142 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

You also have cases when actions and motives are different. I always helped the villagers in Redcliffe. As a good guy I'm doing because, well, helping people. As my more "evil" play through it was calculated expediency where Eamon's help was worth the effort I put into saving his village. My problem most of the time is that the games don't differentiate what I'm doing from why I'm doing it.

Especially Morrigan, who is just being chaotic stupid at that point. You can't even explain it to her in any way, which is just frustrating. 

[9TailsFox]

I think, we should be allowed, to be chaotic evil, but only if people, are not allowed to cry, because they can't complete game solo. This is what I don't like companions reaction to you choices especially in DA2. In DA:O you want de-fail ashes Leliana no. In DA2 Hawke can ouvn slave and Fenris I don't like it but fine we still friends ok. This is bullshit. Or killing mages in front of Anders. Really? Justice would crush Hawke like bug.

[9TailsFox]

I think I recall Morrigan in the first trailer saying something along the lines of "Will you save the world or destroy it" or whatever. So, I'm guessing from that that destroying the world is, well, an option

She saying: "Darkness closes in. Will you stand against it?Or leave this world to it's bitter end?

.

[DarthSliver]

I think I recall Morrigan in the first trailer saying something along the lines of "Will you save the world or destroy it" or whatever. So, I'm guessing from that that destroying the world is, well, an option

 

That line makes me hope we do have the "evil" choices that won't make the game feel like an hinderous to play after making said choice. 

 

Of course taking from the newest trailer, I aint taking Cassandra with me anywhere if I can be evil lol. 

[Vilegrim]

I think, we should be allowed, to be chaotic evil, but only if people, are not allowed to cry, because they can't complete game solo. This is what I don't like companions reaction to you choices especially in DA2. In DA:O you want de-fail ashes Leliana no. In DA2 Hawke can ouvn slave and Fenris I don't like it but fine we still friends ok. This is bullshit. Or killing mages in front of Anders. Really? Justice would crush Hawke like bug.

 

 

If the choice is eradicate the chantry or save the veil, I would seriously have to consider which is worse, the world with the chantry in it, or a world with demons in it.  I seriously hope I can kill Cassandra as well.

[DarthSliver]

I think, we should be allowed, to be chaotic evil, but only if people, are not allowed to cry, because they can't complete game solo. This is what I don't like companions reaction to you choices especially in DA2. In DA:O you want de-fail ashes Leliana no. In DA2 Hawke can ouvn slave and Fenris I don't like it but fine we still friends ok. This is bullshit. Or killing mages in front of Anders. Really? Justice would crush Hawke like bug.

 

Well Anders is my healer in all playthroughs on DA2 and I find it absolutely hilarious to side with Templars with him in the party. 

 

As for being Chaotic Evil, it can be Knights of the Old Republic style. At one time I thought it was bad at the end to be Sith in the game but I learned I was just being stupid about it and i found a way to make it work lol. 

[In Exile]

That line makes me hope we do have the "evil" choices that won't make the game feel like an hinderous to play after making said choice. 

 

Of course taking from the newest trailer, I aint taking Cassandra with me anywhere if I can be evil lol. 

The trailer sounds like a "will you take up the burden to save the world, or refuse and let it burn" i.e., will you play the game and save the world, not, you can play the world and damn it. 

[9TailsFox]

Well Anders is my healer in all playthroughs on DA2 and I find it absolutely hilarious to side with Templars with him in the party. 

 

As for being Chaotic Evil, it can be Knights of the Old Republic style. At one time I thought it was bad at the end to be Sith in the game but I learned I was just being stupid about it and i found a way to make it work lol. 

I play SWTOR and I more or less like sith options I save people and everyone why you did it. I am sith I do what I want, have problem talk whit my lightsaber. But to bad I never really get chaotic good. You always mister nice killing is bad, save your enemy. No walk into room you die for tormenting these people. You basicly have to option Ican save you fro evil or muhahaha I slaughter you in most horrible way. Basically in swotor there is 2 ending templates(Jade empire is good example to) Becoming evil god emperor or noble sacrifice. I want become good god emperor. I want walk to the emperor defeat him and take over, and not make everyone suffer. Mostly of the time you completely bad or saint.And I understand it's hard to implement, someone said very good example I didn't save village because I am care, I saved it because I need support, something like what is almost impossible to implement.

[AlanC9]

You also have cases when actions and motives are different. I always helped the villagers in Redcliffe. As a good guy I'm doing because, well, helping people. As my more "evil" play through it was calculated expediency where Eamon's help was worth the effort I put into saving his village. My problem most of the time is that the games don't differentiate what I'm doing from why I'm doing it.

 

That shouldn't matter all that often. In the example you give, your character would want to be seen as being good by most folks anyway. The only issue I see is that you'd want some of the companions to know your real thinking on the matter. This is a recurring problem with Morrigan and Sten, although I don't think either of them would really take to the concept of "soft power." I think there are a couple of times it's a issue with Isabela too.

[AlanC9]

It's the DnD alignment chart,  Chaotic Evil is cruelty adn evil without purpose beyond doing it, it's puppy kicking serial killing evil.   Lawful Evil (which imho is easier to contain in the plot) is Evil with a purpose and drive, sometimes honour, usually believing they are doing what needs to be done.  It's the difference between Tywin Lannister and Joffery Baratheon, Tywin is evil, but everything he does has a purpose,  Joffery is a sadistic psychopath.

 

Note that the  (original!) DMG and PH are a bit contradictory here. The PH makes Evil sound like it's all about the sadism, while in the DMG Evil is about achieving personal benefits regardless of what bad things happen to others. Sort of the difference between Joffrey and Petyr Baelish.

[Vilegrim]

Note that the  (original!) DMG and PH are a bit contradictory here. The PH makes Evil sound like it's all about the sadism, while in the DMG Evil is about achieving personal benefits regardless of what bad things happen to others. Sort of the difference between Joffrey and Petyr Baelish.

 

 

This is true.   Then you get the fun of various planar beings who are supposed to embody the alignments, being full on stupid, as TSR wouldn't let evil be clever.

[lady_v23]

I certainly hope so.  Everyone knows villains have more fun

[Medhia_Nox]

Neutral evil is evil without a purpose - it is only "Evil" modified by nothing else.  Whatever THAT means.

 

Chaotic is governed by emotion - Lawful is governed by reason. 

 

Not that the D&D alignments much matter here.

 

As for evil being "clever" - Asmodeus is considered to be one of the most powerful beings in the D&D cosmos.. and is quite "clever". 

[Vilegrim]

Neutral evil is evil without a purpose - it is only "Evil" modified by nothing else.  Whatever THAT means.

 

Chaotic is governed by emotion - Lawful is governed by reason. 

 

Not that the D&D alignments much matter here.

 

As for evil being "clever" - Asmodeus is considered to be one of the most powerful beings in the D&D cosmos.. and is quite "clever". 

 

 

Under WotC yes, TSR however turned all evil people into complete idiots.

[Grieving Natashina]

Under WotC yes, TSR however turned all evil people into complete idiots.

It depended upon your DM.  A good DM can turn even a ridiculous rule set into something dynamic and fun for the players.  I used to play A D&D and I didn't think 2.5 ed was that bad.  TSR didn't do any editions past 2.5  3rd ed and later was WotC, which I think did a fine job fleshing out the alignments.  The less spoken about 4th ed, the better.

[Bob from Accounting]

Video games generally only feature one type of good and at least four types of evil.

 

Might be the case for real life as well.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Video games generally only feature one type of good and at least four types of evil.

 

Might be the case for real life as well.

 

The question is defining what any of those are; we might agree on this, but we'd disagree on what the good is and what the evil is.

[themikefest]

I like to do a path of evil. I did a really good(others would call it very evil) playthrough with my femshep a year ago and it would be nice to do something similiar.

 

I plan on playing a female human mage that will resort to kidnapping/toture/murder/blackmail/seduction to achieve her goal. Nothing will stop her.