@Obsidian: Please make playing evil worthwhile, fulfilling & not juvenile!

[Lephys]

 

OR, even a character like Dexter. "I brutally murder people because it's fun, but I'm choosing to make sure I only brutally murder people who deserve to be brutally murdered, even though, technically, according to pure goodness, I simply shouldn't murder."

expect it from Hollywood to see a show glorifying a homicidal sociopath

 

Hehe. For what it's worth, I wouldn't say it's exactly glorifying him, per se. But, that isn't to say that isn't at least SOME of the execs (or other people's) intentions. Beyond just an exploration of a "wouldn't it be interesting if" scenario.

 

 

The problem of evil (no not that one) is also, that it's never clear what the intention of characters is, and I think this is important to understand when playing evil. It's not necessary for the do-gooders, because everyone (well, most of us anyway) can identify with the sentiments of "good" characters. But it's never clear why evil characters decide to slaughter a whole town. Even for a maniac, "just for fun" is not the only internal monologue that's going on, I'm sure about that.

 

A possible solution to that problem would be flavour text in form of an internal monologue  that shows how the character came to his possible answers.

Well... you SORT of have this same thing on the side of good, with the "robotic" type person who doesn't comprehend the human psyche/social inclinations. You know, "I told her that her son was most likely dying a gruesome death right now... she asked! I don't want to lie to her!"

 

Many would argue that a "good" person would spare another the suffering thoughts of imagining their son being ripped to pieces. But, then, what happens when they find out their son was actually being ripped to pieces, and you knew that, and you lied to them? People would also view that as terrible.

[Tuckey]

I would prefer that they focus on allowing your character to be selfish and accumulate power rather than just a douche. Like in so many games where evil is largely a flavour option.

 

If a fighter evil path is warlord with desire for conquest.

if a priest evil path is championing a cult that furthers your desire for power.

If a thief becoming a spymaster and blackmailing your way to success and influence etc

 

*I don't expect these sorts of things in PE. Mostly because design and resources are already largely set and the budget just isn't there to support that. The other big problem is that for all the classes you need branching story and areas that support these things. That means multiple end states and most players will probably never experience these things, no harm in putting down some ideas through is there.

[Orogun01]

I would prefer that they focus on allowing your character to be selfish and accumulate power rather than just a douche. Like in so many games where evil is largely a flavour option.

 

If a fighter evil path is warlord with desire for conquest.

if a priest evil path is championing a cult that furthers your desire for power.

If a thief becoming a spymaster and blackmailing your way to success and influence etc

 

*I don't expect these sorts of things in PE. Mostly because design and resources are already largely set and the budget just isn't there to support that. The other big problem is that for all the classes you need branching story and areas that support these things. That means multiple end states and most players will probably never experience these things, no harm in putting down some ideas through is there.

So just neutral evil?

What about those people who agree with eugenics, or they just really want to kill an annoying NPCs? Would you deny them just because of your pure evil options?

[Tuckey]

@Orogun01

 

"What about those people who agree with eugenics, or they just really want to kill an annoying NPCs?"

 

I think of these examples as flavour options for the broad type evil character paths I have proposed. There is nothing I have said that excludes that. If you have played kotor 2 you had the option of doing the later action and if I recall rightly Kreia scolds you for a pointless act because it fails to advance your goals.

 

An interesting take for lawful/chaotic evil could be a Vlad the impaler type character (aka what dracula was based on) . Vlad, despite being a fiend, was considered useful by authorities because of his prowess on the battlefield against the Turks and therefore tolerated despite being vilified and spawning a gothic myth. He was it seems into slaughtering Turks a great deal and prone to many acts of wanton cruelty. The problem plot wise is that most rpgs start you out as a nobody whom nobody respects. People even send you on meaningless tasks which would be a ludicrous thing for a Vlad type character who is only interested in getting others to serve him.

 

In this game you have a fortress. Vlad had a fortress and impaled his enemies on spikes all around his territory to frighten off aggressors. It could be done, just would involve a massive amount of work.

Edited August 5, 2013 by Tuckey

[Yonjuro]

@Orogun01

 

 Vlad had a fortress and impaled his enemies on spikes all around his territory to frighten off aggressors. It could be done, just would involve a massive amount of work.

 

 

 In BG2, I always felt that there should be the option of taking Firkraag's head and impaling it on a pike (or maybe have Cromwell stuff it and then give it to Garren Windspear to hang over his fireplace (and then finding out later that the old paladin only took it to be polite and then put it in the closet)).