Evil ending *spoilers, duh*

Felinoid · Sun, 2nd Oct '05, 11:13pm

I wanted to try a F/M/T solo through BG1&2, so I thought up the concept of someone who got gradually turned by their godly blood, because they wouldn't allow anyone to get close, and thus had no support system to fall back on when things got tough. So I played BG1 through as CG because there are so many good things you can do there. The torture by Irenicus unhinged my character a little bit to become CN (used a custom-made scroll for that in the first dungeon), and the dreams culminating in the loss of her soul to Irenicus finally deranged poor Corsana (so I RPed her as CE in the later part of SoA without changing her alignment). When she regained her soul in Hell, she realized the true power that her Bhaal essence could grant her and turned NE (by way of the Hell trials).

Now, playing ToB as a b*tch was moderately fun (Mazzy actually attacked me when I summoned her only to insult her), but the ending where you ascend to godhood is just cr*p. For all the leeway they give you to become the next Lord of Murder, they really rag on you for doing it. And who wrote that end speech? It makes you sound like just another run-of-the-mill minor evil god! After all the work you have to put into it, they just insult you (via the solar) and then give you some cookie-cutter description of your what you *might* do!?!

I've tried both other endings (good god & mortal), and both of them actually have thought put into them, but the evil god one is just a let-down. I'm going to take a break from BG2 for at least a month, and I'm definitely never bothering with the evil god route again.

Susipaisti · Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 1:15am

Tell me about it. I like playing evil myself, and it really bugs me that the game punishes you for it - not just with the rewards (money *and* exp), but with the storyline as well. Quite often the "evil" dialog choices only allow you to be an ---hole and miss out on quests, the choice being goody-two-shoes stuff that conflicts with your alignment. The evil part of the story is, in most games, plain badly written. "Good" is always the default path, and even in the great BG series, in many cases you don't even *have* that choice - the game dictates you have to even *think* good. The journal entries in BG1 are still fresh on my mind.

And another thing. In the SOA hell trials, if you are CE and play by your alignment, you end up being NE. You have to play heroic to stay Chaotic Evil. Logical...

Finally had the chance to vent this stuff out. Thanks for the opportunity.

Silverstar · Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:32pm

Fel, your idea of a slowly corrupting PC is most brilliant indeed!

However, I do not like playing evil in RPGs, (I generally do not like playing evil, and the only game which made me to love evil was Dungoen Keeper 2, a marvelous RTS, but I am getting off topic.) and I think BG2 is really supposed to be played by good side.

Think of it, a character who tries to stay good hearted despite his/her taint is much cooler than a vicked guy/lass who embraces it IMHO, at least for me. So it is possible that game designer did many things to discourage people playing evil.

Why, my friend was playing Arcanum (another good RPG which I am sure you know), he made the most evil and vicked character you can imagine, and his game ALWAYS produced more and more bugs, even crashing, making it impossible to play. When he played goodly, he finished the game with no bugs and problems. See, sometimes it is best to play good, and most RPGs are destined to be played by good people. But it is 'R'pg so you can choose evil, if you dare to face the consequences, just like in real life!

I do not know the evil ending of BG2, is it that weak or bad? Mmmm what were you expecting really?

olimikrig · Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:43pm

Hmm... Couldn't one maybe change the endings, if one had a better story, Fel

Ain't that what Ascension does...?

kuemper · Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:51pm

It really is horrible that being truly evil is very non-rewarding. Yes, I do feel BG was meant to be played as a good PC, but sometimes...

I never wanted to be the @$$ to everybody, but more smarmy. One of these days, one of these days-POW!

The things that bothered me mostly about playing evil was you couldn't have a high reputation. Why can't I be notorious? And NPCs would leave if you ever got a high rep. Don't they want to be known as powerful beings to be feared by the masses?

The evil ending was very blah to me. It was as if nobody bothered to think about it. I know plenty of RPGers who enjoy playing evil PCs, so why screw over those who like the game series so much? I feel like I'm getting off topic here, so that's my opinion.

olimikrig · Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:56pm

Quote:

The things that bothered me mostly about playing evil was you couldn't have a high reputation. Why can't I be notorious? And NPCs would leave if you ever got a high rep. Don't they want to be known as powerful beings to be feared by the masses?

I think there's a mod called virtue, which splits the reputation, so to speak: #1 is how the public looks upon you, #2 is your virtue, and the factor by which your your fellow comrades judge you.

Susipaisti · Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 7:50pm

A two-part reputation counter would be a good idea indeed. Think of Isaea Roenall-type of characters, or the Fallen Paladins, or the respected tanner Rejiek. That type is impossible to achieve if your "karma" equals your reputation. And it doesn't make sense that if you kill someone in the middle of nowhere with no witnesses, the whole world just magically *knows* you're the culprit.

If a game is "supposed" to be played in a specific way it, in my mind, ruins the very idea or roleplaying. An ideal game to me would not default to *any* alignment (although one that would reward you handsomely for evil deeds and gave only meager exp for heroics would at least be a nice change). I'd really like to see a game that would allow you to be manipulative and evil without having to just mindlessly insult everybody you meet and slaughter them in the fight that inevitably follows, would allow you to be corrupted, but would also give you the option to be a hero. It makes no sense to me that being righteous and doing the right thing is the *easier* way, because it doesn't work that way in life. And thinking of experience, after all it's supposed to represent a learning process, not a reward or score. Why would you not *learn* things going the evil way?

Don't get me wrong, I like playing good too and often do. But it would be so much better if the choice to do so wouldn't be based on the fact that it's more profitable.

Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:43pm	#4
olimikrig SPS Account Holder Distinguished Member Mod Reviewer Cavalier of War Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Dinamarca Posts: 1,787 Like: 6 Liked 6 Times in 3 Posts vBActivity - Stats XP: 4,399 Level: 20 vBActivity - Bars Level Completion: 96.3% Daily Activity 2.98% Weekly Activity 1.28% Monthly Activity 5.96% Achievements Awards	Hmm... Couldn't one maybe change the endings, if one had a better story, Fel Ain't that what Ascension does...?
	__________________ - If you can't beat 'em with your intelligence, beat 'em with your bull****!

		Sorcerer's Place Home \| Chatrooms \| BoM Rules & FAQ Sorcerer's Place Stores: Games, Books, DVDs, Merchandise (buying via these links & our affiliated stores below helps support the site - thanks!)
Have you liked us yet?

Sun, 2nd Oct '05, 11:13pm	#1
Felinoid SPS Account Holder Who did the what now? Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: the Tzenkethi homeworld Posts: 7,471 Like: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post vBActivity - Stats XP: 15,794 Level: 36 vBActivity - Bars Level Completion: 12.04% Daily Activity 2.98% Weekly Activity 1.28% Monthly Activity 2.11% Achievements	I wanted to try a F/M/T solo through BG1&2, so I thought up the concept of someone who got gradually turned by their godly blood, because they wouldn't allow anyone to get close, and thus had no support system to fall back on when things got tough. So I played BG1 through as CG because there are so many good things you can do there. The torture by Irenicus unhinged my character a little bit to become CN (used a custom-made scroll for that in the first dungeon), and the dreams culminating in the loss of her soul to Irenicus finally deranged poor Corsana (so I RPed her as CE in the later part of SoA without changing her alignment). When she regained her soul in Hell, she realized the true power that her Bhaal essence could grant her and turned NE (by way of the Hell trials). Now, playing ToB as a btch was moderately fun (Mazzy actually attacked me when I summoned her only to insult her), but the ending where you ascend to godhood is just crp. For all the leeway they give you to become the next Lord of Murder, they really rag on you for doing it. And who wrote that end speech? It makes you sound like just another run-of-the-mill minor evil god! After all the work you have to put into it, they just insult you (via the solar) and then give you some cookie-cutter description of your what you might do!?! I've tried both other endings (good god & mortal), and both of them actually have thought put into them, but the evil god one is just a let-down. I'm going to take a break from BG2 for at least a month, and I'm definitely never bothering with the evil god route again.

Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 1:15am	#2
Susipaisti Maybe if I just sleep... Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Rummaging in your fridge Posts: 1,790 Like: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post vBActivity - Stats XP: 4,037 Level: 20 vBActivity - Bars Level Completion: 19.16% Daily Activity 2.98% Weekly Activity 1.28% Monthly Activity 2.11% Achievements	Tell me about it. I like playing evil myself, and it really bugs me that the game punishes you for it - not just with the rewards (money and exp), but with the storyline as well. Quite often the "evil" dialog choices only allow you to be an ---hole and miss out on quests, the choice being goody-two-shoes stuff that conflicts with your alignment. The evil part of the story is, in most games, plain badly written. "Good" is always the default path, and even in the great BG series, in many cases you don't even have that choice - the game dictates you have to even think good. The journal entries in BG1 are still fresh on my mind. And another thing. In the SOA hell trials, if you are CE and play by your alignment, you end up being NE. You have to play heroic to stay Chaotic Evil. Logical... Finally had the chance to vent this stuff out. Thanks for the opportunity.

Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:32pm	#3
Silverstar Gems: 31/31 Latest gem: Rogue Stone Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Ankara Turkey Posts: 4,048 Like: 3 Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts vBActivity - Stats XP: 9,458 Level: 29 vBActivity - Bars Level Completion: 12.83% Daily Activity 2.98% Weekly Activity 1.28% Monthly Activity 2.11% Achievements	Fel, your idea of a slowly corrupting PC is most brilliant indeed! However, I do not like playing evil in RPGs, (I generally do not like playing evil, and the only game which made me to love evil was Dungoen Keeper 2, a marvelous RTS, but I am getting off topic.) and I think BG2 is really supposed to be played by good side. Think of it, a character who tries to stay good hearted despite his/her taint is much cooler than a vicked guy/lass who embraces it IMHO, at least for me. So it is possible that game designer did many things to discourage people playing evil. Why, my friend was playing Arcanum (another good RPG which I am sure you know), he made the most evil and vicked character you can imagine, and his game ALWAYS produced more and more bugs, even crashing, making it impossible to play. When he played goodly, he finished the game with no bugs and problems. See, sometimes it is best to play good, and most RPGs are destined to be played by good people. But it is 'R'pg so you can choose evil, if you dare to face the consequences, just like in real life! I do not know the evil ending of BG2, is it that weak or bad? Mmmm what were you expecting really?

Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 4:51pm	#5
kuemper I'm gonna eat your soul! Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Blood Wars Posts: 8,926 Like: 0 Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts vBActivity - Stats XP: 19,632 Level: 39 vBActivity - Bars Level Completion: 50.09% Daily Activity 2.98% Weekly Activity 1.28% Monthly Activity 2.11% Achievements	It really is horrible that being truly evil is very non-rewarding. Yes, I do feel BG was meant to be played as a good PC, but sometimes... I never wanted to be the @$$ to everybody, but more smarmy. One of these days, one of these days-POW! The things that bothered me mostly about playing evil was you couldn't have a high reputation. Why can't I be notorious? And NPCs would leave if you ever got a high rep. Don't they want to be known as powerful beings to be feared by the masses? The evil ending was very blah to me. It was as if nobody bothered to think about it. I know plenty of RPGers who enjoy playing evil PCs, so why screw over those who like the game series so much? I feel like I'm getting off topic here, so that's my opinion.

Mon, 3rd Oct '05, 7:50pm	#7
Susipaisti Maybe if I just sleep... Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Rummaging in your fridge Posts: 1,790 Like: 0 Liked 1 Time in 1 Post vBActivity - Stats XP: 4,037 Level: 20 vBActivity - Bars Level Completion: 19.16% Daily Activity 2.98% Weekly Activity 1.28% Monthly Activity 2.11% Achievements	A two-part reputation counter would be a good idea indeed. Think of Isaea Roenall-type of characters, or the Fallen Paladins, or the respected tanner Rejiek. That type is impossible to achieve if your "karma" equals your reputation. And it doesn't make sense that if you kill someone in the middle of nowhere with no witnesses, the whole world just magically knows you're the culprit. If a game is "supposed" to be played in a specific way it, in my mind, ruins the very idea or roleplaying. An ideal game to me would not default to any alignment (although one that would reward you handsomely for evil deeds and gave only meager exp for heroics would at least be a nice change). I'd really like to see a game that would allow you to be manipulative and evil without having to just mindlessly insult everybody you meet and slaughter them in the fight that inevitably follows, would allow you to be corrupted, but would also give you the option to be a hero. It makes no sense to me that being righteous and doing the right thing is the easier way, because it doesn't work that way in life. And thinking of experience, after all it's supposed to represent a learning process, not a reward or score. Why would you not learn things going the evil way? Don't get me wrong, I like playing good too and often do. But it would be so much better if the choice to do so wouldn't be based on the fact that it's more profitable.