216 réponses à ce sujet

[PsychoBlonde]

Liable****sman wrote...

PsychoBlonde wrote...

Yeah, a Dr. Evil Caricature Character doesn't really suit Dragon Age imo.

Of course, it might be funny if you had a wise-cracking comrade who insists that they are Evil and that they do Evil things and is just incredibly sarcastic about the entire business--especially if they make it their business to point out where the no-good-option questionable choices could go HORRIBLY WRONG and enthuse about how Evil you are no matter what you do.

You sound like you should really play some Baldurs Gate, if you haven't already. Especially, for instance, Edwin is excellent at precisely what you describe.

I like Dynaheir and Minsc so I never bring Edwin along.

[Liablecocksman]

PsychoBlonde wrote...



I like Dynaheir and Minsc so I never bring Edwin along.

Edwin had me at "Greetings. I am Edwin Odesseiron. You simians may merely refer to me as 'Sir,' if you prefer a less... syllable-intensive workout."

I couldn't NOT bring him along.

[Geeenie]

frist of all Evil comes in many shapes and sizies excample lucerfer used his own vanity to minipulate woman to minipulate man into beleaving that what God had told them about the fruite of good and Ev il was not true for his own goal is Evilanyone who uses anyone for there own personal gain is doing an Evil act lets not forget that Morrigain is a Blood Mage useing the soul of an old God for her own personal goal which means as a mother she dose not care about the child at allshe will protect it to make sure that she won't loose out of her own personal goal and that goal is to be the Drak Queen.and she she will get what she wants by what ever means nesseryI'm a mom and this makes so upset because I'm also a grandmom and if any one did this to my7 child I'd well lets just say it would not be pretty another way I could put it I went to which hunt and KILLED HERend of storyI donot Approve of rearing children for own personal gain.therefor what she did is an act of Evil

[silentassassin264]

You discounted Shale's chaotic sociopathy and ignored the fact that Morrigan encouraged every evil action in the game. You also ignore the fact that Velanna killed a bunch of innocent people in her just being racist mode. What more do you want? Bioware insists the Dragon Age is going to be a heroic fantasy, meaning regardless you are going to be a hero. Why would some pure evil character follow you? They would have to make them somewhat good or it would make no sense at all for them to follow you as you are going against their interests if they are pure evil.

[druplesnubb]

double post

Modifié par druplesnubb, 12 décembre 2010 - 12:57 .

[druplesnubb]

[quote]druplesnubb wrote...

[quote]druplesnubb wrote...

Morrigan, Zevran and Shale are all evil. Morrigan completely lacks compassion for anyone except the
warden, and then only if he, she's also evil or abuses the gift system.
Zevran outright states that he doesn't think there's anything wrong at
all with killing people, by what measuring does that not make him evil?
Shale enjoys killing innocents more than any other party member and
almost completely lacks empathy. That makes him evil. The fact that
he's a golem doesn't make him less evil, it only explains why he is
evil. There's also Velanna who kills dosens of humans and says she
feels "warm and fuzzy" about it even after she learned that they were
innocent. She turns good after some character development
though.[/quote]

Morrigan I've covered in the OP.
Zevran was raised by assassins and live by an assassins code of conduct. He would have been killed had he not adhered to it, and the reason he thinks like he does, is because his own life is worth nothing to his masters.
It is a tragic case indeed, but he isn't evil.
Shale enjoys killing darkspawn and preventing the blight as much as killing innocents. She isn't evil, she is "chaotic".
Velanna hates humans. That's it. She doesn't hate anyone or anything else, just humans. She is racist, certainly, but not evil.
[/quote]
So Shale isn't evil because she doesn't only kill innocents? And Morrigan isn't evil because she refuse to help people who need it?, that sounds more like proof that she is evil. The only reason she doesn't make a deal with the demon is that she knows she can't trust demons. Yes Zevran was raised by assassins who taught him to believe what he does. That's an explanation, not an excuse. And hating a certain demographic to the point of being fine with killing them doesn't make you evil? By that logic (or rather, lack of logic) the ****s and the KKK are all good guys. are you seriously saying people only count as evil if they are evil to absolutely everyone? what the hell is your definition of evil, anyways? it seems to be a very weird one. Like "people who do evil things for evil reasons aren't evil" weird.
[/quote]

[0x30A88]

I am new to the morality in video games, with Dragon Age: Oirigins being the first game where the player had to take important decisions. I always tend to find the morally whitest sollution. Thus, I wouldn't like an evil character going -5 approval on me for everytime I open my mouth. Then again, diversity would add to the game's story.

[JW720]

I would really like some darker, eviler characters. The worst in DA:O I would say is Loghain considering we were trying to unseat him for the mjority of the game. Even he wasn't bad just incredibly misguided and arrogant.

[Liablecocksman]

silentassassin264 wrote...

You discounted Shale's chaotic
sociopathy and ignored the fact that Morrigan encouraged every evil
action in the game. You also ignore the fact that Velanna killed a
bunch of innocent people in her just being racist mode. What more do
you want? Bioware insists the Dragon Age is going to be a heroic
fantasy, meaning regardless you are going to be a hero. Why would some
pure evil character follow you? They would have to make them somewhat
good or it would make no sense at all for them to follow you as you are
going against their interests if they are pure evil.

Shale joins the warden simply to help stop the Blight, for no other reason than it's the "right" thing to do.
Morrigan, as I've said, is the only one on the edge of being evil, but I just find her to be... You know - not evil?
I can see how some would find her evil, but I wouldn't be so sure
myself. She lives by the laws of nature - survival of the fittest. I
don't think that's evil.
Velanna is just racist. She isn't evil. She even becomes more "good" than arguably "evil" over the course of the game.

Evil
characers can follow you if they believe you can help them further
their own interests or agenda. There were, for examples, numerous cases
of this happening in Baldurs Gate.

druplesnubb wrote...
So Shale isn't evil because she doesn't only kill innocents?

Shale takes equal pleasure in killing evil people as in killing good people, so no - she is equally apathetic towards everyone, and thus not evil.

And Morrigan isn't evil because she refuse to help people who need it?, that sounds more like proof that she is evil. The only reason she doesn't make a deal with the demon is that she knows she can't trust demons.

Morrigan doesn't go out of her way to help others, which I don't think is evil by itself.

Yes Zevran was raised by assassins who taught him to believe what he does. That's an explanation, not an excuse.

Zevran, for instance, isn't too happy about the enslaved elves. Try working with the slaver, and see how much he likes that.  Zevran personality isn't evil, he just doesn't value the lives of others highly.

And hating a certain demographic to the point of being fine with killing them doesn't make you evil? are you seriously saying people only count as evil if they are evil to absolutely everyone?

That is, in essence, what I'm saying, yes.

Velanna has many redeeming qualities, and isn't evil at all. She is racist.

Gisle Aune wrote...

I am new to the morality in video
games, with Dragon Age: Oirigins being the first game where the player
had to take important decisions. I always tend to find the morally
whitest sollution. Thus, I wouldn't like an evil character going -5
approval on me for everytime I open my mouth. Then again, diversity
would add to the game's story.

As it is now, you can just go with the "whitest solution" and everyone (except Morrigan, in this case) will approve. You already have everyone going "+5" every time you open your mouth.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 12 décembre 2010 - 01:07 .

[Crimson Invictus]

druplesnubb wrote...
And Morrigan isn't evil because she refuse to help people who need it?, that sounds more like proof that she is evil.

Refusing to help people is evil?

Modifié par Liana Nighthawk, 12 décembre 2010 - 01:09 .

[Drasanil]

I don't think the OP wants an "evil" or morally dubious companion as most people would understand it, but rather a companion who's for "Teh Evulz" which is hard to do in a supposedly more serious and morally ambiguous.



*Spoiler Below*











How about Loghain? Regicide, slavery, murder, politically motivated violence and torture against one's citizens... I mean really, it seems like you want a cartoon super-villain as opposed to anything remotely realistic.

[Liablecocksman]

Drasanil wrote...

I don't think the OP wants an "evil" or morally dubious companion as most people would understand it, but rather a companion who's for "Teh Evulz" which is hard to do in a supposedly more serious and morally ambiguous.

But these people are everywhere in the world. Look at the slaver in the Alienage, for instance. Look at the humans at the start of the city elf origin, raping(or wanting to rape) the bride. There are many, many, many people who work only in service of their own agenda - why can't we have such a companion? We've had plenty of them in the past.

How about Loghain? Regicide, slavery, murder, politically motivated violence and torture against one's citizens... I mean really, it seems like you want a cartoon super-villain as opposed to anything remotely realistic.

I always thought Loghain acted in service of "the greater good", which is a dangerous, although not evil, trait to have. He is quite convinced that what he does will ultimately help him save the world. So no, he isn't evil.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 12 décembre 2010 - 01:15 .

[PsychoBlonde]

Drasanil wrote...

How about Loghain? Regicide, slavery, murder, politically motivated violence and torture against one's citizens... I mean really, it seems like you want a cartoon super-villain as opposed to anything remotely realistic.

Yeah, that's my impression as well.  Personally, I think Morrigan came the closest to being outright evil in Origins because belief in (and desire for) power as the ultimate purpose and meaning of one's life eventually leads to evil.  I think Sten was the next closest (maybe Velanna if you count Awakening).  Sten certainly believes some things that are quite evil but he doesn't actually try to implement them on you at any point during the game--and he also believes some things that are quite good and appropriate, so you actually get more favor with him for NOT being a dick (go figure).

An "I'm teh evulz, I eat babies and kick puppies and drown kittens in the tears of tortured virgins!" character is just goofy.

[PsychoBlonde]

Liable****sman wrote...

But these people are everywhere in the world. Look at the slaver in the Alienage, for instance. Look at the humans at the start of the city elf origin, raping(or wanting to rape) the bride. There are many, many, many people who work only in service of their own agenda - why can't we have such a companion? We've had plenty of them in the past.

Um--how do you know these folks were teh evulz according to your definition?  Sure they were for the 4 minutes we saw them, but let's not make assumptions just on that basis.

[Liablecocksman]

Refrain from these strawmen arguments, please. I'm not asking for "teh evuls", I'm asking for evil companions as we know them from the past.



Hell, the only one I can think of within the past few years is Bishop from NWN2.

[Tinxa]

I'd like another character like Bishop. I thought he was a very well done evil character. What I wouldn't want is a psychotic character like Grimgnaw who is evil just because he wants to kill everything in sight. Wanting to shoot and squish everything for the sake of it is funny in non human characters like HK47 or Shale but annoying in human characters.

[Maria Caliban]

Liable****sman wrote...

You call Sten, Shale, Zevran and hardened Leliana evil!?

Hardened Leliana would even still leave you (spoiler) if you desecrated the urn, if you hadn't a high enough coercion skill.

As we all know, people who murder others because of their religious beliefs can never be classified as evil.

Liable****sman wrote...

How about Loghain? Regicide, slavery, murder, politically motivated violence and torture against one's citizens... I mean really, it seems like you want a cartoon super-villain as opposed to anything remotely realistic.

I always thought Loghain acted in service of "the greater good", which is a dangerous, although not evil, trait to have. He is quite convinced that what he does will ultimately help him save the world. So no, he isn't evil.

It boggles my mind that people ask for realistic evil companions and then will suggest that characters who commit blatant atrocities aren't evil because they have a slim rationale.

If Loghain, Morrigan, and Sten aren't evil then that basically leaves BioWare with Rapepuppies McEatbabies as the only companion who'd be sufficiently evil.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 12 décembre 2010 - 01:50 .

[Liablecocksman]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Liable****sman wrote...

You call Sten, Shale, Zevran and hardened Leliana evil!?

Hardened Leliana would even still leave you (spoiler) if you desecrated the urn, if you hadn't a high enough coercion skill.

As we all know, people who murder others because of their religious beliefs can never be classified as evil.

While it is completely needless, it is still a good point. Please, though, I think we can all agree that Leliana is a "good" character.

[SDNcN]

Liable****sman wrote...

Refrain from these strawmen arguments, please. I'm not asking for "teh evuls", I'm asking for evil companions as we know them from the past.

Hell, the only one I can think of within the past few years is Bishop from NWN2.

So you want one dimensional characters?

[Drasanil]

Liable****sman wrote...
While it is completely needless, it is still a good point. Please, though, I think we can all agree that Leliana is a "good" character.

Not really, she was perfectly fine with most of what she did and only came to regret anything when it bit her in the bum. She puts up a good girl act because she thinks that is what she should do, but her amazing ability to rationnalise away what she did, and the fact you can turn her right back around so easily, leaves my doubts as to how repentant she actually was. 

Alistair (hardened or not) basicly comes across as one of the few actually "good" companions we have, even Oghren has a better case for being "good" than Leliana. The rest are firmly in the morally ambiguous shades of grey, as far as I'm concerned.

[Liablecocksman]

SDNcN wrote...

Liable****sman wrote...

Refrain from these strawmen arguments, please. I'm not asking for "teh evuls", I'm asking for evil companions as we know them from the past.

Hell, the only one I can think of within the past few years is Bishop from NWN2.

So you want one dimensional characters?

It's a nasty way of putting it.
I thought Bishop to have plenty of depth and "believeablilty".
Character only pushing for their own agenda is what I'm looking for, which doesn't necessarily constitute one-dimensional characters.
We have many blatantly good characters, but none blatently evil. Why?
In this timeperiod, everyone and their mother would be considered "grey" by todays moral standards.

Being goody-goody two-shoes is already breaking the mold.
Why not break the mold towards the other side of the spectrum as well?

Drasanil wrote...

Not really, she was perfectly fine with
most of what she did and only came to regret anything when it bit her
in the bum. She puts up a good girl act because she thinks that is what
she should do, but her amazing ability to rationnalise away what she
did, and the fact you can turn her right back around so easily, leaves
my doubts as to how repentant she actually was. 

Alistair (hardened or not)
basicly comes across as one of the few actually "good" companions we
have, even Oghren has a better case for being "good" than Leliana. The
rest are firmly in the morally ambiguous shades of grey, as far as I'm
concerned.

No.
I can say that with such confidence because of the "approval system".
Why? It gives us a view into the mind of the character, to how their feelings towards the PC is.

If Leliana was merely putting on an act, she wouldn't really care what was going on. She would object/sympathise, but you wouldn't lose/gain any approval.
Remember that the warden has to basically make her go back to being like she was when she was a bard, and even then she still puts the needs of the many above the needs of the few.

Modifié par Liablecocksman, 12 décembre 2010 - 02:06 .

[Ryzaki]

True that it was harder to find a good person in DA than someone who simply wasn't a self-serving douche. And Morrigan is plenty evil. Anyone willing to kill their own family for a massive power up (as she suggest the CE do) isn't exactly neutral. A neutral person would've told them to handle their own sh*t. Morrigan kicks them in the face and spits on them. Shale gets a pass for being non-human and Sten is pretty much towing the line to. (You kill a group of innocent civilians but you only regret the fact that you lost control and your sword is missing? WTF is wrong with you?!?)

[Drasanil]

Liable****sman wrote...
It's a nasty way of putting it.
I thought Bishop to have plenty of depth and "believeablilty".
Character only pushing for their own agenda is what I'm looking for, which doesn't necessarily constitute one-dimensional characters.
We have many blatantly good characters, but none blatently evil. Why?
In this timeperiod, everyone and their mother would be considered "grey" by todays moral standards.

Being goody-goody two-shoes is already breaking the mold.
Why not break the mold towards the other side of the spectrum as well?

We had at best three "blatantly good" companions, Alistair, Sigrun and Justice. The rest were either, broken, self-serving or pretty much evil. Compared to most games that's breaking the mold quite a bit.

[Fishy]

Lawful Evil? Yes

Dungeons and Dragon/ Wiki  wrote...

Lawful Evil is referred to as the "Dominator" or "Diabolic" alignment.
Characters of this alignment see a well-ordered system as being easier
to exploit, and show a combination of desirable and undesirable traits;
while they usually obey their superiors and keep their word, they care
nothing for the rights and freedoms of other individuals and are not
averse to twisting the rules to work in their favor. Examples of this
alignment include tyrants, devils, undiscriminating mercenary types who
have a strict code of conduct, and loyal soldiers who enjoy the act of
killing.
Like Lawful Good Paladins, Lawful Evil characters may sometimes find
themselves faced with the dilemma of whether to obey law or evil when
the two conflict - however their issues with Law versus Evil are more
concerned with "Will I get caught?" vs "How does this benefit me?"
Boba Fett of Star Wars, and X-Men's Magneto are cited examples of Lawful Evil characters.[7] The Lawful Evil outsiders are known as Baatezu (Devils). 

Chaotic evil or Sociopath like .. Never
But i think bioware want to build some kind of relationship between you and the written character and most of the time *evil* character are bullies with huge egocentric personality.So i doubt they would do that..

The monk in NWN 1 was quite cool though.

Modifié par Suprez30, 12 décembre 2010 - 02:13 .