Posted November 29, 2017
I read in some thread here that Viconia is a psychopath. Can someone explain, please?
When I first encountered her, in BG1, I was not fully indoctrinated in the D&D ways (having only played PoR and brief tabletop before that). In particular, I didn't know what a Drow was, and didn't fully understand the D&D alignment system (the very idea that a sentient creature is bound by some life-long moral alignment seems stupid to me, especially since I don't believe in absolute morality). So, when two people arrive, one of whom asks for help, and the other of whom threatens me if I don't help, it seems pretty clear who is more deserving. I was rewarded with an enthusiastic, loyal supporter for the rest of the game. In what way was she evil?
OK, in BG1, the characters are not as fleshed out, so maybe she just didn't get enough opportunities to prove to me just how evil she is.
In BG2, we meet again -- in almost the exact same way, except now it is a crowd of prejudiced* assholes instead of just one. Again, the reward for freeing her is a loyal and enthusiastic supporter for the rest of the game. When we enter the underdark, she even insists that she be given the geas for the greater good, and the game gives me no way to tell the elves that forcing me to turn a sentient being into a magically bonded slave for the rest of her life so that I can do them a favor is not only unacceptable, it is blatantly, mind-bogglingly, and unforgivably evil.
She does say some disturbing things during her romance options, but a lot of that was specifically exaggerated to push the main character away. In any case, I am willing to forgive, given that she clearly (in spite of her upbringing, and at great danger to herself) changed her ways. Given her upbringing, she was not exactly doing evil in spite of knowing better, unlike the elves in the example above.
Apparently in ToB she even gets to improve her alignment, but not by much. Is it in ToB that she truly shows us how evil she is? Admittedly I have a hard time motivating myself to finish that one.
Is it because Shar is evil? It's not like Viconia sacrifices babies in the name of Shar, at least not while I'm looking (and, in fact, given that baby sacrifices are what drove her away from Lolth, I'm guessing she doesn't even do that while I'm not looking). In fact, I find her battle cry in the name of Shar to be quite endearing.
Is evil selfishness? Then why is "lawful good" Arie given a free pass when she constantly whines about her own problems? Why is Nalia given a free pass for just doing good because she feels guilty about her station? Good acts are not always selfless, and a selfish, but beneficial act, is not evil, at least in my opinion.
Maybe I just don't understand good and evil. Am I a psychopath as well? Or maybe I just glossed over something important, or maybe I'm just forgetful and the stories I presented above are inaccurate. I admit I haven't played either game in several years now. Or maybe I'm just confused because a lot of video games offer only comic evil vs. comic hero choices (regardless of the actual greater good/evil). Pokemon appear to be sentient. Do they deserve to be enslaved to 10-year-old children for life for entertainment purposes? Does this question even ever come up in the games (or the cartoons)? Or is the only "evil" in that universe the stealing of other people's slaves?
* Note that I don't consider prejudice to be intrinsically wrong, as long as it is adjusted when falsifying facts are made clear. None of Viconia's assailants really cared about the truth.
Note also that I always play good characters, and have real trouble playing evil characters. Even somewhat ambigous games like Tyranny make me uncomfortable. My BG parties always end up with 20 rep, even with Viconia in the party (she stays if your CH is high enough).
I'm not sure why I'm posting this; I must be really bored, in spite of having a million things to do (the least of which is a huge game backlog).
When I first encountered her, in BG1, I was not fully indoctrinated in the D&D ways (having only played PoR and brief tabletop before that). In particular, I didn't know what a Drow was, and didn't fully understand the D&D alignment system (the very idea that a sentient creature is bound by some life-long moral alignment seems stupid to me, especially since I don't believe in absolute morality). So, when two people arrive, one of whom asks for help, and the other of whom threatens me if I don't help, it seems pretty clear who is more deserving. I was rewarded with an enthusiastic, loyal supporter for the rest of the game. In what way was she evil?
OK, in BG1, the characters are not as fleshed out, so maybe she just didn't get enough opportunities to prove to me just how evil she is.
In BG2, we meet again -- in almost the exact same way, except now it is a crowd of prejudiced* assholes instead of just one. Again, the reward for freeing her is a loyal and enthusiastic supporter for the rest of the game. When we enter the underdark, she even insists that she be given the geas for the greater good, and the game gives me no way to tell the elves that forcing me to turn a sentient being into a magically bonded slave for the rest of her life so that I can do them a favor is not only unacceptable, it is blatantly, mind-bogglingly, and unforgivably evil.
She does say some disturbing things during her romance options, but a lot of that was specifically exaggerated to push the main character away. In any case, I am willing to forgive, given that she clearly (in spite of her upbringing, and at great danger to herself) changed her ways. Given her upbringing, she was not exactly doing evil in spite of knowing better, unlike the elves in the example above.
Apparently in ToB she even gets to improve her alignment, but not by much. Is it in ToB that she truly shows us how evil she is? Admittedly I have a hard time motivating myself to finish that one.
Is it because Shar is evil? It's not like Viconia sacrifices babies in the name of Shar, at least not while I'm looking (and, in fact, given that baby sacrifices are what drove her away from Lolth, I'm guessing she doesn't even do that while I'm not looking). In fact, I find her battle cry in the name of Shar to be quite endearing.
Is evil selfishness? Then why is "lawful good" Arie given a free pass when she constantly whines about her own problems? Why is Nalia given a free pass for just doing good because she feels guilty about her station? Good acts are not always selfless, and a selfish, but beneficial act, is not evil, at least in my opinion.
Maybe I just don't understand good and evil. Am I a psychopath as well? Or maybe I just glossed over something important, or maybe I'm just forgetful and the stories I presented above are inaccurate. I admit I haven't played either game in several years now. Or maybe I'm just confused because a lot of video games offer only comic evil vs. comic hero choices (regardless of the actual greater good/evil). Pokemon appear to be sentient. Do they deserve to be enslaved to 10-year-old children for life for entertainment purposes? Does this question even ever come up in the games (or the cartoons)? Or is the only "evil" in that universe the stealing of other people's slaves?
* Note that I don't consider prejudice to be intrinsically wrong, as long as it is adjusted when falsifying facts are made clear. None of Viconia's assailants really cared about the truth.
Note also that I always play good characters, and have real trouble playing evil characters. Even somewhat ambigous games like Tyranny make me uncomfortable. My BG parties always end up with 20 rep, even with Viconia in the party (she stays if your CH is high enough).
I'm not sure why I'm posting this; I must be really bored, in spite of having a million things to do (the least of which is a huge game backlog).