IGN: The Villains of Neverwinter

[Jorian Drake]

They should really hire for char creation people who actually play and GM a pnp game.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Meh... none of the villians in BG2 were as good as Sarevok.

I would be very interested in hearing why.

 

They should really hire for char creation people who actually play and GM a pnp game. 

There seems to be this bizarre assumption that because some developers share a fan's opinions on something -- rules, characters, etc. -- that they don't play PnP. I've been playing and running PnP games since I was in fifth grade. Ferret also played and ran a D&D game at Obsidian, which included some of these characters.

 

Hell, Avellone worked for Hero Games before he came to Interplay/BIS.

[Darque]

Irenicus just seemed like a whiney punk to me.

 

Boo hoo, I was bad, they took my soul from me, I don't feel anything anymore, so I'll steal the soul from someone who I feel doesn't deserve it. Boohoo, I've got issues.

[Tigranes]

I would be very interested in hearing why.

 

 

(You ask Darque for explanation?!)

 

 

This is the same problem as the henchman, I think it's a very silly feature by IGN to try and milk some hype out with these little 'character snippets'. Character of all things should not be limited to such snippets because as we can see..

 

edit: also, I'd say having no frickin soul is a pretty big 'issue'. If you call that whiney then that's like saying "hey, we all know your mom died yesterday, stop the waterworks and get over it". Cynical trivialism doesn't always work.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Tigranes

[Darque]

edit: also, I'd say having no frickin soul is a pretty big 'issue'. If you call that whiney then that's like saying "hey, we all know your mom died yesterday, stop the waterworks and get over it". Cynical trivialism doesn't always work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yet, supposedly he didn't feel anything.

 

So why would he care?

 

Oh, that's right, revenge... which he shouldn't even feel... cause without a soul he doesn't feel anything.

 

Sarevok might have been a single minded terminator, but at least he had a real goal and reasons for it.

[Volourn]

"Irenicus just seemed like a whiney punk to me."

 

Irenicus sure didn't come across as whining to me. More like a guy who simply wanted revenge for what he believed were wrongs against him. A whiner would play tiddlywinks, go to a shrink, and tell all. He (at least at the start) simply thought the PC was not worthy of such godblood.

 

 

"Sarevok might have been a single minded terminator, but at least he had a real goal and reasons for it."

 

This could be used to describe Irenicus as well except Irenicus wanted to accomplish more than one thing at least.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Volourn

[Azarkon]

I'd like to see the Zulkirs of Thay as villains in some future CRPG. How come we never face off against any of the nefarious wizards in FR, anyhow? The closest we've got is, well, Halaster in HoTU and he wasn't really a villain there as much as he was a plot device.

 

Something to do with not wanting to tamper with canon?

[Volourn]

Red Wizards of Thay had a cameo in BG1. Not Mighty Zulkirs though. Just young 'uns.

 

And, I don't think canon has much to do with it since the BG series espicially messed with canon a lot. The whole idea of Bhaalspawn illustrates this.

[Darque]

Irenicus sure didn't come across as whining to me. More like a guy who simply wanted revenge for what he believed were wrongs against him. A whiner would play tiddlywinks, go to a shrink, and tell all. He (at least at the start) simply thought the PC was not worthy of such godblood.

 

HE did play "tiddlywinks"... except in his case it was clones and experiments and other fun Hellraiser-ish stuff.

 

Oh, wait, that was just the tutorial for the player.

 

 

 

Maybe I just empathize with Sarevok more because he wasn't really a villain. He was pushed into that role thanks to his "father" and "mentor".

[Volourn]

Um. He was a villain. Sad beginnings doesn't exuse poor behavious.

 

 

"LOLZ MY dad molested me so I will molest by kid. LOLZ"

 

Sarevok was a villain because he wanted power, and would stop at nothing to get it even and espicially if it included mass murder. He was no victim or some misunderstood fool.

 

 

P.S. Be nice, Raven.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Volourn

[Azarkon]

Yeah Edwin was a Red Wizard. One of my favorite characters, too. Would've loved to have the Zulkirs involved - they've got all the necessary qualities: evil, intelligence, ambition, a tad of insantiy, and political shrewdness. Even if it's only as sub-bosses... Please?

[Volourn]

Don't forget the group of them you met out in the wilderness. "

[Azarkon]

They died too fast

Edited October 5, 2006 by Azarkon

[Dark_Raven]

Um. He was a villain. Sad beginnings doesn't exuse poor behavious.

 

 

"LOLZ MY dad molested me so I will molest by kid. LOLZ"

 

Sarevok was a villain because he wanted power, and would stop at nothing to get it even and espicially if it included mass murder. He was no victim or some misunderstood fool.

 

 

P.S. Be nice, Raven.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sarevok was your typical power hungry villain. Rather one dimensional.

[Gromnir]

Um. He was a villain. Sad beginnings doesn't exuse poor behavious.

 

 

"LOLZ MY dad molested me so I will molest by kid. LOLZ"

 

Sarevok was a villain because he wanted power, and would stop at nothing to get it even and espicially if it included mass murder. He was no victim or some misunderstood fool.

 

 

P.S. Be nice, Raven.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sarevok was your typical power hungry villain. Rather one dimensional.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

sarevok had an excellent evil laugh... not much else, but a quality evil laugh will take you far.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Dark_Raven]

sarevok had an excellent evil laugh... not much else, but a quality evil laugh will take you far.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That he did.

[Jorian Drake]

 

sarevok had an excellent evil laugh... not much else, but a quality evil laugh will take you far.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That he did.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He also had stamina and endurance, not to mention a nice armor and weapon

....hmm, I guess tomorrow I try to make sumtin with Sarevok's portrait, and figure out how to get him into a NWN mod. :ph34r:

[Pop]

Um. He was a villain. Sad beginnings doesn't exuse poor behavious.

 

 

"LOLZ MY dad molested me so I will molest by kid. LOLZ"

 

Sarevok was a villain because he wanted power, and would stop at nothing to get it even and espicially if it included mass murder. He was no victim or some misunderstood fool.

 

 

P.S. Be nice, Raven.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sarevok was your typical power hungry villain. Rather one dimensional.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What, opposed to those villains that aren't power hungry? The ones that sit in a cottage and brew tea and you have to stop from doing absolutely-****ing-nothing? New guidelines, plz.

 

I liked Irenicus. He's a classic example of hubris. Got too ambitious, paid for it, couldn't accept it, lost his humanity (or elfity) and became something entirely different and more base than what he was originally. Sarevok, so far as I could tell, was always a Bond villain. I didn't think the story of his upbringing served any purpose but to create an excuse for him to have lots of power early on. I found the ToB "I could have had your life and not been a monster" storyline to be a tad underwhelming. Sarevok sat all too well in his villainy to create much sympathy with me.

 

They're all well-done and fleshed out in comparison to, say, Mehrunes Dagon, but I found the general quality of the villains in 2 to be better than those of 1. Maybe I'm like Darque (?), and biased because of the order in which I played the games, but it makes sense to me, at least.

Edited October 6, 2006 by Pop

[Darque]

Maybe I'm like Darque (?), and biased because of the order in which I played the games, but it makes sense to me, at least.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

That might be part of it for me as well.

 

Plus I did play BG about 5 times more than I did BG2.... so maybe that colors my perceptions a bit.

[Jorian Drake]

Um. He was a villain. Sad beginnings doesn't exuse poor behavious.

 

 

"LOLZ MY dad molested me so I will molest by kid. LOLZ"

 

Sarevok was a villain because he wanted power, and would stop at nothing to get it even and espicially if it included mass murder. He was no victim or some misunderstood fool.

 

 

P.S. Be nice, Raven.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sarevok was your typical power hungry villain. Rather one dimensional.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What, opposed to those villains that aren't power hungry? The ones that sit in a cottage and brew tea and you have to stop from doing absolutely-****ing-nothing? New guidelines, plz.

 

I liked Irenicus. He's a classic example of hubris. Got too ambitious, paid for it, couldn't accept it, lost his humanity (or elfity) and became something entirely different and more base than what he was originally. Sarevok, so far as I could tell, was always a Bond villain. I didn't think the story of his upbringing served any purpose but to create an excuse for him to have lots of power early on. I found the ToB "I could have had your life and not been a monster" storyline to be a tad underwhelming. Sarevok sat all too well in his villainy to create much sympathy with me.

 

They're all well-done and fleshed out in comparison to, say, Mehrunes Dagon, but I found the general quality of the villains in 2 to be better than those of 1. Maybe I'm like Darque (?), and biased because of the order in which I played the games, but it makes sense to me, at least.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I bought BG2 first, but didn't open it till I got BG1, than i played it in the correct order. (also all its expansions)

Still, I think BG2 was better in both NPC-s and story, and those NPC-s i liked in BG1 were anyway in BG2 too.

[Pop]

Maybe I'm like Darque (?), and biased because of the order in which I played the games, but it makes sense to me, at least.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

That might be part of it for me as well.

 

Plus I did play BG about 5 times more than I did BG2.... so maybe that colors my perceptions a bit.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought you had said that earlier mebbe I was wrong on that count. solly.

 

And perhaps I'm being a bit simplistic. Ambition and hubris are certainly common traits among villains, as it tends to make them bigger threats, but it's not required. A powerful assassin might not want to take over or destroy the world, but he's certainly committed to killing off the PCs, and that's a bit to deal with by itself. Or you could have a Mononoke-style situation, in which there isn't a clear villain, but rather powerful entities and ideas on a crash course, with neither of them being inherently evil.

 

It's certainly easier to make a Bond villain, though

Edited October 6, 2006 by Pop

[Darque]

I think my biggest problem with Irenicus was the lack of feeling I was able to muster toward the character.

 

I hated Sarevok most of the game, but felt pity toward him at the end.

 

With Irenicus I was pretty pissed at what he did to my BG1 party... but when I found out why... I kinda laughed (not a humor laugh, mind you)... and then killed him anyway. Bohdi was a midboss as far as I was concerned. And I barely remember the villian in ToB.

 

 

As for the three presented today...

 

Can't say I'm looking forward to the first two, but I can't wait to come across the Gith.

[Dark_Raven]

If Bohdi was given more time she would have been a good villain. But the spot light went to Jon boy.

[Darque]

If Bohdi was given more time she would have been a good villain. But the spot light went to Jon boy.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I agree with this completely.

 

Bohdi definately had potential, and I expected more from her.

[Jorian Drake]

I think my biggest problem with Irenicus was the lack of feeling I was able to muster toward the character.

 

I hated Sarevok most of the game, but felt pity toward him at the end.

 

With Irenicus I was pretty pissed at what he did to my BG1 party... but when I found out why... I kinda laughed (not a humor laugh, mind you)... and then killed him anyway. Bohdi was a midboss as far as I was concerned. And I barely remember the villian in ToB.

 

 

As for the three presented today...

 

Can't say I'm looking forward to the first two, but I can't wait to come across the Gith.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Melisa (or whats her name) was a good villain in ToB, but so soon after BG2 people just 'overrun' the expansion without even noticing anything from the game. <_<

 

 

 

PS: it's Bodhi

Edited October 6, 2006 by jorian