Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 16 of 20 1 2 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Joined: Jul 2017
C
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Jul 2017
Originally Posted by Vhaldez
Originally Posted by Cyka
Tyranny at best is Neutral. If you take evil decisions (and there are a couple) you basically lose out chunk of story and get bad ending (like you have to basically skip the entire DLC if you are lawful evil?). The worse case of this is with a vendor in prologue. If you follow lawful evil you miss out entire tree of skills. You can be devious here and there but Crusader King beats it by a long mile for sure lmao.
Ah yes, I forgot that being in the Oldwalls was illegal. You are there for half of the game lol. The Bastard's Wound sucked, but I would still argue that basegame Tyranny has the best CRPG writing in terms of player agency.


I also really did not like how the dread system linked to companion endings. Dread is AMAZING as an alternative to get people's loyalty without kissing people's arse, yet the game sicks out bunch of companions go dead or crazy endings if i go for the dread route, making the system entirely pointless.

Joined: Nov 2020
B
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
B
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Abits
I'll concur that writing evil is harder. Moreover, other than Kotor, I don't remember any game that had any actual evil path. moreover, properly defining an evil path is hard. Even the drow city in bg2 and Korriban were not "evil paths" per se, but a mandatory parts of their respective games that had an option for evil flavour, but playing evil in them didn't change the story drastically.

With all that in mind, I think the fact is that Larian didn't have to tell the story in the way they did. It is much more difficult to create two storylines than creating one storyline with good/evil nuances. But if they did, I expect the same quality of writing from both.


I am currently playing through BG 2 and took the vampire side just to be edgy and I'm playing chaotic neutral so thought it was appropriate. Surprisingly even Bodhi The Bitch Queen gives you a choice between a good and evil quest to further to her final quest.

Minthara should be designed similarly where instead of her being default evil with evil quests, we get the choice, whether outright or through deception, we can go along with the evil quest or redirect her to the "good" or "neutral" one since it is "good" according to an evil character.

The BG 2 quest lines required this flexibility to keep a party together for the PC in the early game and I think it is a good compromise for creating the branching storylines that are associated with alignment but also not requiring that someone just blindly go along with whatever they are told.

Honestly Larian is thinking too basically about their evil NPCs and need to get more writers who are enthusiastic about writing evil and neutral storylines.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by Abits
https://www.ign.com/articles/baldurs-gate-3-early-access-changes-player-data-feedback-larian

okay so this article is probably gonna pop up in more places in the forum soon, but I want to address something specific Sven talks about in it:
Quote
“The writers have a tendency of being good and not putting in the evil options,” Vincke says. “We had to actually force them to go through everything and put in more contrasting options so that they could put the evil ones in there.” It’s all about offering the players “real” choices, he explains - a variety of options falling all across the spectrum of morality, rather than just slight variations on ‘the good one’. “For choice to be there, you need to have the ability to do good and evil and things in between, and edge cases, and stuff like that. That is a modus operandi for the remainder of the game.”

the bad news is that yeah, the evil path does feel like someone was forced to write it. The good news is that it seems like something they really care about and might work on improving

Interesting article ... thanks fot it.
They should concider hiring Brian Mitsoda, that man have experiences with writing great "evil", or at least morally grey stories, and screw with player in the way that people usualy even enjoy. laugh


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Jul 2017
C
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
C
Joined: Jul 2017
Its funny how JRPG already beat modern west CRPG in complex moral grey writing in the form of Fire Emblem three houses.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
I would like to say how I see the ideal path of "lawful evil" (moderate evil) and "chaotic evil" (absolute evil)

In a chaotic evil way, we will have to betray Minthara for the sake of the Absolute or Lolth who wants to punish her for her betrayal, lead the army, and do many disgusting deeds, both motivated and not very motivated, and in the end it is possible to turn into a Mind Flayer or gain too much power. I don't know who will play it, this way does not tempt me.

In the "lawful evil" path, I want to open Minthara's eyes to tadpoles and deception, to oppose the Absolute or play your own game together, to protect her from the clerics of Lolth, and gain her trust and true friendship. But this must be an evil role-playing. As a team and reliable allies, we will act using any method, including the possible killing of tieflings and anyone else, putting personal gain first of all, without being someone's puppets. It would be really fun and interesting. This is what will give me the pleasure of role-playing.

This is the path that will allow you to combine honor and friendship, evil roleplay and personal gain. I would like this roleplay, and I really hope that Larian will make it possible.
I do not want the evil way as only "absolute evil", the moral choice and the boundaries of good and evil in some moments should be more difficult.

Joined: Nov 2020
B
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
B
Joined: Nov 2020
They would do themselves a service in opening up more neutral decisions as well not just straight good vs. evil. That's not all it's about. I want to be able to play as a dedicated diplomat or a disinterested wanderer if I please.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Savage North
Originally Posted by Bleeblegum
I want to be able to play as a dedicated diplomat or a disinterested wanderer if I please.


There is already a bit of Neutral roleplay. You may not give a damn about Sazza, Arabella or Liam. You're just trying to find a healer and head back home. In that case, you're not going to go out of your way to help other people (my definition of Good), but you're not causing any suffering to others for your personal gain (my definition of Evil). You're just a (possibly hardened-hearted) passer-by. A disinterested wanderer, I suppose.

To me, if you save the tieflings because you sympathise with their plight and want to help them, you're Good. Maybe you're very brave and not afraid of taking on armies of goblins and you make sure to kill all the goblins, so that the region will be ultra-safe for the tieflings' passage (no new leader emerging and rallying the goblins). But you could be more Neutral and end up saving the tieflings merely because Halsin wouldn't be available to heal you until the goblin leadership was dead (he himself has his own reason for wanting that, and it's not to help the tieflings).

The difficulty with Neutral, is that it's not so much a clear ideal and morality. It's often what is neither Good nor Evil, and presumably in the middle (as Good and Evil are often thought of as being on a one-dimensional spectrum, which certainly is restrictive). As a result, Neutral could be narrower, or much broader, than Evil or Good, depending on how far you see these areas expanding toward the middle.

I guess Larian should start by ensuring that they have equally good and motivated paths for both Good and Evil. Then find how much room there is in-between the two paths. Ideally, Neutral shouldn't end up being the same result as Good, but for slightly different motivations. That being said, I'd already be happy if there's a good Evil path and a good Good path. Having an interesting Neutral path sounds like the icing on the cake.

Note: in fact, probably, they shouldn't start by thinking of writing a Good path and an Evil path, but they should start think in terms of "how could things naturally unfold, what could various characters do, seek, and how would that affect the end situation".


Hoping we'll be able to create great assumptions-free Custom Characters and be given great roleplay options.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by OneManArmy
In a chaotic evil way, we will have to betray Minthara for the sake of the Absolute or Lolth who wants to punish her for her betrayal, lead the army, and do many disgusting deeds, both motivated and not very motivated, and in the end it is possible to turn into a Mind Flayer or gain too much power.

Says who exactly? O_o


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Oct 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Oct 2020
the only true evil route is the route where I chose to join the mind flayers smile but I can't frown

Last edited by Evil_it_Self; 12/11/20 10:43 PM.

[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]
Joined: Jun 2018
F
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
F
Joined: Jun 2018
[quote=OneManArmy]I would like to say how I see the ideal path of "lawful evil" (moderate evil) and "chaotic evil" (absolute evil)

In a chaotic evil way, we will have to betray Minthara for the sake of the Absolute or Lolth who wants to punish her for her betrayal, lead the army, and do many disgusting deeds, both motivated and not very motivated, and in the end it is possible to turn into a Mind Flayer or gain too much power. I don't know who will play it, this way does not tempt me.

In the "lawful evil" path, I want to open Minthara's eyes to tadpoles and deception, to oppose the Absolute or play your own game together, to protect her from the clerics of Lolth, and gain her trust and true friendship. But this must be an evil role-playing. As a team and reliable allies, we will act using any method, including the possible killing of tieflings and anyone else, putting personal gain first of all, without being someone's puppets. It would be really fun and interesting. This is what will give me the pleasure of role-playing.

This is the path that will allow you to combine honor and friendship, evil roleplay and personal gain. I would like this roleplay, and I really hope that Larian will make it possible.
I do not want the evil way as only "absolute evil", the moral choice and the boundaries of good and evil in some moments should be more difficult. [/quote]

Yes evil needs to be a lot more nuanced. There must be a choice between power at all cost and serving the absolute and trying to use your newly gained power and overthrow the absolute and rule yourself. Something like that. Currently the only evil option is to blindly follow the absolute, for no reason at all. And playing evil is not just murdering everyone! You should still have companions who follow you. Because they are afraid of your power. Because you threatened their life. Because you rule by fear. You should acquire devoted servants and slaves, companions who worship you and would die for you. Thats how you properly write an evil character. Look at how Knights of the Old republic 2 did it. If you play an Evil Sith Lord in that game, your followers will also become evil and one will even sacrifice herself so you gain more power. Thats what this game deserves! Evil playthrough with good writing!

Your dream lover doesn't tell you to side with the goblins. There is no incentive to raiding the grove. Its only the goblins and absolute followers who talk about great rewards. But your personal character has never even heard of the absolute, and has discovered that the True Souls are also infected by tadpoles. So why would you play stupid and help them? You want to get the tadpole out. Or, in the case of Astarion, you want to learn about the tadpole and control it. By the way, why does our questlog say "removing the Parasite" all game long? Thats not my intention! Like Astarion, my personal goal is to make use of its powers. But the game immediately pushes the player to remove the tadpole. Even though Larian devs have talked about the fact that some characters may want to keep the tadpole.

The Absolute needs more npc's which convince you that its useful if you join them. They need actual good rewards. And they need to have a choice and an effect to solving your main issue: The tadpole. The goblin quest of raiding the grove doesn't help you at all. Your goal is to find a healer, whether or not you want to keep the tadpole or not. And the first thing the goblin priestess does to you is put you in chains and leave you to die.

The rewards are just pitiful. You murder a bunch of refugees, Kadga and Zevlor. But their magic items don't compare to the magic items obtainable by the goblin leaders at all! The goblin leaders should award you with powerful magic items because you helped them raid the grove.

And the absolute itself should reward you! The questlog says "The absolute has awarded me with more power" once you finish the raiding the grove quest. But that's a lie. You get nothing. Ironically, getting the Hag to help you with your Tadpole situation and then sparing her life actually gets you a skill point. Thats what I would have expected from serving the absolute. Additional skill points, special, otherwise unobtainable feats. And skills like blessing of the absolute, which Mintharra uses! And more great skills like those you get from your dreams. Those are awesome and by far the best rewards to any questline in this game.

Last edited by feedback_wizard; 13/11/20 09:58 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
One thing that got to me reading the last interview Sven did with some news channel.

There he said, not exactly these words, but it's what I understood from it "We had to force our writers to put in the evil choices in the scenes" because they tend to be good.

I think they need a few people specifically to lay out the evil routes.

Most of us struggle to be evil, but there are ways in which being evil can actually be enjoyable.

I've said it many times, and most people I read here tend to suggest something along the same lines: Currently there's chaotic evil path, it's weird, it's like burning everything for the sake of saying "I'm the bad guy". That's fine.

What we need is neutral and lawful evil options, like manipulating people into doing your dirty work and just harvesting the results or convincing one faction to attack the other, or even corrupting some of the people to overthrow their leadership and become your pawns.

I think most of what is lacking is a means to solve stuff in an evil way without combat.

Anyways, this topic is of extreme importance to me. I hope they do something about it.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by malks
What we need is neutral and lawful evil options, like manipulating people into doing your dirty work and just harvesting the results or convincing one faction to attack the other, or even corrupting some of the people to overthrow their leadership and become your pawns.

Allready there. -_-


I liked original spellcasting system more ... frown

Anyway ... i cast Eldritch Blast!
Joined: Nov 2020
T
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Nov 2020
Been contemplating for a few hours. I have come to one conclusion. Acceptance.

"Flux" has to be taken into consideration as well. Think about it. "Good. Bad. Bad. Good Good Get rewarded. Get punished. Sleep on the couch. Get in my bed."

Each person. Each situation. Always adapting. I don't fear confusion and chaos. I find peace and happiness in it. I think chaos get misunderstood a lot. "Out of control" is ONE type of chaos. But chaos can also have control. Especailly when you have support.

Hmm... There's a thought. You can't really alignment yourself if you need support. Not in single player games anyway. Some things are only possible with others. A reason for that control. Or a reason to be lost and confused while being guided with happiness. Puts things into perspective doesn't it?

Btw, lawful is something I consider harmful. Due to fear. Lawful people "fear monsters" easily. Not all kobolds are evil. As I've had to tell a paladin in Neverwinter Nights 1. My logic always adds up. Turns volatile situations around in my real life too. Even with my back against a wall. It's not about choice alone. It's also "automatic response". Habits. What matters is the RESPONSE. How you respond to a situation. Regardless of the situation. A lawful good paladin can be just as close minded and abusive as a chaotic evil out of control demon. But if the logic adds up, it adds up. BG2. The one giant demon in that building that attacks you on sight. You don't FIGHT it. You HEAL it.

I used to go with chaotic good. But now I see sense in chaos. And now none of it applies and it has to be together. because that's what we all are. Two sides of the ever spinning, ever turning coin. In each moment that changes. With each person we face.

How can you possibly align that?

Last edited by Taramafor; 16/11/20 11:10 AM.
Joined: Aug 2014
1
addict
Online Content
addict
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Ok so now it's clear that the "evil" path means...

...using the tadpole to gain more power. Allying yourself with this evil faction you know nothing about that is trying to kill you.

It makes no sense.

Motivation is the most important thing in writing evil characters. If I play evil it's an intelligent, methodical evil that has a goal. That goal can be personal power, but I wouldn't ally myself with whatever evil faction comes along or keep such a meaningless power source knowing it can kill you. Furthermore, the goblins and the other weak-willed misguided individuals don't exactly scream "join us". I'd rather ally with the Zhentarim who are an established faction with smart people.

Having a shadow magic infused tadpole in your head and being a part of someone else's unknown plan means you are not in control. The first thing a sensible evil character would do is get back in control. Besides, a slimy parasite in your brain that is largely unknown is simply gross. And you know it wants to kill you. Say the creator of the shadow magic decides to kill you. They can just dispel it and you die a horrible death and turn into a Mind Flayer. Getting the tadpole out is the only sensible thing anyone would do. And also the perfect motivation to do evil things. But this is not even an option in BG3. I would totally wipe out the Tieflings if the Shadow Druids would remove the tadpole in return. Getting cool powers seems more like it's for gameplay reasons to get more Bonus Actions and doesn't outweigh the fact that you can be killed or controlled by the shadow magic tadpole.

So my evil Drow Warlock ended up killing the other evil characters for Halsin because he seemed like the best or only option to remove the tadpole. I was really annoyed this didn't happen. And the parasite is gross, I just want it out regardless of whatever.


Last edited by 1varangian; 16/11/20 02:17 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Ok so now it's clear that the "evil" path means...

...using the tadpole to gain more power. Allying yourself with this evil faction you know nothing about that is trying to kill you.

It makes no sense.

Motivation is the most important thing in writing evil characters. If I play evil it's an intelligent, methodical evil that has a goal. That goal can be personal power, but I wouldn't ally myself with whatever evil faction comes along or keep such a meaningless power source knowing it can kill you. Furthermore, the goblins and the other weak-willed misguided individuals don't exactly scream "join us". I'd rather ally with the Zhentarim who are an established faction with smart people.

Having a shadow magic infused tadpole in your head and being a part of someone else's unknown plan means you are not in control. The first thing a sensible evil character would do is get back in control. Besides, a slimy parasite in your brain that is largely unknown is simply gross. And you know it wants to kill you. Say the creator of the shadow magic decides to kill you. They can just dispel it and you die a horrible death and turn into a Mind Flayer. Getting the tadpole out is the only sensible thing anyone would do. And also the perfect motivation to do evil things. But this is not even an option in BG3. I would totally wipe out the Tieflings if the Shadow Druids would remove the tadpole in return. Getting cool powers seems more like it's for gameplay reasons to get more Bonus Actions and doesn't outweigh the fact that you can be killed or controlled by the shadow magic tadpole.

So my evil Drow Warlock ended up killing the other evil characters for Halsin because he seemed like the best or only option to remove the tadpole. I was really annoyed this didn't happen. And the parasite is gross, I just want it out regardless of whatever.




Makes sense yeah!

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Netherlands
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Netherlands
Originally Posted by /u/Happymemories2010
We can only hope Larian puts a ton of work into improving the writing of the evil storyline. There is no incentive to side with the goblins and the rewards are just abysmal. And you end up feeling like an idiot after the narrator tells you about power and authority 30 times, yet all the goblins end up turning against you after you did the dirty work.

This isn't an evil storyline, its a "go on a muder spree for no reason, even though you are about to turn into a squid" storyline. It makes no sense. I would have expected this path to strengthen the connection to your tadpole and offer you amazing powers like the dream scenes. Best rewards and best part of EA for sure. The connection to the absolute needs to be explained better, feels like they Showup out if the blue. There is no reason to side with them, they never promise any help with your tadpole situation.
Thought this and the comment after it were interesting.
Originally Posted by Pale_Efficiency6831
It's made all the more confusing by Larian encouraging people to play the evil storyline.

Like, they must have been somewhat proud of it, otherwise they would have marked it as a work in progress, but no they outright tried to present it as a valid choice to be made.
Larian wants to incentivize the player IRL to do evil but kind of forgot to do it ingame.

Joined: Jul 2019
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jul 2019
Yeah, I'm not sure what the "evil" path is even about. When I went to the Goblin camp and it was presented to me, my first thought was "Why? Why is this a choice? Why would I do this?"

It's like the evil character is meant to be stupid or just do things for no reason.

IMO, better evil dilemmas would Auntie Ethel giving power or knowledge for eliminating the brothers. Kagha offering their magic to limit the ceremorophisis process and giving more chances to use its power without transforming in exchange for eliminating the Teiflings or forcing them out, knowing it's likely their deaths.

Give me, the player, some gameplay bonuses and the PC some powers like more abilities or the ability to use the worm more without consequence to the PC in exchange for doing "evil" things.

You can even layer choices. Kagha offers some powers or influence throughout the rest of the game for some evil act. You do the act and find she lied or used you, you then get the option to use the Goblins to wipe out the Grove for revenge and to show that you shouldn't be used or mislead.

In the Goblin camp you're able to kill these absolute people, why not give the PC the ability to fight them and then force them to obey you instead. Hell, for the scenes with characters like Minthara they could make it an abuse of the characters power and position instead.

Edit: In Fallout 2 I could play all the families, gain their trust and use them, then sell them out to the next family. I could bone the Bishop family leader's wife and daughter. Those are more evil choices that to me make sense.

Last edited by Blade238; 16/11/20 06:35 PM.
Joined: Aug 2014
1
addict
Online Content
addict
1
Joined: Aug 2014
Originally Posted by Blade238
Yeah, I'm not sure what the "evil" path is even about. When I went to the Goblin camp and it was presented to me, my first thought was "Why? Why is this a choice? Why would I do this?"

It's like the evil character is meant to be stupid or just do things for no reason.

IMO, better evil dilemmas would Auntie Ethel giving power or knowledge for eliminating the brothers. Kagha offering their magic to limit the ceremorophisis process and giving more chances to use its power without transforming in exchange for eliminating the Teiflings or forcing them out, knowing it's likely their deaths.


That's true.. Auntie Ethel just reveals her knowledge when she could trade. Make you do something evil and horrible for her. And trick the player in a true hag fashion while doing it so you get another motive to kill her so you don't miss out on a fun fight either.

Shadow Druids, same thing. "Do this for us just because". No motivation for getting rid of the tieflings related to what is driving the player at the moment.

It's like they miss every opportunity to let the player make an evil choice that is motivated by their own plot device. Maybe the tadpole is meant to stay and give you cool bonus actions no matter what and that's interfering with the storytelling.

Joined: Nov 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by 1varangian
Ok so now it's clear that the "evil" path means...

...using the tadpole to gain more power. Allying yourself with this evil faction you know nothing about that is trying to kill you.

It makes no sense.

Motivation is the most important thing in writing evil characters. If I play evil it's an intelligent, methodical evil that has a goal. That goal can be personal power, but I wouldn't ally myself with whatever evil faction comes along or keep such a meaningless power source knowing it can kill you. Furthermore, the goblins and the other weak-willed misguided individuals don't exactly scream "join us". I'd rather ally with the Zhentarim who are an established faction with smart people.

Having a shadow magic infused tadpole in your head and being a part of someone else's unknown plan means you are not in control. The first thing a sensible evil character would do is get back in control. Besides, a slimy parasite in your brain that is largely unknown is simply gross. And you know it wants to kill you. Say the creator of the shadow magic decides to kill you. They can just dispel it and you die a horrible death and turn into a Mind Flayer. Getting the tadpole out is the only sensible thing anyone would do. And also the perfect motivation to do evil things. But this is not even an option in BG3. I would totally wipe out the Tieflings if the Shadow Druids would remove the tadpole in return. Getting cool powers seems more like it's for gameplay reasons to get more Bonus Actions and doesn't outweigh the fact that you can be killed or controlled by the shadow magic tadpole.

So my evil Drow Warlock ended up killing the other evil characters for Halsin because he seemed like the best or only option to remove the tadpole. I was really annoyed this didn't happen. And the parasite is gross, I just want it out regardless of whatever.


Yep, I was playing a githyanki wizard, so there was no incentive whatsoever. The reasonable choice seems to be to shrug and move on, leaving the goblins and the tieflings to fight it out, because an evil character would not care. And possibly assassinate the absolute leaders on your way out, as retaliation for daring to try to kill you.

Joined: Jul 2019
member
Offline
member
Joined: Jul 2019
Originally Posted by 1varangian


It's like they miss every opportunity to let the player make an evil choice that is motivated by their own plot device. Maybe the tadpole is meant to stay and give you cool bonus actions no matter what and that's interfering with the storytelling.

I originally didn't care for the tadpole, but it's the perfect motivator for evil choices, but it's never utilized.

A good character would never use it, they'd want to get rid of it at all costs, even to their detriment at times.

An evil character would think how they can get rid of it, but would also consider how it could be used for their gain.

There could be tons of characters that could make use of the plot device for evil decisions. Raphael could convince the PC to sacrifice their own good companions for instance.

It's a huge wasted opportunity at present. Hell, with all of the dialogue options, there should be ways to deceive NPCs to do things your way.

Page 16 of 20 1 2 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5