Jump to content
Qorach

Lack of evil companions (potential spoilers)

Recommended Posts

 

...So what you're basically asking for are more insipid, mustache-twirling caricatures who are amoral for the sake of amorality.

Sure, why not? 

 

 

 

 

This is something that PoE stridently and rightly avoids.

Well, now would be a good chance for a little more variety. 

 

 

Other posters in this thread have shown how the existing companions each are willing to do or abide questionable actions for their own reasons, which is exactly how it should be.

 

Why shouldn't we have more options than such stale companions? I've yet to see a single reason why such a character would hurt the game.

 

 

 

The D&D alignment paradigm has no place here.

 

True. No one I've seen is calling for the D&D alignment system though.

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most people at least try to convince themselves and other's that they're good, even if they aren't really. It sounds to me like NPC companions are managing to fool you, OP, at least.

Not really. You have that illusion because of dominance of Abrahamic religions and Rousseau-esque humanist secular philosophies in our World. In fantasy world nothing prevents people from openly living their life adhering to variety of ideologies - Nietzchean, Ayn Rand-ist, Pagan Bhaalist etc. Imagine if our world would be stil Abrahamic, but gnostic, and gnostics believe that God is evil. Would most of people try to convince everyone that they're evil even if they're not, in a gnostic world? After all, putting moralistic things aside, for most people evil=dangerous, so to be openly dangerous to others requires much bravery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iunno I kinda thought Grieving Mother was a bitch.


"The Courier was the worst of all of them. The worst by far. When he died the first time, he must have met the devil, and then killed him."

 

 

Is your mom hot? It may explain why guys were following her ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wholeheartedly support of OP's request!

 

One thing though. Like people in this thread have said, I think psychopath characters ala BG2 were fine at that time but lacked depth compared to more fleshed out companions like the ones we have here in PoE.

They did a fine job having more "grey" companions with a real background but my big issue here is that the majority of them are clearly on the side of "light-gray" rather than "dark-gray" if that comparison made any sense ;)

 

What we need is either more companions, some with shadowy motives *and / or* a way to influence them on a certain side depending on how you solve their personal quests.

 

Would love to see that for an expansion / sequel!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if I would ever call Durance good, although I admit I didn't travel with him very long. The Grieving Mother, while well-intentioned, used highly questionable methods in her work.

He just an angry old man, I cant get passed his attitude to make a determination on him other than he's bat **** crazy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also would consider Durance on the "evil" side, if you read all his dialogues. An unpleasant (if occasionally comment-amusing) person indeed. But he's not eeeeveeelllllll.

 

I don't find any of the companions super good or super evil in any obvious cliche ways (which I personally like). They have histories, beliefs and goals that they'll impart and you either agree/respect them or dislike/don't respect them or somewhere inbetween. Kind of like in real life.

He sweats a lot, it's evil by itself.


If it doesn't kill you, it just missed its target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the issue people are having is simply the apathy and passivity of the companions more so than having X number from Good and X from Evil or whatever.

when you RP a Good playthrough in BG you are, by default from roleplaying, determining which companions you can and cannot have; as people like Viconia will leave your party if you are too nice. so roleplaying the story directly roleplays your companions as well. by roleplaying you will, by necessity, end up with different parties*. not so in PoE.
in PoE, the companions [with 1 or 2 exceptions] only care about two things: your personal journey and theirs. so political choices during the game only gets one-off comments, sometimes, from your companions, with no action or real consequence. at least twice in a row i had dialogues where hiravias interrupted to yell at me, only for his "friendly meter" to stay the exact same outside of that vacuum-sealed context of a conversation. then we moved on to the next phase of his character quest like nothing happened.
they are all just so damn amicable. your party could be the exact same whether you [in DnD terms] are going Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil; it makes no difference as far as party composition is concerned. **

* that, i believe, is the crux of the argument.

** yes, i know there is a very specific exception to all this, as mentioned by other people.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issue stems from two things:

1) Lack of resources and funding. It would take more money to create more companions, so that everyone can have a full party. Not much can be done about it.

2) The options companions have regarding your behavior seem to be very limited: stay with you or leave. And because of #1, they can't really leave. Only Grieving Mother can be pushed so far as to leave.

 

But there ARE other ways for companions to meaningfully object without leaving. They could be getting temporary bad moods from following a leader they don't agree with. For example, if you kill an innocent, harmless person X, companion Y would say something disapproving and had -2 resolve, -2 dexterity until you gain 1000 xp. Passage of time would be measured in xp gain, similar to how Stronghold works, because otherwise you could just trivially wait it out and suffer no consequence for enraging a companion.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Other posters in this thread have shown how the existing companions each are willing to do or abide questionable actions for their own reasons, which is exactly how it should be.

 

Why shouldn't we have more options than such stale companions? I've yet to see a single reason why such a character would hurt the game.

 

 

 

 
They would hurt the game because they reflect the same shallow mode of thought as the alignment system that they were originally created for.  No one is arguing against variety in the companions, but new characters should be thought of as actual people with freedom of choice and complex, evolving motivations and characteristics.  They shouldn't be made to fit a static template based on some arbitrary moral scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
They would hurt the game because they reflect the same shallow mode of thought as the alignment system that they were originally created for. 

 

They would reflect nothing. It would just a more eccentric character. 

 

 

  No one is arguing against variety in the companions, but new characters should be thought of as actual people with freedom of choice and complex, evolving motivations and characteristics. 

Some people really are just puppy kicking, simple minded, cruel, and heartless jerks. Not every character needs to be or even should be complex.

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wanted to replay BG... from Irenicus' point of view.

like when "dungeon keeper" came out... turning the whole "gotta be the hero" thing on its head is a good thing, IMO.

it's really past time a clearly supervillain oriented crpg was released.

I mean, if Maleficent can be a box office hit, so could a game that features the perspective from the supposed "villain" POV.

Edited by Ichthyic
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no "good or evil" in the PoE game world. There is only beneficial or not.

 

This is most obviously represented by the reputation system (favored or not, and to what degree instead of good/evil).

 

Even the "gods" are not divided along such lines.

 

There is no inherent good vs evil in PoE.

 

Therefore, there is no good or evil path or CNPCS in the game. Just benevolent or despicable, beneficial or not and so forth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no "good or evil" in the PoE game world. There is only beneficial or not.

 

This is most obviously represented by the reputation system (favored or not, and to what degree instead of good/evil).

 

Even the "gods" are not divided along such lines.

 

There is no inherent good vs evil in PoE.

 

Therefore, there is no good or evil path or CNPCS in the game. Just benevolent or despicable, beneficial or not and so forth.

 

While this is true, there are no greedy, despicable, yada-yada-yada pre-made NPCs.  In other words, no evil pre-made NPCs.  One doesn't have to have a strict good/evil alignment system like in DnD to have characters that most people would easily see as "evil".

 

An "evil" NPC in this setting could get fed up and leave the party if your PC's reputation started looking too goody-goody for his taste.  And visa-versa, a "good" NPC could leave the party if it felt that the PC had gone too far down the dark path.  It would seem that NPC paladins would be particularly sensitive to this, given that they have their own favored and disfavored behaviors.

 

Of course, this is not an original idea, given that it was basically used in BG2 within the DnD alignment system.

 

 

Or can you imagine if you had a particularly greedy, selfish NPC who interjected himself into a dialog at the point where the PC was about to make a choice between accepting a reward, telling the character to whom he's speaking to keep their reward, or demanding more?  The greedy, selfish NPC could step on your leadership and demand the greater reward before you even had a chance to make that decision, or you still get to make the choice, but if you override his stated demands, could anger the greedy NPC.   And think of the dissension this could cause in the party!  (and of course, the reverse could be possible as well.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you understand what I mean here. A greedy, despicable person (your idea of "evil", really?) will go along as long as things benefit themselves.

 

Period.

 

What you really want is for the Companions to "grow a pair" and offer conflict against the Watcher when he/she does something not beneficial towards said Companion. Whether outright attack or leave, whatever.

 

Because as the Watcher, you can do some really nasty things in the game, you know...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the issue is that most of the companions are not driven by moral/alignment issues as much as personal loyalties to various factions/people. Frankly, the only Good character is Eder - the rest are all different shades of Neutral, by Great Wheel standards.

 

But Durance is definitely either Chaotic Neutral or Chaotic Evil, and Aloth can turn all Lawful Evil under the right circumstances.

I understand evil, Durance is a terrible person but what makes him Chaotic? He seems to be following a very strict internal structure to a T. He has very specific ideas about how things should be run. If anything, from his conversations, he's LE.  Are you using chaotic as "more evil"? I always found that line of thought sort of fascistic.


It's good to criticize things you love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There *is* no alignment.

 

You really need to let that sink in. There is no Wheel of Alignment governing things in PoE, no Detect Evil/Good/Chaotic/Law/Neutral.

 

In fact, there is a lack of such - even the gods (which are not real gods but created ones) do not care about such things.

 

Good, Evil, etc. merely human-constructed notions...and personally, I haven't found any references to such in the game.

 

So one isn't going to have Dorn the Half-Orc Blackguard that serves an evil entity, for example, or a vile, evil blade...because in PoE such does not exist.

 

One could have instead an Auama (whatever they are called) Paladin of (Cruel and Aggression) X who perhaps follows either Skaen or Woedica, depending, who perhaps is a serial killer.

 

But it is really not the same, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There *is* no alignment.

You really need to let that sink in. There is no Wheel of Alignment governing things in PoE, no Detect Evil/Good/Chaotic/Law/Neutral.

In fact, there is a lack of such - even the gods (which are not real gods but created ones) do not care about such things.

Good, Evil, etc. merely human-constructed notions...and personally, I haven't found any references to such in the game.

So one isn't going to have Dorn the Half-Orc Blackguard that serves an evil entity, for example, or a vile, evil blade...because in PoE such does not exist.

One could have instead an Auama (whatever they are called) Paladin of (Cruel and Aggression) X who perhaps follows either Skaen or Woedica, depending, who perhaps is a serial killer.

But it is really not the same, is it?

Um, yeah, it would be.... Something along those lines would be 100% satisfactory to me -- honestly, something a bit milder would work as well.

 

Evil is a term with real meaning and (while there is loads of debate around edge cases), there is general agreement that people who do certain things without extraordinary justification AND lack remorse for what they have done are "evil" -- whether a deity exists to recognize their actions or not.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the devs should give people what they want here. A fully evil psychopath. Then, the first time you rest, he or she guts you in your sleep. Or, the first time you equip an item they want, they demand it or attack you. Or, they assault the healer in the party because they were looking at them funny. Or, you run low on finds once and aren't able to pay them. Or, in the big final fight, you find your enemy has bribed them.

 

And none of this you have won their loyalty crap and they decide not to sabotage you and walk off all noble and principled in the distance. They have been pissing in your wine skin, broke all your arrows, wiped poo all over Aloth's grimior and then stab you in throat. 

 

Again, this is the same argument had about being a complete psychopath. People who claim they want an evil companion, by which they mean something of sociopath (which I don't understand, technically your entire party borders on the mentally deranged and you slaughter your way along most of the game quite merrily) don't really because their game would be short, unless you want to play the entirety of acts 2 and 3 strapped to a bed in a cabin in the woods being slowly tortured to death by that really cool and edgy evil companion you picked up because they have developed a somewhat unhealthy (for you at least) obsession with you. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the devs should give people what they want here. A fully evil psychopath. Then, the first time you rest, he or she guts you in your sleep. Or, the first time you equip an item they want, they demand it or attack you. Or, they assault the healer in the party because they were looking at them funny. Or, you run low on finds once and aren't able to pay them. Or, in the big final fight, you find your enemy has bribed them.

 

And none of this you have won their loyalty crap and they decide not to sabotage you and walk off all noble and principled in the distance. They have been pissing in your wine skin, broke all your arrows, wiped poo all over Aloth's grimior and then stab you in throat. 

 

Again, this is the same argument had about being a complete psychopath. People who claim they want an evil companion, by which they mean something of sociopath (which I don't understand, technically your entire party borders on the mentally deranged and you slaughter your way along most of the game quite merrily) don't really because their game would be short, unless you want to play the entirety of acts 2 and 3 strapped to a bed in a cabin in the woods being slowly tortured to death by that really cool and edgy evil companion you picked up because they have developed a somewhat unhealthy (for you at least) obsession with you. 

 

Frankly, the character you're describing here isn't a joiner, or sure doesn't seem like one.  There's a difference between your fully evil psychopath and just being plain ol' greedy, for example.  The kind of character you're describing is probably someone even a lot of "evil" PC's wouldn't want around.  He sounds like a perpetual loose cannon or a rabid dog that needs to be put down, rather than anyone you'd actually be willing to risk letting into your party.

 

I think that it's entirely possible to create an "evil" NPC that's nowhere near that extreme and still be what most people would see as evil.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evil does not have real meaning.

 

There are things that are considered "bad" or "good" from a perspective, nothing more nothing less.

 

Having a greedy, sleazy NPC would mean running the risk of them betraying the PC by any faction that regards the PC negatively (like The Leaden Key).

 

So game over.

 

Perhaps you mean someone who is accustomed to violence, the street, etc?

 

I kinda wished for a Rogue from the Docks in Defiance Bay...like one of those bandits, perhaps the leader. And Maerwith...A swashbuckling Fighter (or Rogue).

 

A worldly, no nonsense realist.

 

But a bloodthirsty psychopath? I'll pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evil /does/ have a real meaning -- within the context of a culture. The fact that a different culture might have attach very, very different meanings to the terms, and that even within a single culture there may be lively debate on certain topics is irrelevant. The vast majority of players share a common set of cultural values, and those values inform us that the following things are "evil", and people who do them willingly and without remorse are "evil" people:

 

* Murder

* Torture / abuse

* Rape

* Theft

* Slavery / kidnapping

 

Again, reasonable people have profound disagreements around edge cases -- most people would agree that forcing a child to get a shot is OK, but if you've ever been in a pediatrician's office when a 4 year old is get a vaccine... But there is wide agreement /on the basics/, and any NPC that violates these norms will be given the evil tag, regardless of whether the game treats the character that way.

 

If the game was set in the old empire (whatever it's name is) then slavery would be considered good -- but the regardless of how the game treats it, the /players/ would consider an enthusiastic slave-owner companion as evil.

 

Being a moral relativist doesn't mean that good and evil become meaningless terms -- it just means that you have to attach a frame of reference to the terms whenever you use them, and acknowledge that no one frame of reference is "privileged" over any other. The morality of the Aztec Empire is just as valid as modern western morality, but that's only relevant if I have an ancient Aztec sitting in front of me, or I'm reading a novel / history set in those times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good and evil and neutral and law and chaos and neutral have no natural, inherent meaning - only man - made meanings that change according to who beholds them.

 

There is no universal accepted meaning for evil, etc.

 

So enough philosophy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the "Machiavellian" archtype. Someone with good intentions but their methods can get downright terrifying when appropriate. Think a sociopath who figures beneficial actions like an equation. Someone who would support terrible people until the "good" that they would do runs out and then dispose of them like they were tending a garden. And then on top of that make them polite, soft spoken, and affable. Like they would give the shirt off their back in the middle of a snowstorm, unless of course you're a detriment to the greater good. And then it's "Oh dear, I like you and all but I don't think we can afford to let you live. You shouldn't fight, if you do I can't promise it'd be painless.".

 

I'm not really a writer but, you know, something to that effect.

Edited by Dadalama

It's good to criticize things you love.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the "Machiavellian" archtype. Someone with good intentions but their methods can get downright terrifying when appropriate. Think a sociopath who figures beneficial actions like an equation. Someone who would support terrible people until the "good" that they would do runs out and then dispose of them like they were tending a garden. And then on top of that make them polite, soft spoken, and affable. Like they would give the shirt off their back in the middle of a snowstorm, unless of course you're a detriment to the greater good. And then it's "Oh dear, I like you and all but I don't think we can afford to let you live. You shouldn't fight, if you do I can't promise it'd be painless.".

 

I'm not really a writer but, you know, something to that effect.

Kinda like Tharos in this game? :)

 

Yeah, I agree, but such a character archetype is poorly suited for a companion -- a companion, by their very nature, is a follower, and the only way such a character would put him/herself in such a degrading (from their POV) is if it supported his/her ultimate objectives. And, almost certainly, that would lead to conflict with the PC (for most PC personalities, at least). A companion that CAN betray you might be interesting -- one that inevitably WILL betray you.... Not so much. See poor old Youshi in BG2, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...