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

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.

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.

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.

Its funny how JRPG already beat modern west CRPG in complex moral grey writing in the form of Fire Emblem three houses.

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.

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.

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".

Says who exactly? O_o

the only true evil route is the route where I chose to join the mind flayers but I can't

[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.

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.

Allready there. -_-

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?

Ok so now it's clear that the "evil" path means...

Makes sense yeah!

Thought this and the comment after it were interesting. Larian wants to incentivize the player IRL to do evil but kind of forgot to do it ingame.

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.

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.

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.

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.