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).

There's only one thing you need to take in mind about Viconia: she has the capacity to change. A truly evil being has no such capacity. To have such capacity you must have doubts in and about your views, of which Viconia has many. She acts tough because she's had to survive that way all of her life. Most of what she spouts, in my opinion, is a front: it's all she knows, but deep down, as i said, she doubts. You can see clues of this in some of her conversations.

So, is she evil? Yes, but not at heart.

She's a member of the matriarchal drow society where men are used as cattle. What can be more evil than that?
One male Drow has broken free and is fighting the good fight of masculism along the Sword Coast.

Vicionia might be polite, but that doesn't really reflect her world view. She is still drow, and views non-drow as inferior creatures. Whenever the PC recruits an NPC, he has two options: 1, tell the NPC you are rescuing Imoen, or 2, tell the NPC you want revenge. If you tell Vicionia the former, she can't wrap her head around why you would want to save Imoen. A sign that she lacks empathy.

She is loyal to the PC because she has a pack mentality. When you learn about her past, you'll understand why she feels the need to bond with those around her.

I'm not really sure what you mean by giving certain characters a free pass. Aerie isn't selfish, she is like that because she is traumatized.

There is a phrase by Saint Bernard of Clairvaux: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions". This can be interpreted in two ways. The first is where someone genuinely wants to do something good, but ultimately damages anything or anyone around him. The second interpretation is where someone does a good deed, but it is really done because it profits the person in some way. Neither of these apply to Nalia. Nothing is damaged because of her actions and her crusade is not part of some larger, more sinister purpose. Her dilemma is that she wants to help the poor, but can't truly empathize with them because she's from a different world.

I'm afraid I disagree. The D&D universe has stories of fallen heroes. There are even specific monsters who's backstories revolve around this, like death knights and the arch devil Baalzebul. If the righteous can be corrupted, it's not that much of a stretch logically to say the wicked can be redeemed.

Well, given that she does get stat bonuses for being drow, she's not entirely wrong. Given that she's lived her entire life among them, with no dissenting voices, it is quite telling that she decided to escape in the first place. People may be a product of their environment, but they can change. Apparently being a drow is all that defines her. I expect that you would have been a willing participant in the crowd that wanted to burn her alive. There are three things I don't believe in: pure evil, pure good, and the inability of a sentient creature to change. Where did you get this? Did you read a different story than I did? Maybe this is one of those details I glossed over when I played, or maybe you're just saying this because you want that to be her motivation. I guess that agreeing to the geas was just part of her pack mentality, yes? These characters are called "Good". I'm not denying that their actions are mostly good, I'm denying that this is due to some altruistic internal belief system. They have selfish reasons for what they do, but they are never called on it. I'm not saying they're evil, either. I'm saying that D&D alignment is stupid and simplistic.

She's a good example of the "nature vs. nurture" debate. She grew up in a society that supports some pretty evil philosophies. So, the baseline she has been exposed to of what constitutes "normal" behavior is an evil one, and it has an influence on her own actions. I would not agree with her being called a "psychopath" though. A psychopath is more of the "some men just want to watch the world burn" type of personality (like Xzar or Tiax). She's not necessarily an evil person by nature, but she does and says some things that lean that way due to the influences of the environment she was brought up in.

Caveat: I've never taken Viconia in my party, so I'm unfamiliar with her specific lines. I don't know whether I'd call her, a psychopath, since I don't have personal experience with her.

That said, I'm going to question some of your statements here.

"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)."

1) There are 3 different party members that can have an alignment shift in BG2 + ToB. Also, there are specific rules about paladins and rangers Falling (though the BG2 system is very simplistic). A sentient creature is NOT bound by some life-long moral alignment; as I understand it, alignment is more meant to reflect a character's general perspective on what is and is not acceptable. That can change over time, and their alignment changes as a result of that shift.

2) The D&D universe does have the concept of absolute morality; if you start from a point of "there is no absolute morality" when judging things in that universe, then you are likely to see problems. I'm not saying there aren't inconsistencies in-universe, just that applying some other standard is very likely to see issues.

-----

The drow race as a whole is evil. A quick trip through the drow city in BG2 seems like a good sampling, what with the slaving, torture, abuse, backstabbing, and general lack of caring for others. Drow also tend to be powerful. So when a surface worlder sees a drow, they are going to be jumping straight to "end the thread before it ends us!" pretty quickly, because drow tend to do Bad Things to surface worlders just as soon as it is opportune to do them. I do find it kind of hard to blame the vigilantes who want to string up the drow that they discovered was walking about the city undercover; I still murdered the crap out of them, but in retrospect their fears weren't entirely unfounded. The surface elves have a particular hatred for the drow (and vice versa), so them binding up this drow before it can wreck them (like a horde of other drow are trying to do Right Now) does make some sense.

Again, I can't fully comment on whether I'd think Viconia is indeed evil, since I haven't had her in the party. From what little I've seen of her dialogue though, she has little in the way of compassion for others, instead being perfectly happy to throw them under the bus if it would help her situation. Such an attitude is much more in line with Evil than with Good.

Viconia is a Chaotic Good in my heart and will always stay like that.


First, about alignments: They give the general idea about the instinct of a person, how they would react in certain situations where they have the chance. Viconia is considered evil by BG because she chose the murder people when she was mistreated. That's ironic considering the number of people YOU kill in the game.

Before I got familiar with D&D alignment system, I would consider myself Chaotic Good in real life. Those games actually showed me that I am a Lawful Good person, who prefer to play by the book. No more "rogue Engerek" :) Weird how a game can change your perspective about yourself.

About Viconia, she is a Drow. Which is an evil community where being evil is a virtue as long as you do not get caught. She was raised like that, believing that she is better than men and other races. When you are told enough times that you are good, you start to think you are good.

She changes along the way if you are patient. I could never finish BG2 but I always choose Viconia over Jahiera. Viconia is a prime example of my theory: that morality is, in fact, vectorial and has a direction which can only be understood by examining where it came from.

And TV is full of 'dead' characters that are written 'back to life' just because...

When presented with indisputable facts countering my beliefs, I change my mind. Permanently. Instantly. I may be uncomfortable with the truth, but I don't deny it. I'd give concrete examples, but I'd rather not confide in a total stranger. Isn't that true of all social creatures (other than asocial introverts like myself, of course)? In what way is she special? You still haven't answered how her agreeing to being magically bonded as my slave for the rest my/her life even after I expressly said no conforms to her "pack mentality". Just because they do what they do to satisfy their own desires doesn't mean someone else has to be hurt in the process. True. Apparently taking part in a drinking contest makes you evil (or at least no longer good) for life (ToEE). When you look at Viconia's character sheet, it says "Evil" right there, plain as day. I'm not talking about what the game, or the D&D universe, expects me to think (or maybe I am, since the game designers wrote Viconia as they did).

The game expects me to think that the Lawful Good Paladin threatening me if I don't help him is morally superior to the Neutral Evil Cleric of an Evil God who does nothing more than ask for help and explain herself. Note that the Paladin didn't "fall" after attacking me, either. Alcohol is much more evil than murder.

What paladin are we talking about? If you're referring to BG1, I was under the impression that the guy was simply some generic (though very skilled) Flaming Fist guard member. A fighter, not a paladin.

I assume Ajantis, who is a whiny ass.

Huh. I don't recall Ajantis having any real intersection with Viconia, nor him issuing threats to CHARNAME.

For that matter, I don't recall him being particularly whiny. More like a somewhat excitable, but not too bright, puppy; all ready to go out and do good deeds, and disappointed if you decide to part ways.