SDNcN wrote...
Because they aren't interesting. Personally I found that Edwin only worked as a character because he wasn't taken too seriously and was quite comical.
If Bioware makes another comedic evil companion who was utterly incompetent I'd might enjoy it.
While I don't really appreciate the "utterly incompetent", I am very interested in having a such "comedic evil companion" also. That is basically the whole point here, you know, which is why I brough up Edwin in the OP.
Edwin is driven by his own agenda, and is so incredibly arrogant that it is just hilarious. I personally don't find these self-rightous companions very entertaining.
Evil characters don't have to be rawr rawr evil kill murder murder about everything. They can have things beyond themselves which they care about -- which adds depth. As a child Zevran was sold as a slave to the crows, it would make sense that despite his otherwise amoral attitude he would detest aiding slavers in kidnaping innocent people.
You are most certainly correct. But the "depth" in this case adds some quite reedeming qualities to Zevran. Why? Because he was sold as a slave himself. He doesn't wish it upon others (of his kin). That's quite reedeming in my book.
Ultimately Zevran is only really experiencing life with the warden, and the only reason he appears evil is because he adheres to an "evil" code of conduct. He hasn't really had choice. He was a pawn.
One of my favorite parts of (Modded) BG2 was when Viconia stood up for a homeless man when he was being harrassed by the City Guard. The fact that she empathized with his situation instead of giving her regular survival of the fittest spiel added quite a bit to her character considering most of her background is her just wanting other people to leave her alone.
I'm unfamiliar with this, so I can't really lend any thoughts. Care to elaborate, or does it have limited relevance?
@Liable****sman what do you consider sufficiently evil?
To unfortunately invoke Godwin's Law, is Hitler evil? He killed 6 million jews, was a rascist homophobe, but he also instituted some of the first animal cruelty laws and loved dogs and ostensibly did what he did for the "greater good" as he saw it... If we apply the same rationnale you used for Loghain, or even Velanna, he most certainly isn't correct?
By the logic I'm using, yeah, Hitler wasn't "evil". He was convinced that what he was doing was for the greater good. He did much good for the people of Germany, and had the best of intentions. I'm not saying he was a good person, I'm just saying that maybe if he wasn't so angry that he hadn't been accepted in art-school I doubt he would have started a revolution. I don't support what he did, but I wouldn't call it evil by my own definition.
An example of someone being "evil" would then be Stalin, who punished everyone equally.
I don't equate being misinformed (being a bigot/racist) to being evil, personally. Have you read "Mein Kampf"?
I would really appreciate we keep such things out of this discussion, though. We are discussing fictional people, so please let's continue discussing fictional people.
I must again stress that I am not looking to discuss moral values, and I'm actually a little sorry for what I've just written, since I've been baited into arguing such things regardless of my initial intentions.
Modifié par Liablecocksman, 12 décembre 2010 - 02:56 .
Retour en haut
