Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Did anyone genuinely enjoy the "Evil" Route?

The main issue I have about the evil path is the fact the goblins turn against you once you helped Minthara destroy the grove. You should be viewed as their champion rather. And yes, at least, give us Minthara as companion.

Another issue is with the hag. If you are so evil, there should be a way to conclude a pact with her of some sort so she can provide help later on in the campaign. I would love to get some redcaps reinforcements like the 3 ogres provide.

Of course, there should be some betrayal between evil characters. But it's too much in our face at the moment.

First of all, your character should not know what benefits will something gives him to side with anyone ... you can just presume. :P
I completely understand the urge of going the most profitable route ... on the other hand, those should not allways be the right attitude.

Also ... yes, you may end up with empty hands, and head full of regrets ...
The question is: Is that bad thing?
You could choose different path, but you choosed this one, and you choosed poorly.
For myself on the contrary, once you get screewed with evil, once you get screewed with good options (for example ungreatfull victim in Hag's house).

As for goblins ... you sided with selfish and toxic beings ... and then acting selfish and toxic ... what else you expected? That seem acurate and i honestly like it that way.


Well ... those are all just presumption ...
There is also that option that those ungreatfull bastards will act like they dont know you.
Or maybe they will know you, will thank you ... and that will be all. Simmilar to Astarion, when he try to drink your blood: "I allready apologized, what more do you want?" Only switch the word apology with thanks.

After all, they do have smith/vendor ... but that bastard dont even give you a small discount after you put your life in danger and wipe out whole camp of goblins, so they have "safer road to Baldur's Gate". -_- They didnt even bother to wait for you with celebration. And parrents of that dead girl are still mad at you, bcs you were the one who told them that someone else did kill their child, even if you tell them sensitively and with compassion.
Zevlor dances for you, and that bard wish to create song about you ... and that is it!
I dont feel much rewarded for being a good guy here either.


Well ... it also depends on how you seen them ...
This myconid colony may seem like city of friendlies ... but are they?
They seem more like "non-hostile, yet" wich certainly dont make them friends.

They are practicly necromancers, that uses bodies of their enemies as thralls ... they dont have any problem with invading your mind and dig there ... the second you arrive to talk with their leader, he just starts force you to do their revenge attack aggainst Duegars on your own, they dont even help you with that! ... and with first encounter their leader threatened you with death ... and possibly enslavement after.
And dont forget the fact that they will imediatly attack you, if you fail to persuade them about that you are looking for healing, or just adventuring around ... a "friendlies" in mine opinion should at last alow you to leave in peace.

That is something that really leaves bitter taste for myself ...
And i must say i cant blame my character to wish settle the score with those bastards who theat him like this.
Especialy when there is reward. :P
Havent you ever seen any old western movie with bounty hunters? Or Riddick from newer example? "I kill that one for free." That is just clasic line, when someone pisses off such character.

Also leader of those Myconids seem to me more like mafia Don, than some friendly leader ... so my moral compas was twitching even when i helped him.


There is allways some reason ... i honestly dont recall single NPC that you are suppose to kill in some situation, and dont have any. :-/
They are not allways cristal clear, and not allways seen at first sight ... but they are there.
If you could give me some examples, i could help you see them.


Yeah, that too.
But good and evil are still just matter of perspective.


Ad 1.) I honestly expected that cage that is in your camp (Halsin stand next to it) was prepared for her, or other prisoners. :-(
Ad 2.) That would be really great ... even better if she will be other class, since i dont need two clerics and i have the feeling that Shadowhearth will have no problem with wiping druid groove (didnt try yet, curently i play evil character).
Ad 3.) No problem from me, great idea.
Ad 4.) They could work as that earlyer mentioned mercenaries, that will be for hire as companions ... good idea aggain.
Ad 5.) I like the idea of slave market ... not quite sure about that "working for me" part, not like its bad idea, i just can imagine how they could work for you. Certainly not as companions, that would be odd.


That seems like a bit overkill, certain impact yes, sure, absolutely ... but that ogres? :-/
Its baldurs gate, not Faerun mafia.

I'm sorry, but do you not understand the point of incentives? What you are saying here is "the evil path is fine because you are supposed to get screwed over in it", so why would anyone ever take it then? This is like saying getting your brain eaten by the dying mindflayer in the Nautiloid's wreckage is as valid as the entire good path...

What im actualy saying is this:


You quoted it ... so it would be great if you actualy read it first ...

But lets take it sentence by sentence ok?

First one is that your character DONT KNOW THE OUTCOME of any alliance s/he made.
Wich is something we call cornerstone of this whole predicament. In other words: IMPORTANT, REMEMBER PLEASE.
So ... the answer for the question "why would anyone ever do that" in this part is: The vision of power, wealth, influence, etc. (Strike out what does not apply.)
The most important thing you should understand about it, is that your character have no way to know if s/he will or will not be screwed over ... in fact, even you as a player should not know that in your first gameplay. So why did you try it? Was it pure curiosity, or that vision of great reward in the end? And before you will claim that you didnt, or even dont expect reward ... remember what does this whole threat is about. :P

Then there is another sencente, where i claim that there is different approach to story, but you choosed this one.
That is actualy not so important right now, just pointing out that your character was not forced to do this ... he probably wants to for some reason ... personaly i presume that The vision of power, wealth, influence, etc. is usualy motivation for usual evil character ... notice the fact that first word in this motivation is vision ... that is very important part!

In that same part i point out that there is possibility, that your character will get nothing in the end ...
That is actualy just amplification of allready claimed ... for once: Your character dont know the outcome ... for two: Your character presume big reward ... but as i mentioned, none of it is certain, s/he just expected it.

Next one is description of the race you sided with ... wich should help you understand how slight chances for your expected big rewards you have.
There is not much to add to this ...

And in rest of my post, wich you seem to ignore aswell ... i explained how even "good path" can left you unrewarded.

Well ...
When you take it all together you should get this outcome:
Playing evil is (and by mine opinion it should be) something like playing poker, with "all in" ... stakes are high, potential profit is huge, but your chances on it are slight, but potentialy grow in futher perspective ... if you play your cards right.
Otherwise you end up empty handed with head full of regrets ... and that is how it should be.

Also for that fabricated example with mind flayer ...
"as valid" is concept i cant work with, since validity is very subjective term, so im affraid i have no idea what do you mean by that.

My point is that this vision of power is not compelling to the player as they are uniquely aware that the Absolute is an Illithid ploy while none of her forces seem to know about this. Of course the player character has no metagaming analysis of outcomes that have canonically not happened yet, but you know in-universe about the tadpole right from the start. The tadpole is not a gift, it was forced into your brain by a big scary squid monster. Minthara and Gut do not acknowledge this and it seems they were the ones who sent Eodwin out to come kill you. If they are unable to put two and two together to conclude that they too are being duped and the player's companions all can (Lae'Zel immediatly points out that the Absolute is a Gaihkh deception) who in their right mind would go "nay, it is a gift!"?

People makes deals with devils and demons all the time in-setting. How is using the tadpole any different?

That is actualy good question ...

Let me answer that with another question ...
In this same world, cambions are quite known thing and every single person in camp (except Gale) seems to be quite sure about that dealing with Raphael is bad idea ... VERY(!) bad idea ... yet, your character is allowed to concider it and maybe in some future even accept it, bcs s/he can, same as Gale, think that s/he can outsmart him and came out as winner, instead of whiner.

Or other example ...
In this same world Vampires are concidered as monsters, and i bet everyone in Faerun will kill Astarion in the second he reveals what he is ...
Yet, your character is allowed to keep him close, since his power can prove usefull.

Or other example ...
Maybe not as much as in other cases, but i still bet that Necromancy is in this world concidered as something ... unpleasand, if not exactly evil ... yet your character can choose to become necromancer.

And to finaly answer your question ...
Yes, there is quite common knowledge that tadpoles (and mind flayers) are usualy bad sign ... and yes, everyone in your camp (again except one, Astarion in this case) concider keeping it the worst idea ever ... yet, you are allowed to question that decision ... and decide for yourself.
Are you asking why? That is up for you to decide, but that option is there ... it even will gives you some benefits, but outcome is yet unknown ... it may give player ultimate power, aswell as it may give him ultimate death, or fate ultimately worst than that.
And same as with that mindflayer in nautiloid wreckage, that you can either kill imediatly, or start conversation, and risk death ... its just up to you, there is that option and it dont really matter why you choose it, important thing is that you have that option ... maybe your character is sadistic homicidal maniac, even that can be reason.

I think that right now is quite too soon to presume that Absolute is Illithid ploy ...
Yes, Lae'zel is quite sure about it, yet she seem (at last to me) to be person that see Illithid scheeme even behind the fact that her jogurt went missing in the fridge, and dont even think for a second that some person can just eat it by accident, or on purpose.
Why im not so sure? Since that whole tadpole stasis thing seem to be in direct contradiction with illithid reproduction system. True, on nautiloid we seen that new Mind Flayer has ben created by pushing the button, so it all can be part of some bigger experiment to improve their reproduction ... and im quite ok with the option that Lae'zel was right, and i was wrong ... i just like to remember wider perspective.
I know that we are used from games, books, and series that character that is prowiding us with informations are infallible, but what do we know?

About Minthara and Gut ...
That is also good point, but those two can send people to kill survivors of that wreckage just to ensure their power.
Same as Astarion told us, no Vampire need another Vampire to do as he please in his teritorium ... same goes with true souls ... they dont need competition, so they can use their zealots to wipe it out. After all, that brother and sister from Eodwin was quite obedient to your comands, since you were marked as true soul ... until you tell them that you are from wreckage, then they imediatly become hostile. And i think its bcs they must obey true souls ... yet they were send to kill everyone who survived ... therefore they dont know that on this ship was true souls.

And finaly a "gift" ...
Yes, you are right that our character should see tadpole as an infection, abomination, and something they wish to get rid of ... but that is just it.
The "tadpole" is what fits this description. To be more precise "usual tadpole".
And as the story continues your character trying to get rid of "usual tadpole" finds out more and more that he have very "unusual tadpole" ... and this can be quite different story. There is magic that can keep it dormant, so there is no risk for you to have it ... at last so far. Who can say if there is or isnt magic that can make it dormant permanently? :P
After all ... when you think about it ...
Lae'zel is concerned about tadpole, bcs she is zealot and she never questions her teaching ...
Shadowheart is concerned bcs she dont want to turn into mind flayer, also she sees a plot behind every corner, so she have thrust issues ...
Gael is concerned just bcs there is a risk of turning into mind flayer, yet it seems like this problem is not on top of his "to be concerned about" list ...
Astarion seems to me much more concerned about the fact that there is potential danger, if this stasis will end prematurely ... but the benefits are too sweet for him to decline it entirely ...
And Wyll? Wyll dont even seem to admit that there is any danger at all ... he feels fine, so he dont see anything to be concerned about, until he stops feeling fine.
So...
Yes, i believe that your character can put thrust into this "Absolute" that is allready saving his/hers life right now, since s/he is not turning ... and that can be quite good argument to not provoke that entity, whatever it is.

I don't understand the point of your post Ragnarok.

In my opinion the evil route is bad because its harder and unrewarding.
It does not create fun dilemmas for me.

Its not like I got a really cool sword or some other loot and it apparently belongs to some kid's dead dad.
And then I am faced with the dilemma of giving up the loot for honor or keeping it like a selfish bastard.

That, in my opinion, is what being evil or good is all about.
As for me not knowing if the reward is actually worth it.

Well maybe the first gameplay sure but the second time? And after Act 1 whether I do good or evil I know that evil has little to no reward... so why keep doing it?
Also being evil gives me a worse story. I am not stupid, when I play as good large towns are open to me, I meet new characters, have interesting conversations, go on quests and etc...
And more often than not they tell me "See you at baldur's gate!"

So either I will encounter them on the road to Baldur's gate or I will see them there.
But if I go evil? I destroy any chance of that. Even in the Underdark I lose several plot threads that lead to act two like helping the deep gnomes if I betray the current mushroom king to the exiled one.

It just doesn't make any sense and it is a chore to do.
Especially when the evil road almost always has those NPCs betray me anyway so I end up killing twice as many.

Yep. Evil actions should be more rewarding most of the time.

I believe that depends on what do you see as "rewarding" ...
Also it depends on what do you see as "evil gameplay" ...

For myself one of pure evil deeds was throwing a rock to Bear-Halsin ... and yes, you really dont get anything from it, except maybe even toughter fight, and lots of regrets as a player (speaking for myself).
Other evil situations is wiping out the groove ... but that is rewarding, since all loot from whole groove is yours to take and sell (presuming you still have some vendor alive ) ... and if you play your dices right, you even get that Drow to potentialy join you ... well, at last she helped you at the moment.
But if you are talking just about Illithid / True Soul conversation options ... that "final reward" was not yet revealed for us, but for now we get almost everytime sure dice sucess, wich can also be usefull ... kinda.

So in fact there is rewards, if they are sufficient or not, that is for you to decide.


And that is exactly where our opinions are different ... i dont need cool sword.
Its good example ... but certainly not the only possibility. This what you are desribing is called carrot on a stick ... you stick some reward before players nose and he will follow it no matter the consequences, bcs he just want the reward, nothing else matters.

That is for example nice to see in that quest for Paladins of Tyr ...
That sword is certainly interesting reward (presuming you have someone with 2h weapon in party) ... so some players can just take that road and dont even think about the other way ... i know that it drops from his corpse if you choose to help other site, but for your first gameplay you dont, or at last i didnt.
No moral dilema here, in fact there is so chance so there is even no dilema (read as: thinking, or trying to figure out where is the truth) at all, just quest and reward ... nothing more, nothing less.
At last i know i did it with my mage ... she didnt liked at all how Myconids were treated her as potential threat right from the begining ... yet i just needed that neckage, that hobgoblin is selling.
Same with ogres ... i just wanted that crown! And i was potentialy able to persuade them that i am wearing the mark of Absolute ... but i didnt even try, and honestly i should, after all its three scarry ogres ... it was not right "roleplay" decision ... it was right "videogame" decision.

That is why i like so much how attack on the groove is made ...
Every decision you made you made for you own reasons, Larian dont need to show your character why you should that, or this ... that is for you to decide ... i dunno, maybe your character is homicidal maniac, maybe its xenophobic Tieflinghater, maybe hes fighter for goblin's rights, maybe hes just loyal to another Drow, or maybe he is really interested in that whole Absolute cult, so he really want them to suceed ... or maybe litteraly anything else.
But its all up to you, and that is exactly why i just love it.
That, and the fact that everyone is acting as they should ... goblins ale bloodthirsty, selfish, coward, treacherous bastards, that can be ruled only if they fear their master ... so you can presume that they will be even worse. And they are. :3
So in this particular case ... i think some reward will ruin that whole scene, bcs greedy players will do that just for biger profit, and evil is not "allways" just about profit. :-/
That Drow cant give you anything, bcs by her character, she sees you as usable tool, nothing more. For her you were never alies, since she sees herself on the top of pyramid ... wich kinda makes that situation, when you roll your dices right and she will not attack you, but help you instead ... even sweeter.


Greed is certainly one of sins ...
But there is reason why i used plural.
So no ... it is "about" ... but certainly not "all about".

Also dont forget that this is only small portion of whole game, and we can presume that both roads will have some consequences ... so there is some chance that your desired "reward" will reveal later.

It seems to me like you are talking just about Lawfull-evil characters ...
Try this: Chaotic Evil


As i sayd, that is up to your character ...
After all, its not like "good and righterouss" path will give you any reward either.

And for myself (and multiple philosophies across human history) good, and evil is just matter of perspective ...
You either massacre tieflings for the good of goblins ... or massacre goblins, for the good of tieflings ... since there is no way to negotiate peace between them, there is no "pure good" solution.


I dont think so ...
But our metters are obviously working with different numbers.


You may not be stupid ... question is: Is your character?
I dunno, it seems like either im too distant from this game, or you are too deep.
Anyway ... if you are not evil person (and i presume you are not), and want to play evil character ... logicaly you cant decide as yourself, but as the character.
You can for example try with every diaogue to say something like "what would i NEVER choose" ... and then choose it, sometimes its fun.

Since we dont know yet what consequences will be there, its all pure speculations ...
But i think its not so impossible to presume that when you will go good path, there will be new characters, interesting conversations, go on quests and etc. ... but when you will go evil path, where will be another characters, with another conversations, and different quests etc.

I dont quite think it will be like Fallout 3 where you just blow nuke in middle of the town, and created magnificent crater.
More i expect that scenario, where on one side will be army of Baldur's Gate, potentialy with our good character ... and the other side army of Raiders, potentialy with out evil character ... ofc, that side with PC on their side probably wins.

So in conclusion, i dont presume that you will get rid of any experience for playing either side ... except the other ... therefore i will totally play this game at least twice, for both sides ... and then i shall see what will be next.


You almost made it sounds like if you expect that whole maps will be empty for evil characters.
True, you will not met this characters ... you will met others.

The Underdark is tricky, since once aggain we didnt seen whole plot.
But you can make deal with that Duegar (especialy understandable as a Drow) that you will help him get that Deep Gnome runaway, especialy her boots.
So i presume that you will not "loose plot" with deep gnomes ... more likely you will switch Deep Gnomes plot with Duegar plot.
That said ... IF you dont choose to betray them both.
(Sometimes i just need to try kill everything in the Act ... betray Druids for Tieflings ... betray Tieflings for Goblins ... being betrayed by Goblins and wipe them out too ... i really wonder how will game will work with that. And yes ... Chaotic Evil character.)


As Gale said: There is no thing as absolute certainity.
They can betray you ... and you will be foolish to expect otherwise ... yet, and again if you roll your dices right ... there are different outcomes.

For example:

Sure you should. at least in theory. When Zavlor asks you for help, he promises to reward you. Whether he will keep his promise or not is a different matter, of course it's a risk, but less risky than doing what Minthara wants you to do. She just say "go kill everyone in the grove" "why?" "Because eeeeeevil." that's stupid.

This sums this up. Currently evil answers are more like a teenage douchebag would be answering, can't imagine any adult picking these and enjoying themselves.

I didn't like the fact Minthara doesn't kill you being put behind a dice roll. If it had been mirrored by whether or not tieflings trust you and come to your camp, it would have been fine. But it is obvious the devs want this path to be harder and it's not really fair to the player.

And as well, goblins being hostile to you after the events of the grove, without the possibility to do anything about it, clearly indicates Larian wants you to feel being evil is bad and not rewarding.

I liked it, sort of.

I didn't like that there's no good "path to evil" path. No one ever tempts you into the evil path.
But I like that the Goblins turn on you. It shows how there's an inner core and "useful idiots", and in order to keep the Goblins in line they claimed to them that you are the "useful idiot"

I agree Minthara should be a possible party character, and I think she might become one. (Reason: Only NPC that becomes naked when you loot her)
I hope she becomes a Paladin though, would suit her more than cleric.

But yeah, I like the dark path. I like leaning into the tadpole, and just doing whatever.

One thing to remember: Evil doesn't mean "side with all the evil people", in fact it's very opposite. Evil is generally defined by how self serving, "easy way out". I don't need to side with the Hag. The hag is evil yes, but I'm the only evil in town! To me the evil part is to take the wand at the end.

The way I see it, the essence of evil is self interest above all. I see an evil character as one driven by greed, who lusts for power, one who'll take what they want even at the expense of others. When faced with a decision or a quest, an evil character doesn't ask "How can I be as big of a dick as possible?", they ask "How will this benefit me?".

So in other words I agree - there should be more incentive to be evil. In fact, I'd go further: there should be more incentive to be evil than good. Playing evil should be easy mode, they should get more loot, better gear, and positions of power. You don't choose to be evil for evil's sake; You are tempted by it, because evil means you get to live deliciously. You can have anything you want... all it costs is your soul.

Being good, on the other hand, is more often than not a thankless job. Good characters are selfless and self-sacrificing. Sometimes this means putting themselves in harm's way to protect the weak. Sometimes this means giving up what they want for the benefit of others. I think this is needed in order for the heroism to feel real. After all, if there is no downside to altruism, then why would I ever act any other way? Certainly not just for evil's sake, I don't like being unlikeable.

Evil or Good shouldn't be a choice you make at the beginning of a playthrough. It should be the angel and devil on your shoulder, always there, nagging you in every moral choice to do what's right, or take what you want.

Being evil is more than simply killing everyone and throwing rocks at bears. That is being an asshole.

You could be evil and still save the tieflings and Halsin, provided they would work for you in return. Remind them in the future who saved them and why they should do such and such.

I once played a warlock that set a whole village against its mayor and put my minion in his place, the only person who died was the mayor and a few orcs I used in the process of agitating the village.

Imo, being evil is taking what you want with no care for others.
That's far from let's kill everyone, which is what seemed line the evil path available. Didn't finish the evil play because it didn't feel like true evil and more like chaotic evil.

You could be evil and help the Tieflings because you are a pragmatist and they are your best chance out of there. A lot of the "evil" choices in this first Act are cartoonish.

I would agree if it wasn't D&D. In D&D, alignment is so straightforward and limited that only evil characters may associate with each other. One of the reasons is the fact there are some spells like "Detect evil' or "Protection against evil", which means evil is more a faction than a moral compass.

I'm so glad we lost alignments in this game

Exactly right.
Its quickly becoming obvious this player is the sort that would burn down the orphanage just because its so garsh darn eviiiiiiiil.

Also I cannot abide with emojis.
That is true evil imo.