#rick's “I will change everything to make sure it becomes an advantage to percy somehow” agenda genuinely annoys me

[somewhereincairparavel]

hot take but I will always hate the concept of percy getting elected as praetor with having spent so less time in camp jupiter, while jason spent the same amount of time in chb and still wasn't able to fill in the gaps percy left, but percy seemingly did for jason in camp jupiter, and how replaceable jason was shown as, despite the fact that he spent 12 years, and trained as a TODDLER. i swear if I see some "joke" about percy surpassing jason in a week COMPLETELY ignoring that it's a very obvious gary sue moment written by rick I'll get so salty. it's one of the many inconsistencies of hoo.

because not only does it scream main character favouritism from rick (with making percy fit into everything somehow with zero plot holes) people ONLY say "jason was replacing percy" but apparently acting like percy wasn't? they were BOTH sent to replace eachother, temporarily atleast.

it's the fact that romans are showed to be very choosy in selecting praetors, which is why it took jason so long to become one despite his reputation. the camp just randomly hailing percy (a greek, people whom they hate) as their leader with zero hesitation whatsoever DESPITE the presence of octavian is weird. considering how much they opposed frank, a ROMAN going on an important quest, deeming him unworthy, despite hearing mars, literal GOD giving them orders to send frank, they were still very adamant in not sending him. so we can see that romans bend their rules for no one.

yes percy accomplished something GREAT and deserved the position as much as jason did, but if you take into consideration how the romans were written in the books, they were the type of people to ignore efforts people made if it meant the people were going against their "traditional" values. going by that logic, rick made them contradict their own views just for the purpose of elevating percy, and instilling this sense of superiority over jason.

knowing that the target audience wouldn't want jason to be on the same level as percy, which is strange because rick also meant to write jason and percy as foils of eachother, so shouldn't they be given equal amounts of importance? or just don't write them as foils at all if you want percy to have leverage over jason so bad? like pick a side.

if percy can be made a praetor with a week's time and have golden treatment in an enemy camp that accepts no one in easily (as opposed to chb who's more accepting) then why ISN'T jason held up like a hero in chb if percy is? (nah don't bombard me with the "camp half blood is loyal! unlike camp jupiter, rick wrote percy getting held up to point out that difference between the camps loyalty" bs we are just making up excuses and stories to make sense of the bad writing, who knows if rick even thought through all that, considering how inconsistent he is in books after pjo)

how come chb, whos main trait was written as loyalty to the campers never changed when it came to jason being there? jason got good friends, sure. but the camp NEVER saw him as a replacement to percy and there was some tension with him popping out of nowhere right when percy disappeared. jason was accepted in camp, but he wasn't hailed like a hero there the way percy was.

but camp jupiter, who's traits were extremely traditional values and rules that was never changed or messed with in the past was randomly tailored to percy's advantage? jason was hailed as the pinnacle of the true image of rome, and them replacing him with an unconventional greek hero within a WEEK seems so contradictory and just screams bad writing. why is the fandom giving this portion of the bad writing a pass when it clearly wastes the potential of the characters who aren't percy or annabeth? also this is NOT a percy hate post before y'all flood my inbox with threats, just pointing out one of the many inconsistencies of heroes of olympus.