualifies as a Magnificent Bastard.
Well, he becomes emperor, you don't really get more successful than that... And YMMV, but Season 2 Octavian is not what I'd call sympathetic.
How can Octavian be listed as a Smug Snake, a Complete Monster, and a Magnificent Bastard all at once? Especially since he doesn't really fit any of them. He's too succesful to be a Smug Snake, not succesful enough to be a Magnificent Bastard, and is too sympathetic to be a Complete Monster. At least that's how he seemed to me.
i am not sure if the trope applies merely if something is immoral to our culture, but based in the last line, this is considered acceptable because this was considered acceptable in the time portrayed . In other words, this sounds as an aversion to Politically Correct History, not something related with his relation with the protagonist.