Originally Posted by Leucrotta
Echoing the criticisms already aired about Vic and Sarevok. But I'd like to point out that in some points Larian went out of their way to change the trajectory of the characters from their endings to make them...worse. I think it's already been pointed out how BG 3's backstory for vic twists her ending to make her more evil and fanatical than she originally was, recontextualizing the events to be less hopeful/tragic (viconia doesn't fit in with the evil wierdos that comprise the proper clergy of the church of Shar, they turned on her and so did Shar) and more 'jesus, this cultist is a real piece of work' (she murdered all of them, with emphasis that they were loyal and trusted her, because she's a blind fanatic who lives only to serve Shar)

Sarevok's background doesn't really line up with his endings at all, but seems to have been rewritten with the intention of just making him as one-dimensional and messed-up as possible. Complete with incest. Apparently that's a thing. It even overshadows the left-field nonsense of the other Throne of Bhaal characters returning as fanatical servants. (Sendai was eyebrow-raising, Amelyssan was full WTF)

You also have to look at how they are used in the game-what their purpose is. In Vic's case, she exist pretty much to serve the dual-purpose of cathartic release (by beating Shadowheart's abuser, much like Cazador with Asterion) and also of validating Shadowheart's 'specialness' Vic's new story is basically that her life's work basically been to raise Shadowheart to be Shar's chosen. Then disposed of (on the faithful Shadowheart route) or to otherwise be rendered insignificant by her defeat and Shadowheart sparing her as part of her 'healing' process (basically says she's nothing to her and to do what you want)

Sarevok serves a similar role, but to validate the specialness of Dark Urge and Orin. There's a lot of dialogue that pretty much spells out that he's a failure or otherwise in the shadow of his granddaughter and/or Durge. Durge is pretty much explicitly singled out as better than him, even in his own words. Basically a gatekeeper of sorts to exposit about how great Orin and Durge are compared to himself.

Of note, the only characters who know either of them personally have absolutely nothing good to say about either of them and are very happy if you kill them. Comparing them to SH and Durge in terms, again-to reinforce that the latter are special and the former are failures or otherwise 'fallen'. Even Minthara has nothing good to say about Vic despite being in almost the exact same boat.

Combined with how unpleasantly they are characterized in the game via their words and actions it seems clear to me that these aren't characters we are intended to *like*, or work with, but rather characters who we are supposed to feel disgust/anger/dislike towards and want to beat/kill/surpass and feel good about doing so. They are not character written with fanservice or their general popularity in mind, like with Minsc and Jaheria. Makes me really happy that the pre-release rumors of Lorroakan being Edwin turned out to be false (in the final release, at least) Having half of the evil party members from BG II+ToB being treated as such was bad enough.


Thanks for replying. I agree with what you said, the players do need cathartic release. What confused me is why they have to use old characters to be the punching bag? And they even went out of their way to do it, like you said. Do they hate players of the old games? (Is ths Last of Us Part II?) The villains we got were not well-written at all and literally could be replaced by anyone, any small clown characters. So why have to be them? I really don't understand.