You should play the game instead of watching the Romance video.
The romance is good and it make the character more nuanced. Non-romance character feels less nuanced.
If you play the game:
1. Aerie is either a childish whinny girl who couldn't stop mourning her lost wing or someone who coming to term with his new found flaws.
2. Jaheira is either self-righteous harper or a genuine righteous individual.
3. Viconia is either class A A-hole and a problematic racist or an exciting lover / fish out of the water lover.
Questioning whether you must gain something for being "Evil" in this world is moot. If Shar told Viconia to be a jester, she probably will be a jester, and for what? Nothing. They do it to please their God.
Do you ever ask why Dolor did what he did to his victim? Disrupting the economy? Possibly making Baldur's Gate vulnerable to Absolute influence? And for what? In macro-perspective? Nothing. He did so he can please Bhaal.
It doesn't need to be "Make sense".
In the Real World, God (if He indeed exist) never speak to you directly. God never appear to you directly.
In Faerun, God actively communicate with their follower. Their power apparent from the power shown by their priest and followers.
In Faerun, afterlife is a thing that nobody cannot dispute, especially when Jergal and Kelemvor known to all.
In Faerun, Demon exist, aspect of chaos and evil in material form, not just abstract ideas.
Believe me, I tried, but the game didn't age well, at all. And I tried watching a let's play, but they are all dated or in 360p, which is just pixel art at this point. Watching it is painful.
True, Demons exist in DND 5e, they are basically chaos incarnate. They exist to fight, destroy, slaughter, etc. There is no higher cause, that's just how they are. A bunch of monsters with no reedeming qualities, unlike devils, who at least keep their part of the deal.
Fanatics can be found everywhere and for DND that's especially common, with the gods, blessings, etc. However, slaughtering a bunch of 'FOR THE ABSOLUTE/Any other god' villains, who only exist for the player to kill, loot and get magic items is hardly an exciting prospect. There is plenty of combat in BG 3, as it is.
And if you don't pursue these characters, it's easy to label them as you did, while if you pursue them, you get to know why the act the way they do.
This is the problem. We are working under assumption that we know how these characters can grow and act, leaving aside novels and whatever WOTC says (which is often dumb, as evidenced by the whole OGL fiasco). And after playing BG 2 having characters do a 180 for no explanation and treating them like mooks to be slaughtered leaves a sour taste in anyone's mouth. While, Larian can choose the canon events of the first 2 games and make references to them, bringing characters back and showing them into the game with bad writing is not the way to do it justice.
I am sorry, but I'm ignoring your "smart evil" example because... I don't think those are example of smart of anykind. It's not special, because something similar available to you in BG3, of course with more reactivity.
-Turning on solar space laser for your own power or distributing the energy to a whole region. --> instead of indirectly doomed a community, you can actively participate in their slaughter.
-Making a grieving woman pay to get her husband's out of a warzone. --> how many times you can ask for money to help people in BG3?
-Extorting a community for cash with blackmail --> How many times you extort someone/community for an item you posses?
-Killing 100 NCR troops and getting their dog tags to the Legion, who give the best rewards in the whole damn game. --> Picking dog tags to gain 'good boy' point for an evil faction? Why not commit mass genocide to please evil god?
Instead of comparing Baldur's Gate 3 to an "RPG" made for mainstream audience/RPG tourist/"I play an RPG" game certification for Warzone player - let's not insult BG3 and compare it to Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire.
I think Narrtive and RPG is in opposite direction of game design. The more narrative heavy developer control of game, the less player autonomy they can give, meaning less roleplaying.
Deadfire tried to strike "balance" of sort. Narratively it's a fantastic game, nuanced, and nobody are clearly evil nor good (it's still a debate to this day).
Tight narrative making the game feels less RPG. The dialogue rarely mention what class you are. The dialogue rarely acknowledges your race. The dialogue rarely acknowledges your identity/background. --- it's still a fantastic cRPG, but it sacrifices a lot of RPG aspect within the dialogue to achieve much coherent narrative.
BG3 pulling the string closer to RPG, sacrificing coherent narrative but giving player more options to do. So I am not defending BG3 if somebody say they think BG3 hasn't got the best writing.
TLDR:
in BG3 evil is stupid. Okay, so if irl God, say Jesus comes down today, and you as believer commanded to stand with your hand upside down while drinking grimace drink, would you question His intention or not? (I, as an Unbeliever think that is stupid, the point being: perspective, the materialize form of God in Faerun actively conspiring against one another etc.)
You sound like someone who never played the game and just judges it based on a single line. These were just examples, which you completely misunderstood.
a) -Turning on solar space laser for your own power or distributing the energy to a whole region. --> instead of indirectly doomed a community, you can actively participate in their slaughter. -> OR MAYBE GEE I DON'T KNOW, you are tasked with bringing the solar array online, because a faction tells you to do so. You can: Overload the grid (making sure nobody gets any electricity, not even weapon, which is considered the worst choice); send to chosen community from a list, basically giving them electricity for free; weaponize the solar energy into a weapon (Selfish choice); Distribute it evenly (Brownouts will happen, but it's most humane option and nets you good rewards). No space laser, but you get compensated, so there is a valid choice.
b) -Making a grieving woman pay to get her husband's out of a warzone. --> how many times you can ask for money to help people in BG3? -> All the time. Astarion disapproves, if you are goody to shoes and not shelfish all the time. This kind of quest, would easily fit into BG3 anyway.
c) -Extorting a community for cash with blackmail --> How many times you extort someone/community for an item you posses? -> I am trying to remember how many times in BG3 and the closest I remember is: getting Auntie Ethel to leave Marianna alone and +1 ASI, maybe getting money back from a goblin after Chicken Chase. It's not like you can promise to lead refuges out of the grove, make a deal with Minthara and others after searching them, betray them when they are on the road, etc. The choice are 3, help tieflings, help goblins, do not get involved. 2 of which you are just worse off in general.
d) -Killing 100 NCR troops and getting their dog tags to the Legion, who give the best rewards in the whole damn game. --> Picking dog tags to gain 'good boy' point for an evil faction? Why not commit mass genocide to please evil god? -> Fair, you could do that. Which comes back to fanatics, being fanatics. But really, why would anyone worship an evil god and commit something diabolical for no reward? It's one thing to worship Shar and get some neat magic items, powers, etc. It's the other thing if all you meet are deranged fanatics, who worship evil goods and are treated as mooks to be slaughtered.
That's what Viconia and Sarevok are, mooks to be slaughtered. You kill them, you get their gear and that's about it, unless you do evil run, which adds a bit more. Either way, these 2 could be replaced with Greater Doppelgangers and least their memory wouldn't be tarnished by newer games.
