39 réponses à ce sujet

[termokanden]

I have played DAO many times. I'm really just missing an "evil playthrough". I've tried, but I just feel like such an idiot pushing peasants around and killing good people.

It's the same in other RPGs. I try, but I just end up not caring for my character after murdering enough innocents.

[Sarah1281]

It might help if you didn't play a character who killed people for the evulz but for a more solid reason. Siding with the werewolves? They're more powerful. Siding with Branka? Same thing. Working with the Crows? You need the money and if they mean that they really will stop trying to kill you that could be useful. If you have a more pragmatic reason to do some of the eviler things in game or RP your character as having a sort of social darwinistic perspective you might have an easier time.

[Zjarcal]

I hate the concept of "evil character". A truly evil character isn't fun to play in my view. Killing everyone just for the lulz, nah. They might as well just let the AD kill everyone.

Playing a pragmatic and selfish character though, that's different. Or hell, playing a crazed character with a lot of internal issues could also help in justify taking the "darker" choices.

EDIT: Agreed with everything Sarah said.

Modifié par Zjarcal, 12 novembre 2010 - 06:17 .

[Gilsa]

I play it as "I wonder what happens if I pick this line." I've gotten some surprises that I didn't expect such as demanding a reward from Valtherien at the onset of the treaty and getting a nifty Grey Warden 2H axe (awesome graphic). I was surprised to see him at Redcliffe before we marched our armies in Denerim (he usually died in my other playthroughs to break the curse). When he asked me how I planned to defeat the archdemon, I got to tell him that I thought I'd just throw elves at it. Hee hee. I just play it mainly evil out of curiosity, not a straight up hardcore evil person.



Another reason to do it is because that's where the good lines are if you want to take screenshots and share them and have people go, "Hey, how did you get him to say that?" And then you can horrify them with the results.

[Herr Uhl]

For the lulz is an usual reason.



Pushing the envelope to see where the game screws you over is also one.

[Bruddajakka]

Evil doesn't think of itself as evil.

[Sarah1281]

Bruddajakka wrote...

Evil doesn't think of itself as evil.

It could.

[Wulfram]

You can pick up some of the more dubious choices by playing a character who is not actually evil, but has specific quirks.

For example, a deep fear of magic can help justify killing Connor and annulling the mages.

[termokanden]

Sarah1281 wrote...

It might help if you didn't play a character who killed people for the evulz but for a more solid reason. Siding with the werewolves? They're more powerful. Siding with Branka? Same thing. Working with the Crows? You need the money and if they mean that they really will stop trying to kill you that could be useful. If you have a more pragmatic reason to do some of the eviler things in game or RP your character as having a sort of social darwinistic perspective you might have an easier time.

I tried a few variations. I had the Dwarf Commoner who was bitter and vengeful. Or another character that was just completely focused on beating the Archdemon no matter the costs. Also had a character who was only interested in increasing personal power just for the sake of it (not actually all that unrealistic), and fits well with my powergaming tendencies.

The social darwinism would be perfect also, but it clashes too much with my personal beliefs.

I really do want to give this another try. I also want to bring some of the more... shall we say "pragmatic" characters along with me this time.

But I run into some RP issues. I want the Chantry quests, but I don't actually want to help the Chantry. I want the mage quests too, but it's the same problem. Why would I help them? I suppose gold is a motivation, but several of the characters I had in mind simply loathe the Chantry and everything it stands for.

You can pick up some of the more dubious choices by playing a character who is not actually evil, but has specific quirks.

Yeah that's pretty good actually.

Modifié par termokanden, 12 novembre 2010 - 07:26 .

[Ryzaki]

Huh. I always found it easy to play evil characters and get in their head. Particular for the evil lulz characters. They're just collosal douchebags to be douchebags.

[roundcrow]

I played my evil dwarf noble as having just kind of...snapped wandering the Deep Roads after her exile. To go from being wealthy and high status to an exile meant to die that quickly did not sit well with her and after that she just wanted to hurt as many people as she could (and get as much money as possible while doing it).



It wasn't easy, though. I was sobbing IRL when Isolde was begging for Connor's life. But Mara killed him anyway.

[Avilia]

I can't do it. I get as far as Lothering, kill the merchant there and go "eh". Probably something to do with my deep seated need to be liked. ;-)



I do make some choices that are considered 'evil', I just don't like the dialogue 'evil' choices. They're more like 'I'm a tool' rather than 'I'm an evil mastermind'. Just imho of course.

[Janni-in-VA]

I keep trying to gear myself up for a dark side playthrough and wind up changing my mind mid-way. My personal feelings keep getting in the way. I even started a human noble female specifically planning to make her my dark side playthrough, but she's falling in love with Alistair and getting all redeemed and stuff. :/



Maybe a mage who's a bit socially stunted and a little more "living in his/her head" would be the thing to do. I could see that person killing the elves because Zathrian cursed the werewolves. And keeping the Anvil because of the magic. And killing Connor because abominations have to die. And tainting the Ashes because the Chantry is too freaking powerful as it is. Hmmmm....maybe that's the direction I need to go. I realized I'd need the proper RP perspective, I just hadn't found it, yet. Magically curious would be a good take too...would excuse siding with the Architect in Awakening. I could see this working. Thanks!

[jackkel dragon]

It's hard for me to play an "evil" character in DAO, or even a pragmatist. The game presents some options as being obviously bad. Kolgrim is bat**** crazy, as is Branka. Caridin is a suffering soul that is supposed to change your mind at the last second, why would you go against him? The cutscenes for killing Connor are filled with more emotional music and lines than sacrificing Isolde, and you're practically hit on the head with the "everyone happy" hint about the Circle mages there. The mages are easier to annul, as you might want to stop the madness, but Cullen is, once again, bat**** crazy. (Why are all the pragmatic options presented by the insane characters, and all the "lulz happy ending" options presented by the obviously good characters?) The werewolves are harder to justify without being a hardcore pragmatist, but at least it's the player's decision all the way (with a sane ally.)



Also, most of the "bad" endings are obviously bad. While you can get ~5 gold early on by being a greedy ****, most other "bad" options give you suboptimal endings when the whole point of choosing them is to get something to help against the darkspawn. Kolgrim has some funny dialogue, and gives a specialization, but you alienate potential companions by tainting the Urn. The Werewolves are, in theory, tougher allies; but they end up being melee fighters while the elves are the only ranged allies. Plus, the unlimited elfroot vendor gets killed. The mages are generally better in combat than another melee fighter group like the templars. The Branka choice is one of the few that rewards a pragmatist, as the golems are additional tough melee fighters, rather than replacing something else.



...Yeah, I'm ranting and rambling now. Basically, the game makes it so hard for people like me to choose "evil" choices even when I intend to, and they don't reward as much as "good" choices, when the whole point is trying to get a better reward. Anyway, I'll stop for now.

[jackkel dragon]

Addendum: The Crows are mostly a side quest ally, with a hidden bonus to the Landsmeet. Of course, we care so little about the Crows unless we talk to Zevran for a while, and I never felt like it was a bad idea to help them. So there's a decent reward, but the player can care so little about the whole thing...

[DWSmiley]

"The end justifies the means" is the way to play an evil character. No one else's life has intrinsic worth. People are just a resource and everyone is expendable if it helps you achieve your goal. No random slaughter, as that's a waste of resources. It also helps (imo) to have a soft spot. We are complicated beings and never perfectly consistent. So you are ruthless with people but you love dogs, or whatever.

Modifié par DWSmiley, 13 novembre 2010 - 12:15 .

[Zjarcal]

DWSmiley wrote...

"The end justifies the means" is the way to play an evil character. No one else's life has intrinsic worth. People are just a resource and everyone is expendable if it helps you achieve your goal. No random slaughter, as that's a waste of resources. It also helps (imo) to have a soft spot. We are complicated beings and never perfectly consistent. So you are ruthless with people but you love dogs, or whatever.

This.

I have a character that most people would qualify as "evil" in Awakening, but she still has a soft spot for animals, even if she could care less about killing people.

Playing a 100% jerk just isn't fun to me. Playing a character whose motivations behind the "evil" choices are complex and perhaps even good intentioned, while also having some redeemable qualities, is a lot more entertaining and interesting.

[Reika]

I honestly never thought the Crows quests being evil. First job is to take out a trap for Wardens and their supports. Then you have to take out some mercs and Loghain's ambassador to Orzammar, the second I never really considered as evil on either my HNF, and my CEF just saw it as killing more scummy shems. Then you take out a captain of Howe's to help get revenge on him kidnapping someone's child, and since it's Howe... Well, that's not a hard choice to make.

Or that could just be me justifying being scummy myself. Ah well, such is life.

[Sarah1281]

A nice soft spot would be relatives, I think. Like if you have a ruthless to the bone DC, he'd still die for Rica.

[TJPags]

Exactly. Don't think "evil". Think "selfish" Think "what do I get out of this? And will that guy give me more?"



Evil people rarely do things simply because it's evil - they have a goal - more money, more power, more women/men, better home, etc. Think that way, and go with the option that helps YOU more, even if it's bad for those around you.

[TJPags]

Want to play an evil character?  Think like this guy:

13Dannyboy13 wrote...

I feel bad killing Connor, even though I usually choose that option just to slap Isolde, I can't stand that stuck up b*tch. Plus I really don't like Alistair, I can't stand self righteous charcaters like that, plus he's an idiot, reminds me too much of Carth from KOTOR and I just can't stand him.
Zathrian is annoying too, which is why I usually side with the wolves. I mean you have a blight to stop and he tries to use you as a pawn is his scheme against the werewolves, he cares nothing for the treaty, only his selfish motives. At least the werewolves are honest with you, they usually last a bit longer than the elves in Denerim too I found.

[DWSmiley]

Sarah1281 wrote...

A nice soft spot would be relatives, I think. Like if you have a ruthless to the bone DC, he'd still die for Rica.

Or what if it somehow was that wretch of a mother?  Imagine having a hopeless yearning for her love and affection.  That could produced a pretty messed up character.

[Reika]

DWSmiley wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

A nice soft spot would be relatives, I think. Like if you have a ruthless to the bone DC, he'd still die for Rica.

Or what if it somehow was that wretch of a mother?  Imagine having a hopeless yearning for her love and affection.  That could produced a pretty messed up character.

No one can push a person's buttons better than their parent(s) who put the buttons there in the first place.

[jackkel dragon]

DWSmiley wrote...

Sarah1281 wrote...

A nice soft spot would be relatives, I think. Like if you have a ruthless to the bone DC, he'd still die for Rica.

Or what if it somehow was that wretch of a mother?  Imagine having a hopeless yearning for her love and affection.  That could produced a pretty messed up character.

That would be brutal. I can't imagine trying to get on Kalah's good side.

I also like the "selfish, not evil" approach. While evil for evil sake characters break the fourth wall when they admit to being evil, selfish characters might know they are doing bad things to reach a "good" goal. Besides, those kind of characters are more interesting, as they don't murder puppies "just 'cuz im EVIL."