Roleplaying Evil

Remove all ads!

Is really hard to do. Unless you are into the random slaughter of innocents, it's hard to keep your reputation low. My next playthrough I'm going with an evil party, and I can't really see how I can maintain a low reputation.

Starting in BG1, there isn't really an evil way to complete the storyline. I'll start in Chapter 2, as Chapter 1 ends with your arrival in Naskel, and there really aren't good/evil choice prior to that.

In Chapter 2, there's no evil path to getting rid of Mulahey. Even if you just do the mines for personal gain, you get a reputation point upon receiving your reward for Mayor Gatskill. There's no evil way to clear the bandit camp. There is an evil way to finish Cloakwood, but no equally evil way to complete Chapters 5, 6, or 7 either.

In BG2, it's more of the same, although there are some evil paths. Even if you just say your party is doing it for personal gain, there is no evil way to complete most of the stronghold quests. I suppose you can poison the druid grove, killing Valygar to gain access to the Planar Sphere is possible, and I suppose you don't have to rescue the kid from Firkragg, but that's only quasi-evil. The only outwardly evil actions you can take is working for Bodhi instead of the Shadow Thieves, you can screw over the silver dragon, and there's a few random side quests with evil choices - like with the buried alive quest, you can chose to ransom the woman instead of freeing her. But overall, there's not a heck of a lot there for evil parties.

About the only benefit is that you can do whatever you'd like when it comes to the choices in getting the Tears of Bhaal. (For example, the immunity to weapons of +1 or less is mostly useless, as there's hardly anything you'll be fighting in the ToB that doesn't have a weapon of greater enchantment.

 

I don't mind that much. It makes sense that in general, people want you to do good things for them, and that the only way to complete the task is to do what they ask for. As an evil character, I accept that I'm the exception rather than the norm, and I oblige to perform good actions for the glory and wealth it provides, not for altruistic reasons.

Playing through Baldur's Gate with an evil character had me question what being evil really is. To me, being evil doesn't necessarily mean taking pleasure in doing the despicable, but can also simply be acting entirely for your own, egotistical ends: power, reputation, revenge, considering that the end justify the means regardless of their objective morality.

Take Korgan in BG2 for example, he will encourage you to kill the slavers because he despises slavers himself. He values nobility and courage; you wouldn't see him behead children for the fun of it. Nonetheless, he'll rip apart anything you order him to, for the right price. As such, he's typically Neutral Evil.

 

I agree with Dr Asik.
I don't think that evil is much related to reputation.
There's a big difference between what you do publicly and what when there's nobody to see. Doing good things to benefit from publicity is perfectly in line with evil characters. Though being unable to do evil things when you want them, but game makers didn't give you such option totally sucks...

"I'll start in Chapter 2, as Chapter 1 ends with your arrival in Naskel, and there really aren't good/evil choice prior to that."
There are some off the line like the dryad and thugs.
You can also kill Marl for being such an idiot and help Silke because why not, these qualify as slaughter, but not random IMO.

In BG2, I'd say that poisoning the Grove is much more evil than working for Bodhi.
After all, by doing so you're killing thieves and thugs. Even if you know that your employer is even worse than they are, this isn't really that evil (though FOR SURE it's not lawful)

"you can screw over the silver dragon"
This is one of the parts of the game that I hate the most. The game gives you incredible exp penalty for killing a dragon instead of giving some eggs to it. This makes no sense at all from RPG perspective, if anything, there should be more exp by doing the harder thing. And it's a heavy penalty for not being good.

"(For example, the immunity to weapons of +1 or less is mostly useless, as there's hardly anything you'll be fighting in the ToB that doesn't have a weapon of greater enchantment. "
I don't agree. +2 CON is worth either nothing or ~9 HP depending on your class. And the few fights where enemies didn't have good weapons were worth more for me. Like Draconis. Until transformation neither he nor his summons can hit you, so you don't have to use up any protections and don't risk anything by being stunned. Just wait and continue. Amusing stuff.

Also, I hate ToB for being totally confused about alignment. Either you're strongly lawful good, selfless and more or you're evil. There's no place for neutrality. There's not place for chaos. I hate the most the part "are you indebted to Sarevok?". No, the guy who raised me made some choice. I am not responsible for other people's actions and besides, the action was just as fair as the other would be. I totally don't see why am I supposed to say that I owe something to Sarevok and hate how the game calls it evil. I call it 'sane'.

 

I have no problem maintaining a low reputation, especially in BG1. A lot of people can't properly pay for my services, so they end up with my hammer inside their poor skulls. Also, quite a few quests lower reputation: taking Viconia (-2), flooding the Nashkel mines without freeing the slaves (-2), killing Phandalyn (- some large amount), killing Entar Silvershield (- some large amount), asking for a reward from the lady you turn from stone to flesh in Mutamin's Garden, and probably a lot more I can't remember right now.

In BG2 it's more complicated because if you want to do the Harper Hold quests you need to maintain a decent reputation, so I sometimes donate to temple or kill random innocents just to get my reputation where I need it to be.

 

Well, doing it the "good" way gives you 78,000 XPs per character, so with a full party of 6, that's nearly half a million XPs! That said, you get something by doing it the evil way. You will have to fight your way out of the drow city, and then you have to kill Adalon when you get back. While there's no way you're getting anywhere near the 468,000, you will recoup a decent chunk of it. And you get a pretty cool halberd out of the deal.

Well, it can also be worth regeneration to you. You get regeneration at 20 constitution. If you imported a character from BG1, this can take your CON to 21. You can get it 22 if you played a dwarf, and you can raise it by another point in Watcher's Keep. 23 Constitution is nothing to sneeze at.

That's exactly the point. In fact, you must keep your reputation at 18 or lower if you want any of those people in your party. Which means if you're about to complete a quest that will take you over 18, you have to do something stupid like randomly kill some innocent person.

 

There are several evil paths you can take which will keep your reputation at a reasonable level in the early chapters (you can quickly go save Imoen to get the slayer ability early which will help) -- after that you simply do a fight every now and then as the slayer and your reputation stays low.

 

No, no. Killing the drow city is a side quest. You can both do it as good (just like that) and avoid by as evil (by running, being invisible or turning against Adalon after leaving the city).
And it's nowhere near the 471k (yes, 78.5*6) from the quest really, I think like 1/5th of it. Sure, you get a halberd and you get an armour, but neither is really great and the loss is huge.

At this point in game I never lack regeneration. And since it doesn't stack anyway, making it slightly faster doesn't mean anything. With some item management it might be something, but well, not much anyway.

Yeah, I agree that it sucks. Even when playing evil I always use the tweak that makes them stay even when my rep is high.

 

Oh, I'm not arguing that the two are comparable. You're still getting hosed out of the vast majority of that 78.5K XP per character. You could make the counter argument that 78.5K isn't that much in the greater scheme of things, even though it's one of the biggest amounts you'll receive in one chunk in the game. It's somewhere between 1/2 and 1/4 of a level for a single classed character, depending on what class you're playing, and less for a multi-classed character.

Your entire party has regeneration by the end of SoA? Mine never does. The way I look at it is if I get a bit of regenerative ability on my PC just for having a high constitution, I can give other regeneration items to other characters. Now, even if you go whole hog with constitution, you're never going to get the regenerative ability that can be attained by using a ring of regeneration, but it's better than nothing.

 

"Your entire party has regeneration by the end of SoA? Mine never does. The way I look at it is if I get a bit of regenerative ability on my PC just for having a high constitution, I can give other regeneration items to other characters. Now, even if you go whole hog with constitution, you're never going to get the regenerative ability that can be attained by using a ring of regeneration, but it's better than nothing. "
All? Rarely. But all who get hit always or almost always. And I don't think that it ever happened that my PC didn't have it at the time. It's mostly because I just don't like giving the ring of Gaxx to other people though...so yes, I agree that with some management it can make a party a bit stronger. Yet still I believe that immunity is worth more.