Do you think Evil gets shafted in BG2 to the detriment of the whole game?

Remove all ads!

I've always been struck by the very poor quality of the option of playing as an evil character in BG2. Sure, every dialog has a "shut up or I'll kill you" type of option, but that's more of petty thug sort of evil, rather than intelligent, deliberate, cunning evil.

To compound that, there are many more quests and items and xp out there if you are a goody two-shoes. What ends up happening is whenever I play an evil PC I have to concoct silly RP justifications for doing a bunch of good quests (like "he's trying to gain the favor of the people so he can destroy them from the inside" or "he's just using them for material gain", etc. etc.)

I don't think it should be that way. If anything, there should be some sort of a temptation to be evil, which seems much more in align with the story. You should get better items and more XP being evil, so that choosing the good path and denying your heritage is actually a difficult choice. It's hard to feel "tempted by the dark side" so to speak, when the light side is better in every way.

So do you agree with this or think I have just been misplaying evil characters or what?

Oh and are there any content-adding mods out there that involve adding content for evil PCs?

 

this has been discussed a number of times already I think and one of the more interesting (imo) opinions (and the one that you also appear to believe as well) has been that evil characters can still reconcile doing "goody two-shoes stuff" with roleplaying an evil character, particularly one with high int, wis and cha scores.

This is because a long-term more intelligent villain realizes that if he goes apesh*t and just kills everybody all the time, everyone is going to be after him so he poses as a goody-goody to get the xp and the rewards and maintain a facade. He does the blatantly evil stuff only when the reward is worth the risk of exposure or when there's no chance of being found out.

With that said: yeah, there's a lot of room for improvement for characters who want to play evil more realistically.

 

You see but that's just a crummy RP justification and makes the game indistinguishable for an evil vs. good character. It's easy to make RP justifications for any character, the point is that you want an experience that seems to flow naturally and is less of a justification. Plus, having an evil character just do every good quest with some silly justification about putting up a facade makes playing an evil character just as pointless as there are few points of differentation between them and good chars.

 

While bearing what Enagonios said in mind, I agree with you on this point. Why would anyone be evil if the rewards weren't greater?

That said, Caradhras did have a good BG run through were he reported on how his evil character got on. His character's BGII attempt appears to be on hold ATM.

 

The way I see it many quests should not be done by good characters.

RPing a really good character is not as easy as it looks. We always look for reasons why evil characters should do "good" quests but most of the time we overlook the fact that some quests could raise very complicated issues.
I made a poll 2 years ago about the side quest involving Rayic Gerthras, I wanted to find out how players considered this from an RPing perspective. Although the XP argument will always be valid with gamers that thread offered some insight into different ways of perceiving and playing the game.

Any consideration about the nature of Good and Evil can lead to philosophical discussions. The alignement system is a very simple way to apprehend something that is way more complex.

The rewards are easier to come by (moreover the rewards should be different) it all comes down to a different way to get at these rewards. If a character wants to buy a new shiny armours he/she could work to get money to buy it or steal for it. In both cases the reward would be the same but the way to acquire it would be different. Some would argue that stealing is the easier way while others would not even consider it (either because it's wrong or because of the risks involved in which case it's not because of some inner goodness).

Perhaps you're evil because that's just the way you are... Is Being evil a choice or is it part of your destiny?

In the BG series the taint of Bhaal threatens Charname but it is hinted as well that the Bhaalspawn can determine his own fate.

If a character tries to embrace an ideal (that's what a Paladin does) and an ethos (Clerics and Druids are conditionned by certain sets of beliefs) then his/her behaviour is going to be dictated by this mindset.

Look at Sarevok, his evil is directly related to his nature as a Bhaalspawn, his upbringing as a Deathbringer and his determination to follow the prophecy (he wants to become the next god of Murder and he never tries to escape his destiny).

Now a more mundane character is going to be evil for many other reasons: greed, selfishness, jealousy, etc.

I intend to complete it. I ran into some difficulties (I changed computers and my save is loading but when I want to move to another area it crashes the game... The weird thing is that I copied everything from my old PC. I'll have to start over from Dungeon Irenicus).
Anyway back on topic, you might want to browse the How bad can you be thread and read the adventures of my evil Jester in the no rest for the wicked thread.

 

@nataben1314: Oh, but xp and moneywise it is more profitable to play it as an evil, rank murdering bastard.

The problem is that if a-questing you should go, then some of the quests themselves are made for goody-two-shoes.

Then the question about questing is that what wicked person would do questing in the first place, and what quest might be profitable enough, when slaughtering the churches, the paladins of The Radiant Heart, the cowled wizards and the armed forces of Amn provide much more money and xp than you could ever imagine to get from your sidequests. Do the quests if you want the items, but as our good friend Monty once said: "Sleep lightly taskmaster", for there will become a time to bite the hand that feeds you if you're evil...If you want finesse at it, then use guile; if it's war you want and what wicked person wouldn't, then declare a war and may the rivers run red!

Oh, it'd be nice to have a little more quests involving assassination, murder and whatnot. Maybe a little arson every now and then. But evil is very rewarding. It just depends on the character your playing. If you think that for instance Human Skin armor is rubbish, fair enough, but it's quite something on an evil Kensai/Thief wielding the Holy Avenger...

Admittedly, some of the Hell Trials are better on the good side, but that just depends on your playing style and the character. The thing is that even the bonuses you get from the good side aren't that fantastic in the first place, and hardly that much better than the evil ones that you should worry about them. And depending on your playing style and character, some of the Hell Trials on the evil side are much better than the good ones...

 

A mod adds up new options for evil players, you can side with Rayic and trick Edwin and lure him to Rayic's trap instead! (and you lose him as a joinable NPC forever, how sad!) Or you can trick Harpers with the Xar quest and all, (Jaheira will not like it though, OK this is more serious!) IIRC it was either Unfinished Business, or Quest Pack, or both.

Revised Hell Trials are very good too, you can at last choose Neutrality!

 

Yeh, the stuff Silverstar mentions is from Quest Pack.

 

Yes, Quest Pack, there is some good stuff in that mod! I like the Misery of Baseman (did I get the name right, it has been a while) quest too! Simple, but very filling in terms of RPing.

Quest Pack opens up new dimensions for RPing. Also, Unfinished Business adds up new quests which were intended to be in the game but was cut before it was released.

 

I don't think "you should get better items and more XP being evil".
In books,movies, or traditional crpgs the good guys win and the bad guys loose at the end, people don't want to be it the other way around like in real life.

Most players want to play the good guys, if playing evil would yield better rewards they'd feel cheated and stupid.

The temptation to be evil is still high, I don't think there are many players who didn't pickpocket at all, didn't break in the guarded compound and slaughtered the inhabitants for the CF katana.

 

In the hell trials at least, the evil rewards *are* better. The evil characters are also better than their good counterparts. There are a few things to be said for playing evil.

 

I once read a transcript of a chat with David Gaider (you know, one of the game designers, he even made his own BG2 mod - Ascension) to which I don't have a URL now, sorry. Anyway, on that chat someone asked him pretty much the same question regarding good/evil quests.

His answer was that not only they were on a tight timeframe, but they had the word count limit, which, as the name implies, limit the ammount of written text a game can have (they do it because of translation issues). Considering that the majority of players don't like/care about playing evil characters, it was only natural that they gave priority to quests better suited for a hero-type of PC.

Me, I don't think the game's all that biased towards good. If you look outside quests, evil gets away too easy, IMHO. So you can steal a couple of full plate mail sets and NO ONE is going to recognize it when you leave town wearing it? How *do* you steal a whole set of armor under a shopkeeper's nose anyway?

And what about items? Unlike IWD, there are pretty much no items in BG that have alignment-related use restrictions. Plus, if you RP evil, you can get some very powerful items. The sword from the hell trials (I forgot it's name), the pantaloons, that AND stuff like Carsomyr, which can be used by any rogue or multi-classed thief with Use Any Item. Oh, and there's also the bonuses from the end of SoA, where if you go evil, you get stat increases much more useful in combat.

And last but not least, the evil NPCs. Some of those are the most powerful characters you can get. Edwin, from a powergaming perspective, is the best spellcaster. Korgan and Viconia are anything but lacking in their own department.

[ July 06, 2007, 21:07: Message edited by: Hethan the Skald ]

 

The sword from the Hells trials is called Blackrazor.

If you are really evil you won't save Viconia from the pyre.

Beshaba (the cleric who is sentencing her to death worships Beshaba) is an evil deity and considering the reactions you can get from the NPCs in your party, only good aligned characters are going to complain about her fate (others don't care or like Anomen would rather see her burn).

I believe that the point about the trials is that the evil way is easier (no loss of DEX, some items gained) and it makes sense since this part is about the Bhaalspawn being tempted to embrace the evil within him/her.

 

UAI allows you to use Carsomyr, but that is hardly RP'ing, is it? While the game doesn't implement it, the sword is unlikely to allow itself to be wielded by an evil character.

 

I disagree. First of all, she's a drow priestess of Shar. You already know she'll be of use to you. Second, if you don't intend on taking her with you in order to monitor her behaviour, releasing her at all is evil. Shar is considered one of the evilest deities in Faerun. Among their other depredations, Priestesses of Shar practice ritual (demi-) human sacrifice. Whether or not she was actually caught doing anything to deserve her fate, she most assuredly did a great many things to deserve it while performing her duties as a priestess of Shar. Rescuing Viconia is a lawful act.....but it certainly isn't a good one.

 

Once more the argument of Evil vs Good in BG.

Sure if all you want to play is a psychopathic terrorist BG isn't the game for you. But try playing "smart" evil which I did. Gads was that a great game.

And why is conning the public not good RPing. It is done in real life all the time. If we choose to do evil in real life we justify our actions. Few people are 100% good or 100% evil.

RPing is figuring out the character, why he does what he does. Only someone crazy just wants to wipe out the rest of the world.

As to rescuing Vicky, Drew is correct plus my character didn't bother to ask the guy about to burn who he was or worshipped. In fact he didn't care a hoot in hades. "Hey there's my old comrade Vicky about to burned by a bunch of dumb dumbs. I could sure use her help and maybe get something extra to boot."

 

About Viconia we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't believe rescuing Viconia is in any way lawful. It's quite certain that she deserved what befalls her and she is obviously a threat to society. That being said most Lawful characters wouldn't bother.

OTOH it is lawful to her (and I believe it's what Drew meant in his post) but a lawful character may not find that he has any obligation or duty toward an evil drow.

LG Paladin types would know her and her kind well enough not to trust her. Taking her in the party would be some sort of liability. The redemption path is still nevertheless a solution.

So basically we have three choices:

1) Letting Viconia burn on the stake. IMO this is the blatantly evil choice or the fanatical one (who would blame a good character for not taking action and recue a murderer especially if this character hates dark elves because of what they might have done to him/her in the past) or the less than heroic "I don't care" solution.

2) Rescuing her without taking her in the party. Not so evil but clearly irresponsible. She is bound to get into trouble and to put the lives of surfacers at risk. It's the dumb good solution (help them today, don't think about tomorrow).

3) Rescuing her and taking her to make sure she doesn't do any evil. A rather good aligned choice but it's a gamble, she can jeopardize the survival of the group (unless the group could find a place where she could live peacefully without endangering others).

She'll be of use to herself, she just might try and use you to further her goals. I'd trust Aerie sooner than I'd confide in Viconia.

the idea that evil characters have to band together makes sense for a band of cutthroats and pilferers. If you consider a smart evil protagonist who wants to conceal his objectives (the type Nakia mentioned) I do believe that gathering a group of individuals whom you can (to a certain extent) trust and manipulate is way safer.

Any character would have to be naive or crazy to trust Viconia. Good characters may do that (they want her so badly to be "good" that they might even believe her when she says she wants to adapt and that she has abandoned the ways of her kind). I sincerely doubt evil characters (especially smart ones) would trust her (or even anyone for that matter).

One of the attributes of an evil character is selfishness. Why would Charname risk his/her neck for a drow priestess?

A chaotic evil protagonist could do it just for laughs... I sincerely doubt a neutral evil or lawful evil one would bother. But that's just my opinion.

"comrade"? What's that? When you're really evil you know that friends, comrades and pals are just a bunch of losers who want to take advantage of you or try to please you because you're the one in charge. There is no such thing as frinedship.

 

Hokay, Caradhras, the use of the word comrade was laziness on my part. I just couldn't think of a better term quickly.

At the time I played this character the romances were limited. Jahaira (too bossy) Ariel (too wimpy) so Vicky was left. My PC would quickly have killed Jahaira and Ariel. I was playing a male. He was self-centered, selfish, egotistical very charismatic, oh and thief something, Sarevok thought he was fantastic. I had Edwin who I had never played before, Korgan, Jan (because I love him) and in ToB Sarevok. Forgotten who the other person was. I had a full 6 party.

 

Actually, the only crime that Viconia has been caught committing is being drow. Since being drow isn't actually a crime and there was no evidence of Viconia actually engaging in any other criminal activity (when asked, the beshabans executing her admit that they are doing so solely because she is drow), her execution was unlawful. If her execution was unlawful, then stopping her execution must be lawful.

 

Vigilante justice is lawful?