Evil

Remove all ads!

I think my biggest beef with the BG series is that there is absolutely no way to follow a truly character-driven play through unless you build your character to the game's specifics. IMO, there is no way to play as an evil character unless you don't want to do 75% of the quests.

I know this flaw is in the lack of a dungeon master, and any video game RPG is going to have this problem, but it is irritating. There is no logical reason for most quests besides the good, and any self-centered character is going to have trouble following through on most quests, unless they just love killing things, in which case many more game characters would die and entire quests would be shut off because of a quick temper.

Ah well, I love the BGs and I guess if this is their biggest issue, the programmers did an awesome job. I just wish the game had a sort of dialogue AI that would respond to typed comments. That's a bit far-fetched though. Maybe in a decade or two...

 

It is true that you cannot properly follow many of the plots while truly playing an evil character (the Umar Hills are a good example of this). On the other extreme, it is almost impossible to truly play a Paladin either so there is a rough form of balance.

I seem to recall Spellhold Studios hosting a mod in development called The Mod for the Wicked who's aim was to increase the possibility of properly being evil. However, it is still incomplete and the Spellhold Studios website is refusing to work for me so I can't give you any more information.

 

You can't play a proper evil character because this is a BIO game. BIO makes great hack-and-slash RPGs but didn't, and still doesn't, know how to make a compelling RPG experience for an evil character.

Play a BIS or Obsidian game for a better evil experience. Compare BG series to Planescape Torment, or KOTOR 1 to KOTOR 2 to see what I mean.

 

i think this works for the best, i enjoy it more when the game offers your nasty character to choose occasionaly alternate paths, answers, attitude rather than genuinely be compliant with evildoers which would end up being boring

 

sarevok66, you might want to try playing Planescape Torment once you're done with the BG games. In that, you're not "compliant with evildoers," you can actually be THE evildoer, the manipulator, the schemer, the villain, the cause of that whole mess. For my money, Torment still has the best, most interesting implementation of role-playing an evil character to date.

In BIO's games, in contrast, as hendak suggests, being "evil" means saying "GIMME ALL YOUR MONEY!!!!" to all the quest NPCs, most of which say "NO!", resulting in no quest for you.

 

Actually it's not uncommon that evil characters get less quests that a good character in a PnP game. Mainly because the majority of thre game worlds NPCs are good or neutral and because of that hold a big mistrust towards evil a PC.

Even (usually) evil NPCs hold a mistrust towards NE and CE PCs because they might betray thier employers when another offer turns up.

 

i bought planescape torment right after completing the BG series five years ago and honestly i was bored to death playing it; it felt like i was playing an adventure kind of game rather than a crpg

and i dont know about you having the opportunity to be an evil schemer but from what i recall i only got to deliver stuff from one place to another; anyway im planing on giving it another try

 

I don't necessarily believe that is a flaw. Just as Stardust said, an evil character is not going to be trusted. People will not want a self-centered, selfish person working for them (the basic definition of evil). I think Bioware did a great job of having the quests rely on the givers impression of the PC (based on responses). Many quests are still open if you say you're in for the money -- but those quests involving discretion would, and should, be closed to evil characters as they cannot be trusted. That said, a SMART, evil PC should know when to keep his/her mouth shut in order to get a good paying job. Evil does not mean stupid.

I also like the heroes discount system for stores. Evil characters can (and should) steal from anyone they can. The ability to gain money for an disreputable villian in this game is amazing -- evil characters can have thousands of gold pieces within a few minutes of coming out of the Irenicus' dungeon. Who cares if you miss out on a few minor quests? The evil guys have the great equipment earlier which compensates for the few thousand xp's missed here and there.

I think it all balances out for the role players.

Aside: The PC that goes around killing people on a whim is a psychopath, not just evil. Nobody wants anything to do with a psychopath -- all quests should be closed to that PC. In fact, that PC should be hunted and attacked at every opportunity.

 

Playing evil in a BIO game = having fewer quests and cool things to do

Having fewer quests and cool things to do = less enjoyable experience

Playing evil in a BIO game = less enjoyable experience

It's not just an issue of wanting to be a psycho, it's also a game balance issue. More BG fans need to play Planescape Torment. You could not only have a fulfilling experience as an evil character, there were different shades of evil: dishonest, manipulative, anarchic, misogynist, murderous, larcenous, etc. etc. As opposed to BIO games, where being evil can be boiled down to these 3 sentences, in this order: "Gimme all your money because I'm evil!!! Oh, you're mad at me because I'm evil? OK, no quest for me!"

 

I see what you're saying about the whole issue of NPCs not trusting evildoers, but what about an extensive underworld? With the right connections, any evil character could gain access to quests through less-than-reputable sources. For example, working for the Cowled Wizards in hunting down Valygar. And Bodhi's chapter 3 path never felt that evil to me.

The main thing that gets me is the lack of care I have in the main plot. My evil PC dropped Imoen early in the original, and doesn't care about her now. Irenicus may be able to "unlock" my innate power, but my character would rather deal with those that don't completely overshadow his own power. And once he's powerful enough to take on old Jonnie, the fallen elf would have little to offer.

Yes, I know I'm looking into it too far, and I will be going to Spellhold eventually, I just wish there was an open-ended world as consistent as the one BG offers that also allowed empire building in whatever part of society I wanted. This does NOT include MMORPGs, at least none that I've seen, because of the lack of consistency the gamers show.

I know, it's a dream, but it's my dream, and I'm just waiting for it to come out...

 

or maybe he s just one of nerull s cultist

let the man do his job!

[ September 08, 2006, 10:37: Message edited by: sarevok66 ]

 

Okay, it's ranting time.

In have a confession to make: I hate the D&D alignment system. I hate it because not only is it absurdly narrow-minded, blatantly unrealistic, and sometimes outright puritanical, it isn't even interesting. Anyone who seriously believes morality can be meaningfully summed up in two letters should not be allowed within fifteen yards of concious thought.

That said, even the alignment system - complete with inability to tell whather someone fanatically dedicated to a very out-of-favor moral code is Lawful, Chaotic, or Evil - is far more versatile than topics like this seem to think it is. Just because your character is "evil" does not mean that they have no interest other than something with immediate, tangible benefits for themselves RIGHT NOW.

With many of the game's quests, you can bargain for a substantial reward, or at least assume yourself to be getting one. It also isn't hard to see that a dragon (or similar powerful beast) will have a great deal of treasure, which you can gain by fighting it. Think about Samia's group of mercenaries (from the Windspear Hills): they clearly weren't overly altruistic, but they came to the same place as the PCs, because that's where the loot was.

Aside from all the earthly posessions to be had, however, is the issue of what your character wants. Somehow, I doubt that Lord Karakarn, Scourge of Kittens just randomly developed to hate everything and desire no goal save destroying Irenicus. The game's evil characters tend to have goals: Edwin wants to learn magical secrets (leading him into dark crypts, stange company, and even a whole new body), Vyconia is searching for meaning (rather desperately, at times), and even the villains have impulses other than efficient revenge which will color their judgement.

My current character is an evil wizard slayer who will only go on quests if they pay well, or if they allow him to kill wizards (he will protect non-spellcasters from mages for free, alignment aside, because he came into his current bitterness due to tortures suffered at Irenicus' hands). Of course, there is occasionally a quest I want to go on which doesn't fit these requirements, but it's nothing I cannot either do without or come up with a suitable workaround for. Remember: you aren't the only person in the group (probably).

If you're so interested in roleplaying, then you may want to consider that, in the context of the game, your companions aren't mindless zombies utterly enslaved by the mighty will of Bhallspawn, who will occasionally banter a bit before returning to their endless imprisonment. Rather, they have thoughts and choices of their own. In the above campaign, my main character was sufficiently offended at having been manipulated by Raelis Shai that he was willing to let the bounty hunter take her troop prisoner, but I couldn't picture Jahera or Keldorn abiding by that desicion. I therefore decided that I would send the group through the portal, but not have my main character interfere in the fight for about three rounds, simulating the time he spent on the other side of the portal, being stubborn, before he went in to rescue his companions (for whome he has much more caring than he spares for random strangers, especially manipulative arcanists).

In summary: if you cannot justify an "evil" character taking three-fourths of the quests in any game not about constantly risking your life for no rewards against a foe who you hold animosity for, you aren't trying hard enough. I have little sympathy for any line of reasoning which begins with the assumption "evil characters just don't do good things."

Emphatically,
Deus Ex Biotica

 

Evil deeds may result from good intents.

Playing an evil character is not necessarily about killing every sentient being that is encountered. You have to be twisted. A truly evil PC is not going to acknowledge that he/she is evil. He may well be convinced that he/she is beyond these moral limitations.

Having the appearance of a goody two shoes opens a full range of opportunities for an evil character. IMO the important thing to bear in mind when you want to play an evil character is that evil is as evil does. If they never see you coming it will be too late for them to prevent you from achieving your goals.

An evil character can accomplish heroic deeds unwillingly (as a paladin can make mistakes sometimes) or just because it suited his/her purpose at the moment and serves his/her agenda better in the long run.

I think it's actually easier to justify taking certain quests for an evil character. Joining with the Shadow Thieves is the lesser evil but it's still unsavory for a good aligned character. The Thief's stronghold quest is hard to justify for a good character. I mean killing Rayic Gerthras for instance, you act as a cold blooded killer for a Thayvian mage (Edwin), whom you know to be evil (Edwin actually wants you to kill Rayic Gerthras because the latter is getting close to him), you break into somebody's home and assault him. The explanation that he is a cowled wizard and that therefore it is alright to kill him never convinced me, unless you embark on a crusade and try to kill every cowled wizard in the game, I'm still convinced that it is just murdering someone because you need advancement in the guild and you wnat to shield Edwin from being harassed by the wizards (Edwin is evil and he breaks the law of Amn by practising forbidden magic within the confine of the city).

Another quest that I can't justify from a goody two shoes point of view is the silver pantaloons quest. In SoA you have to be evil to get them. Taking the part of a blackmailer is in no way a "good" behaviour IMO.

Being an opportunist or a hypocrite can be considered to be rather "evil" and it offers a wider range of possibilities.

You can find an explanation for helping out Nalia (money and loot come to mind) and you will most certainly kill her aunt (not while there is a guard around or if Nalia is watching), you might even pretend it was an accident ("she fell through the window, I'm so sorry for your loss Nalia dear") or make it look like the trolls did it... Many possibilities do exist. Think about the CC, you can betray Hendak!

It becomes even more interesting when you deal with NPCs.

You can sit and watch as Anomen fails his test. Take Keldorn away from his family. Manipulate Jaheira into turning against the Harpers. Send Jan to jail and then (perhaps out of boredom) free him. Why should you help HD? Perhaps for the loot or maybe just because you're curious or can't stand intruders... Or maybe you hold a grudge against him already and you want him to suffer and die by your own blade not at the hands of some extraplanar merc.

I do believe that a truly evil PC would relish seeing Viconia burn, after all Beshaba is an evil deity. This PC would probably not rescue Mazzy unless if it was to take advantage of her heroic reputation to tone down his/her act: "this guy can't be that bad / what you heard about him can't be true, look there is Mazzy Fentan with him."

To sum it up I'd say you shouldn't feel limitated when playing an evil character.

 

Good points Caradhras.

But while you can play an evil character, you still get the biggest rewards, XP and more quests by playing a good character.

That goes for the BG series, IWD series, NWN and also Planescape: Torment.

Then again. I am not complaining. The plot in those CRPG's, except Torment, is usually to vanquish an immense evil force. For me it just don't feels right to vanquish it by proving myself a bigger bastard. But that's just me.

[ November 21, 2006, 15:11: Message edited by: Ironhawk Skylord ]

 

Caradhras raises some interesting points (I really like the bit about manipulating Jahera), but I have to ask: truely evil? I study both history and psychology, and I am aware in no cases from either discipline where someone was so antimoral that they revelled in the label of "evil", or that they enjoyed lieing, killing, stealing, manipulation, and every other generally reviled behavior categorically, with absolutely no action which they considered wrong.

Even the most jaded of sociopaths has en ethical it, it is just one that many of us might not recognize (don't hurt children, hurt those twisted people who are hurting children... and their friends, or; take lives, but don't take money), and many of them are even quite reasonable-sounding, until you consider what they lack.

Indeed, in a real-world sense, most adventurers are "evil". As Belkar (from Order of the Stick, for the one gamer out there who still doesn't know) would say, they mostly wander around, killing sentient beings because they have green skin and fangs, then get rich by looting corpses. Anyone who tried this sort of behavior on earth would be seen as a mercenary at best, and a terrorist or serial killer at worst.

My point is that, no matter what little rectangles you click during character creation, your character is capable of kindness to strangers or cruelty to friends. There is more at work on any one decision than "I'm Evil, so I might as well screw these people over."

Deeply,
Deus Ex Biotica

 

Great points here, Caradhras.

This has also been my beef with this type of game - take NWN, for an example. There's a couple of good opportunities to do evil deeds (which is GREAT), but ultimately, the world is saved once again.

Wouldn't it be nice to DESTROY the freaking world instead of saving it? And what those who fell from grace, but ultimately are redeemed? *cough*Aribeth*cough*

There could be HUGE grounds to cover and very interesting twists to a storyline (or a simply new one) if evil was properly explored. I, for one, am seriously tired of having to do goody acts to advance in the freaking plot.

I look foward to that.

 

I think the biggest problem with being evil is that there is no Evil ending to SoA... you can't join with Irenicus and destroy the elves and take the world hostage. Yes, you can kill him for revenge, but then shouldn't you have your own Amnish Killing Spree?

 

I think the alignment system is utterly pointless. Why do you need to designate your own character's outlook on life? Are players not capable of determining their character's attitude without having to pick one from a list. I find this just makes things more difficult for me, since I usually have the general attitude of a character down before I even start the creation process, and then I have to pick the alignment which corresponds the closest to my ideas.

 

I think that your alignment should never be something that you designate with a mouse click. It should be something gradual that reflects your actions and manners over a period of time. This I felt was something KOTOR pulled off very well, and that I hope more games will take advantage of in the future.

@Killjoy:
Earlier, you implied that BG doesn't pull off evil very well because Bioware doesn't make a very good "evil" game. But then you described Planescape as being a game that pulls this off very well. Since when was Planescape produced by something other than Bioware? Seems a bit contradictory, is all.

 

Planescape was produced by Black Isle using Bioware's engine.