when did I become evil?

This forum is to be used for all discussions pertaining to BioWare's Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal expansion pack.
User avatar
Luther
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Marin County, CA
Contact:
when did I become evil?

Postby Luther » Fri Sep 28, 2001 9:50 am

I'm still early in TOB (the north forest temple) and I just realized my character is now evil. When did this happen? He was good when I started. Maybe it happened in Saradush somewhere? I didn't do anything out of the ordinary. I thought it was because I asked Imoen to give up here soul for Sarevok, but after testing both ways, I was good after each. Anyone know? :confused:

User avatar
MegaToerist
Posts: 347
Joined: Sat May 26, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Belgium, Europe
Contact:

Postby MegaToerist » Fri Sep 28, 2001 11:28 am

Your alignment changed during the tests in Hell. Just what was your response to the different challenges?

TC, Geert
It may seem like I'm doing nothing, but on cellular level, I'm really quite busy...

[url="http://www.svelmoe.dk/blade/index.htm"]Blades of the Banshee[/url] - [url="http://www.naturewing.curvedspaces.com/Index.html"]Nature Wing[/url]
"Vis consuli expers mole ruit sua"

User avatar
Luther
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Marin County, CA
Contact:

Postby Luther » Fri Sep 28, 2001 11:37 am

Hmmm...Do you mean the tests in Hell at the end of SOA? I don't think that's it because when I started TOB my alignment was still good. If you mean the first challenge where you get the pocket plane ability, I didn't make any evil choices. I still had to kill everyone though. Sorry I can't pinpoint this more closely.

User avatar
UserUnfriendly
Posts: 4109
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Sluggy Zone
Contact:

Postby UserUnfriendly » Fri Sep 28, 2001 11:29 pm

Me? I became evil in 4th grade after i discovered girls.... and while I am generally true neutral in outlook, evil is still fun and profitable....


experience and treachery will always beat youth and enthusiasm...

sorry about this, if you flubbed a test in hell, you are neutral evil... are you neutral evil?

also have a char cast detect evil near you, you might not be really evil....

if you did whatchers keep, in the wild magic room, could that have changed you? remove curse might work,
They call me Darth...

Darth Gizka!

Muwahahahahhahahha!!!

User avatar
Masteraleph
Posts: 93
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2001 10:00 pm
Contact:

Postby Masteraleph » Sat Sep 29, 2001 7:38 pm

MegaToerist was talking about the hell tests at the end of SOA. If you did any of the following: killed the dragon (instead of talking to it), took the cloak (instead of going without it), had your party member/a peasant killed (instead of sacrificing some), killed the genie (instead of giving it the sword or pickpocketing it), or gave in to hate against sarevok, then that's where you turned evil. Otherwise, it sounds like a fluke to me.

User avatar
Luther
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Marin County, CA
Contact:

Postby Luther » Mon Oct 01, 2001 12:47 pm

Yep, I figured it all out. My testing process was fatally flawed. The walkthrough on this site doesn't say anything about an alignment change in Hell and the game doesn't give you any notification either. I didn't notice I was evil until I was already well into TOB (and cast detect evil--I was pretty surprised when my name showed up!) I was determined to have a good party so I went back to Hell and played it all over again. I really wanted blackrazor though. I didn't think of trying to pickpocket. Also, the stat bonuses you get are different if you choose the good or evil path. Personally, I think the good path gets you better rewards.

User avatar
Zaha
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Ylöjärvi, Finland
Contact:

Postby Zaha » Tue Oct 02, 2001 4:29 am

I think the alignment change system in the end of SoA sucks. In my opinion, the alignment change should be balanced so that the more evil paths the character chooses, the more evil he gets. But if he takes four good paths end one evil, the balance should be in the side of good. My lawful neutral kensai chose evil path in wrath test (to get str bonus) and good in all the others, and became neutral evil. I think it would be just natural for a neutral character to take evil paths in some tests. Not that it really bothered me that much, it's the character's deeds and reputation that affect, not the alignment. But still I don't feel comfortable playing in a lawful neutral style, if it says in my stats screen that I'm neutral evil. Is there a way in ToB to change alignment? (other than SK ;)

User avatar
Saruman
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Postby Saruman » Tue Oct 02, 2001 4:53 am

Originally posted by Zaha:
<STRONG>My lawful neutral kensai chose evil path in wrath test (to get str bonus) and good in all the others, and became neutral evil</STRONG>


Which is entirely correct, the viewpoint of neutral evil people in the ADnD game is that they will do whatever they deem neccessary for personal gain. You deemed it neccessary to fail the wrath test to gain +2 strength rather than the other bonus you would get if you had been nice to Sarevok. You realised that what you were doing wasn't particuarly noble or what most people would consider to be a good action yet you did it anyway for your own personal gain.

Hence you or at least your character are in fact Neutral/Evil.

[ 10-02-2001: Message edited by: Saruman ]
Just remember, everyone is entitled to my opinion

User avatar
Xyx
Posts: 3104
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Xyx » Tue Oct 02, 2001 1:55 pm

Originally posted by Saruman:
<STRONG>You deemed it neccessary to fail the wrath test to gain +2 strength rather than the other bonus you would get if you had been nice to Sarevok.</STRONG>


But if I also decide to be really nice in the other four tests (and I think the Selfishness test leaves little doubt about your motives), shouldn't that balance out?
[url="http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/SpellsReference/Main.htm"]Baldur's Gate 2 Spells Reference[/url]: Strategy, tips, tricks, bugs, cheese and corrections to the manual.

User avatar
Bloodstalker
Posts: 15512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Hell if I know
Contact:

Postby Bloodstalker » Tue Oct 02, 2001 2:07 pm

Which is entirely correct, the viewpoint of neutral evil people in the ADnD game is that they will do whatever they deem neccessary for personal gain. You deemed it neccessary to fail the wrath test to gain +2 strength rather than the other bonus you would get if you had been nice to Sarevok. You realised that what you were doing wasn't particuarly noble or what most people would consider to be a good action yet you did it anyway for your own personal gain


But how would your character know that there was any gain at all to be had either way? No one said anything about the strength bonus during the dialog.I mean you wake up in Hell, you are confronted by this dude who is notorious for trying to kill you, I would have attacked too.
Lord of Lurkers

Guess what? I got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell!

User avatar
Quitch
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Surrey, England
Contact:

Postby Quitch » Tue Oct 02, 2001 2:46 pm

Ah, what people here are doing is getting the alignment system all wrong. You're thinking you should slip down the system, Lawful Good to Neutral Good and so on....

It doesn't (and shouldn't) work like that. There are only three levels. You're either Good, Neutral or Evil. These three then branch out to reflect your stance on the alignment you took. While you may be good, different people have different ideas about how to bring goodness to the world for example.

However were a good character to make a selfish decision, it would represent such a change in character, that it is no wonder your alignment changes. Your entire character (at least as good) is based around doing the best for others, through the branch of your alignment that you have chosen. To choose willingly to do a selfish deed will of course plunge you down to evil.

It would take a lot to recover from that. Simply making the "good" choice on four other tests would not compensate. If you killed someone, you could do four good acts, but would it bring that person back to life? By making the selfish decision you have shown that an element of evil resides in your soul, and the game tries to represent this.

You don't become good by whining "Well I may have beaten up that peasant, but I helped four others!"

Since it didn't warn you about your alignment change, may I suggest you get Kevin Dorners "patch" from Baldurdash. It fixes all the bugs the official patch missed.
Past: Ascension
Present: The Broken Hourglass
Future: Return to Windspear, Imoen Relationship
"Perfection has no deadline"

User avatar
Saruman
Posts: 219
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: United Kingdom
Contact:

Postby Saruman » Wed Oct 03, 2001 1:21 am

Originally posted by Xyx:
<STRONG>But if I also decide to be really nice in the other four tests (and I think the Selfishness test leaves little doubt about your motives), shouldn't that balance out?</STRONG>



No, if you find an onion which is half rotten it is still a rotten onion.
Just remember, everyone is entitled to my opinion

User avatar
Zaha
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2001 11:00 pm
Location: Ylöjärvi, Finland
Contact:

Postby Zaha » Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:53 am

Point here is, my character was NOT good, he was neutral. Generally he isn't just after his own good, but seeing Sarevok, someone who just recently almost got him killed provoking him to attack, he, as a fighter, responds with aggression. Just like Jaheira in the beginning of SoA is ready to tear to pieces the one who killed Khalid, and cannot still be considered evil. Really, this was more powergaming from *me*, but I still don't think that a neutral fighter did against his alignment by attacking Sarevok.

On the other hand, why aren't evil characters affected similarly then? An evil character who decides some day to, for example, give money to a beggar, and then go on with his usual way of life, isn't much less evil after giving that bit of money.

"Evil, meet my sword - sword, MEET EVIL!" Now this is certainly a sign of wrath and aggression. Does this make Minsc evil?

User avatar
Bobsy
Posts: 140
Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Behind you... Made you look!
Contact:

Postby Bobsy » Wed Oct 03, 2001 12:49 pm

Remember that you're Bhaalspawn. Giving in to the evil inside you will slip you into being a nasty chap in all respects. Think of it like the dark side of the force, man.
==========================
state
because you're worth it
==========================

User avatar
Xyx
Posts: 3104
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: The Netherlands
Contact:

Postby Xyx » Wed Oct 03, 2001 1:07 pm

@ Quitch: Why should there only be "pure, lily-white" Good, and no "imperfect, only-human" Good? Nobody is truly, 100% Good, even if only because no two people have exactly the same definition of what is Good.

For example:

Maybe killing that damn Dragon is Good. They're dangerous monsters, after all, prone to eating hapless villagers and maidens and all that.

Maybe letting that innocent peasant die is Good, because it gives you a better chance against Irenicus. If you fail to defeat him, he'll wreak havoc on the world, causing untold suffering and the deaths of a great many more people than just that one peasant. Is taking such a risk acceptable? Heroic: definitely. Wise: perhaps not entirely...
[url="http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/BG2/SpellsReference/Main.htm"]Baldur's Gate 2 Spells Reference[/url]: Strategy, tips, tricks, bugs, cheese and corrections to the manual.

User avatar
Mr Snow
Posts: 233
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: Somewhere on Earth
Contact:

Postby Mr Snow » Wed Oct 03, 2001 7:25 pm

As the DM Manual Says: Alignment is a Guide, not a Straight-Jacket.

How can anyone say "you did one evil act, now for the rest of your life you are evil".... Hello?, would you take that person seriously? I know I wouldn't.
The Present is an Illusion, The Future is a Dream and The Past is A Lie!

User avatar
Curdis
Posts: 1286
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2000 11:00 pm
Location: The edge of reality
Contact:

Postby Curdis » Wed Oct 03, 2001 7:55 pm

@Mr Snow - it is pretty obvious that these are a set of tests which will probably have a large effect on your character's future. Your arguement seems to become, it doesn't matter what I show the world at my moment of judgement I can make up for it later ( Works if your Chaotic...). In the environment of a game script there may be no way back but in a DM controlled environment there would be a (massively expensive, very time consuming, and painful) way back (but you would be evil until you completed it). - Curdis

[ 10-03-2001: Message edited by: Curdis ]
The warlord sig of 's' - word

Making a reappearance for those who have a sig even longer :rolleyes:

[quote="Dilbert]That's about the stupidest thing I've ever heard[/quote]

[quote=Waverly]You all suck donkeys[/quote]

[quote={deleted after legal threats}]I am so not a drama queen![/quote"]

:)

:mad:

:cool:

:mischief:

:angel:

:devil:

:angry:

Repent

For

User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Postby fable » Thu Oct 04, 2001 7:18 am

You can't do a lot of good things and then do an outstandingly bad one when you think nobody is looking, without expecting some change. Your character has illustrated a willingness to take advantage of a situation to perform an immoral act for personal advantage. Learn to live with the consequences.

I would have preferred if you were offered the opportunity to "do pennance" and regain your lost values, but game development has to stop sometime. ;)
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.

User avatar
spork
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 10:00 pm
Location: New York, USA
Contact:

Postby spork » Thu Oct 04, 2001 1:41 pm

I still don't see how any of the tests in Hell show your immorality. If I ever played a good character, I'd be thinking this:

1. It's obvious Sarevok will fight me anyway; why waste my time vainly trying to talk him down?

2. I release the genie by destroying his material form, and I keep Blackrazor out of the hands of evil creatures, using it instead for good.

3. I kill that dangerous dragon, because at some point it's going to want to feed and will probably kill many innocents.

4. Instead of making me permanently sacrifice my ability scores, Minsc tells me that he'd rather use up a charge from the Rod of Resurrection. It's not like he's never died before.... It seems more good is accomplished this way.
See what I mean?

spork

User avatar
fable
Posts: 30676
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2001 12:00 pm
Location: The sun, the moon, and the stars.
Contact:

Postby fable » Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 pm

Originally posted by spork:
<STRONG>I still don't see how any of the tests in Hell show your immorality. If I ever played a good character, I'd be thinking this:

1. It's obvious Sarevok will fight me anyway; why waste my time vainly trying to talk him down?

2. I release the genie by destroying his material form, and I keep Blackrazor out of the hands of evil creatures, using it instead for good.

3. I kill that dangerous dragon, because at some point it's going to want to feed and will probably kill many innocents.

4. Instead of making me permanently sacrifice my ability scores, Minsc tells me that he'd rather use up a charge from the Rod of Resurrection. It's not like he's never died before.... It seems more good is accomplished this way.
See what I mean? spork</STRONG>


No offense, but this has the feeling of choplogic done to uneasily justify a desired outcome. A morally good type would arguably seek to talk down Saverok, because you never assume that anybody you talk to is beyond recall. Similarly, stealing a weapon because you'll use it "to do good" is no more a justification for its theft than the fact that you could steal money from a bank vault and presumably spend it to greater social effect than the owners.

See what I mean...? ;)
To the Righteous belong the fruits of violent victory. The rest of us will have to settle for warm friends, warm lovers, and a wink from a quietly supportive universe.