Jon Irenicus and villain problem in Larian games

[Alleluja2000]

Combat, feeling, gamplay, graphic etc. aside.
There is yet another thing that makes me a wonder about BG3. It's villain.

So even the people who dislike BG Bhaalspawn saga for whatever reason admit that "bad guys" in both games were fantastic. Especially Jon Irenicus.

Sarevok for majority of BG1 was just a "scary dude in big armor" but plot twist at the end of the game made him really interesting. It was further fleshed out in the sequel where you'd had a chance to talk to him and in ToB - made him a party member.
There is was revealed how deep his character arc really is. His torment and his ambitions that, eventually, failed him. Great stuff.

But then there is a NPC that is imo the best written villain in cRPG history. Jon Irenicus.
A fallen elven wizard who's as powerful as he's cruel. The fact that amazing pacing and narrative structure of BG2 allows for multiple encounters with him before the finale is amazing. The twist with Joshimo, the fact that we can (but we don't have to) find Irenicus diary and see how deep his madness goes. His equaly crazy sister and her own motivations - All of that, plus fantastic voice acting, made him soooo freakin cool.

He's also not your typical "Gandal-like" wizard (that's Elminster;P) - Irenicus is tall, muscular, he's wearing this weird cool armor and overall his design is fresh and something that players don't see very often.

Even in, not so good, Siege of Dragonspear Beamdog managed to made him even more interesting showing him as puppet master. A real treat under the noses of others.


And then we have Larian and their history with poor villains.

Credit where it's due. Some of the side villians in D:OS2 showed a lot of promise. Like the Doctor who tormented Lohse. The problem is that even that character is not really fleshed out.
Then the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ Braccus rex - Honestly? I've played D:OS and D:OS2 twice and I still don't really know what the hell is his motivation. Especially in D:OS2 - I mean why he's even there?!
Of ALL characters in D:OS2 the ONLY one I can remember as interesting was Malady - sure she's not a villain but she's interesting and mysterious enough get my attention. And what about her? No idea because no matter what ending you choose her plotline simply... ends.



So conclusion - I have no hopes for a villain as good as Jon Irenicus. Larian games always had ok'ish writing and somewhat forgettable but nice enough characters. But I'd love to see them at least trying to attempt writing a character with clear motivations but complex personality. Someone what is both charismatic but terryfing at the same time. And MY GOD please... Don't make the main villain a comic relief. I know Larian loves to make "funny ha ha" characters but the results are more cringeworthy than funny.

Anyway - those are just my 2 cents of course.

[Lock]

I don't think any game will ever top Jon Irenicus. Not even if the old Black Isle team would get back together and make Baldur's Gate 3 with the exact same writing team.

[Beardpick]

I think what made Irenicus a good villain, is that on your first play through, you didn't really understand his motivations until the very end. He was this presence that exuded power and was act at will with no restraints. It's not until you get through Ust Natha and make it to Suldanessellar that you finally comprehend that he's attempting to ascend to godhood for the second time.

I hope with the Illithids in BG3 that Larian is able to capture the 'Lovecraftian otherwordliness' that they exude and put it to good use in the plot.

[Dr.Gloom]

For me, one of the best types of villains(not just related to RPG genre) are the ones you can relate to in some way. When on some level, you can justify their vile intention. But makes you wonder what the hell happened, what pushed them over the edge, and the scary part is, would you act the same?

[iemander]

Honestly, the villains in BG1/2 weren't really that great. They just really fit that typical power fantasy badass. People just love badass characters that can kick ♥♥♥♥, and then have you as the hero defeat them, feeling even more awesome because of it. Irenicus did have a great voice actor however.

But that still makes them pretty "cheap" narratively, especially Sarevok is pretty simple in BG. Only getting really fleshed out in TOB (When he's actually not a villain).

Then I thought the villains in KOTOR or DAO (Flemeth/Loghain) were much better

If that's a goal for Larian, to create such a character, I don't see why they shouldn't be able to.

Honestly, you don't really need a villain. Look at planescape torment

[Brother PaciFist]

The best fun i had when playing an evil campaign in a nonlinear videogame. Unfortunately most games are not allowing nuanced evil deeds, but only saturday morning cartoon badassery. There are a handful of games that allow you to be the bad guy.

Neverwinter Nights 2 Mask of the Betrayer was excellent in this regard. Honorable mention to planescape torment, tyranny, mass effect, Morrowwind assassins guild quest, fallout 1&2, Arcanum of Magic & Obscura, Vampire the Masquerade, Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain, Kenshi, Fable series and of cause S.Rance, Rhimworld. Excellent fun.

Some rogue games like TOME have pretty badass evil classes.

Have fun.

[Ryllharu]

As for DOS2, I thought Dallis was pretty great as a villain. She shows up repeatedly, you get hints in Fort Joy that don't play out until the final act the blacksmith that can remove your collar has dialogue that she grew up with Dallis and mentioned she abruptly changed...because she *isn't* the human Dallis., she's frenzied and mad, obnoxious and repeatedly in your way. She also has a lot of development delivered through dialogue with other characters like Tarquin or her cat, and the journals and letters littered throughout the game. The unfortunate part is you only get the full scope of her character when you play a specific Origin character.

The biggest issue is that *no-one* is as compelling as a villain played by David Warner! I agree with Lock that Irenicus is one of the better written villains of all time, in a huge swath of media, not just games.

Larian wasn't quite as direct with their villains, but so few writing teams manage with such brutal effectiveness as Black Isle did. Early Bioware comes close with KOTOR, DA:O, and ME1.

Larian spread out their villains in DOS2. Sadly that makes them all a bit less effective than one incredible terror across the whole game.

[deltago]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Finding Irenicus' diary? What? Where the heck is that at?

Also, the reason why Baldur's Gate might have such great writing, is because it actually had a series of novels tied with it. And like with many novelizations, its goes into greater detail, or has some differences than what we see in game.

For example, Bodhi actually has romantic feelings towards the Bhaalspawn protagonist, which may explain why she prefers to toy with you, rather than simply outright kill you. Unfortunately, being undead has corrupted her mentality, so the only way she can express her desires is... not exactly healthy, let's say.

Please tell me you are trolling about the novels...

AND the novels were written after the games were released, and took a lot of liberties with the story.

That's one of the reasons why I want Larian to troll us and say Minsc is in the game and you can find the red-haired inn keeper tending bar somewhere.

[D-Black Catto]

I'm sick of villains being "mad", I found various throne of baal contenders in expansion to bg2 far more believable and likable than Irenicus

[Ryllharu]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Originally posted by Ryllharu:

The biggest issue is that *no-one* is as compelling as a villain played by David Warner! I agree with Lock that Irenicus is one of the better written villains of all time, in a huge swath of media, not just games.

What is it about Irenicus that made him well written and stand out to you? Looking back on it, it seems like he would fit right at home in a typical shonen anime. A ridiculously OP villain, who somehow manages to singlehandedly take over a prison designed specifically to contain spell casters. And he wants to become a god because... just for ♥♥♥♥♥ and giggles, I guess? We never really got an explanation for why he wanted to achieve divinity.

You are a means to an end to him. Your characters are the heroes of the Sword Coast, two of you are divine spawn, and he thinks nothing of you.
"The curse that was wrought against Bodhi and I has ceased, and yours has begun. You will wither, you will wane, and you will die." // "I bid you farewell, Child of Bhaal. We shall not meet again."
But his dismissive attitude at others is the least of what makes him great. The shonen anime part.

Everything he does, or the inconsistencies you seen from his laboratory in the BG2 tutorial map onward finally all knit together once you see what they did to him.
"I have tried to recreate it, to spark it anew in my memory, but it is gone... a hollow, dead thing. For years, I clung to the memory of it. Then the memory of the memory. And then nothing. The Seldarine took that from me, too. I look upon you and feel nothing. I remember nothing but you turning your back on me, along with all the others. Once my thirst for power was everything."

The elven gods tore everything they could from him and Bodhi. They thought it would make him repent for his arrogance, and they were wrong. The two both tried over and over to fill the void. Bohdi went one way, Jon went the other, each trying to reclaim their longevity, their detached view of the world, all that makes them...THEM.

He's just like your character. A stolen essence, the thing that made you special (divine power or elf-ness as a whole). And you both want it back.

A good villain is sympathetic, understandable and relatable. At the beginning of the game he appears to be this all powerful, all knowing, manipulative mastermind. But he isn't. He just has more practice. He is in directly conflict with you because you both have the same goals, saving your family from the tragedy that's befallen them (Imoen and Bohdi). Reclaiming your birthright, and revenge against who did it to you.

Your player and Irenicus are mirrored.

Larian needs to write villains who have goals that directly compete with that of your party and they're off to a really strong start.

edit: It's a 20 year old game, but better safe than sorry.

[marv]

Serevock was a Saturday morning cartoon villain and Irenicus was only carried by the actor that played him. A lesser performance and he'd be on the same level as Ammon Jerro from Neverwinter Nights 2.

[D-Black Catto]

Originally posted by marv:

Serevock was a Saturday morning cartoon villain and Irenicus was only carried by the actor that played him. A lesser performance and he'd be on the same level as Ammon Jerro from Neverwinter Nights 2.

I didnt consider ammon a villian

[BloodDragon]

LOL Jon irenicus was boring, Saverok had zero personality in BG1

[chrstnmonks]

Saverok and Jon Irenicus where okay for their time. But they are still pretty basic.

[Coldhands]

Originally posted by BloodDragon:

LOL Jon irenicus was boring, Saverok had zero personality in BG1

Well, Saravok is barely even in BG1. BG1's writing is extremely slight by today's standards. Saravok is only really a character in Throne of Bhaal.

[Target]

Irenicus was a solid villian but nothing truely exceptional, he was good to passable in every way a villian should be but there is nothing that makes him unique. I will say he was better then anything in DOS2 that had no villain, or depending on how you look at it had 6 or 7 unrelated villians, but thats mainly because DOS2's mains story was kind of a mess. People praise the game all the time but notice they almost never talk about the main story, and right fully so, what was praise worthy was never in the plot.