Should Kiser be Evil?

Remove all ads!

I just started ToB with my Paladin and in the process of doing the Betrayal at the Gates quest, it occured to me that it would have been more interesting is Kiser was innocent. Naturally with a Paladin I just sorted things out by casting Detect Evil, but what would I have done if the Mage had proved to be the bad guy. Couldn't Kiser have really just taken the boy to protect himself, but also be telling the truth about NOT betraying the city? Wouldn't that have made for a more interesting problem to solve?

 

He is the head of an assassin organization in Tethyr, so naturally he is evil.

 

I think Niskers is driving at an interesting point. Would the event in Saradush be more interesting if Kiser were not evil? That is, he did not betray the city but saw the writing on the wall and kidnapped the boy to save his neck. While interesting, I don't think it fits with the game's concept. Most if not all scenarios in BG2 are pretty cut and dried as far as good vs. evil. Evil Firkraag vs. Good Garren, for example. Rarely do you see muddy, real life morality in the game--but then again, that fits well within the ADD system of law-chaos/good-evil, which also flattens out real life morality into a few easily recognizable categories. Morally ambiguous scenarios are more the style of mods, I think.