Evil play-through is hot trash. Failed to deliver or no effort was put into its making.

[50K]

Title. At act 3 now as a evil dark urge with only Minthara, Astarion, Shadowheart, Laezel, and Gale. I killed jaheira since I was already spoiled beforehand that her and minsc wont side with an evil dark urge. What a joke game is clearly one sided towards good playthroughs and punishs me for trying to rp as evil. And before you ask no I did not murder hobo everyone in sight. Games like SWTOR (Sith Lord or Fallen Jedi) or Mass Effect (Renegade Shephard) did a better job on evil playthroughs than this ♥♥♥♥. Also fyi I would have lost gale if I didnt know before hand cutting his hand off would make me lose him too as a companion. If I at least got more evil companions besides minthara I would at least have been slightly more satisfied with losing Karlach, Wyll, Minsc, Halsin, and Jaheira. Characters like Zrell or Nere would have been great opportunity for more evil companions to fill the void of the five I just ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ lost.

[Chaosolous]

My evil play through has been different enough where I’m not upset about it.

Would be nice if it was more fleshed out but I’m still seeing dialogue scenes I otherwise wouldn’t have if I wasn’t evil.

Which to me is the point. I get that being evil isolates, but on an evil playthrough I’m using evil versions (non redeemed) companions. I already saw the cutscenes for the good guys on my previous playthrough.

This time around I’m making Astarion evil evil and I’m making Shart embrace the more negative sides of their inner turmoil. Additionally I have Minthara this time. I get that the good companions don’t want to be around a psychopath, that makes narrative sense.

Evil is not as content rich as a neutral or good playthrough but I’m still doing plenty I otherwise wouldn’t have and have seen those reactions along the way.

Which was the point.

[OnlyOffensive]

for some reason alot of western rpgs associate "evil" playthrough with everything bad playthrough for luls, where you play as psycho. I think only decent evil story i remember was in pathfinder.

Basically they fail to deliver anything meaningful into it, like make you question is it evil or no or make some lawful evil route, which is not necessarily "bad".

Its hard to make villains look interesting in "open" game with choices and stuff, main problem being at some point game turns into some mess that misses all context from story and quests, i can say that because i played "good" and "bad" playthrough and everything was made for it. Like you get better insight on story, story cutscenes, more quests, everything is explained better and makes sense.

As i said "evil" playthrough only meant for luls, only positive is that you probably get to the end quicker

[votadc]

You aren't that punished except a couple of items (armor from Dammon, the potent robe from the bard). They just cut content. You can use hirelings they are just powerful as companions. The only companion more powerful than hirelings Is Astarion and only if you finish the quest with evil choices.

The fact Is that evil characters don't give you many quests. Also there are triggers: if you give Minthara the location to raid the Grove then Karlach Is hostile, if you murder the tiefling without talking with goblin leaders then you can recruit Karlach. She Is ok even if she Is the last survivor of act 1 and you murdered everyone else.

The evil quests are also things that you do in a good run anyway . You give boots of speed to the duergar that always die so you can get them back later, you do shar trial to deliver Nightsong to Ketheric (funny thing Is that if you free her she self-deliver to Ketheric) and killing Nightsong isn't even something suggested by evil npcs but a suggestion of a companion and also Is the most obvious way to remove Ketheric immortality.
In act 3 Gortash has everything under control except the brain so no quest at all but there Is good content for Durge.

[Boombastic]

Is the "Evil path" really so appealing? and why? (storywise, etc.)

I ask out of curiosity because in all my playthroughs I was always very curious to see several story combinations but, surprisingly, never the "evil path".
Maybe it simply doesn't match my personality, but I'm very surprised that, though being a very curious guy, I never had the urge to create such a TAV.

[★REM★]

mmmh.. i only play evil and LOVE It.

[❤N'wahCliffracer❤]

Evil playthrough is so unrewarding compared to a "good playthrough." That goes for both "evil" Tav and "evil" Durge. And I'm sick of people who say things like "hurr durr, evil has consequences." There's a difference between consequences to the character and consequences to the player.

Losing companions is a consequence to the character, but having less content is a consequence to the player rping them, which is utter ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥.

It's completely lacking nuance. Here's an example, my bard Durge: I redeemed him in act 3 and convinced Astarion not to ascend because I wanted a playthrough where they helped each other. What was irritating was in the beginning, I allowed Durge to go with his urges and be a nasty SOB. We raided the grove. So, I lose Halsin, Karlach, and Wyll (I barely ever use the goody-goodies anyway), okay fine whatever. But then we get into act 2 and my Durge didn't want to kill Astarion (I still hadn't decided if I was going to kill Isobel or not but the butler appeared--this is not how it unfolded in my other Durge playthrough).

So, then I have Astarion offering to help me resist the urge, and I'm thinking I'm going to roll with this--it's character building. So with Durge trying to be better, I wake up Art and figure there's some other way to lift the shadow curse, but no (an entire quest lost out on--that is a consequence to me: the player). And it just felt like a dead end of unfinished garbage. Just because my Durge was being a prick earlier on, doesn't mean he can't shift to a "better" path as the game progresses.

Ansur is another one someone could lose out on in an evil playthrough. Ravengard said nothing to me about the dragon in that playthrough. If I didn't already know about him from previous playthroughs, that's another quest gone: a consequence to the player.

You also miss out on good loot, but there's no alternative "evil" loot. Minthara isn't properly fleshed out as a companion. Those are consequences to both the character AND the player.

He Who Was would have been a great evil companion, imo.

And OP is correct, there are other games that handle an "evil" playthrough much better. I love this game, I have over 700hrs in it, but that doesn't mean I can't acknowledge the flaws in it. And this is a huge flaw.

[Pyromaiden]

My only complaint here is that Renegade Shepherd isn't "evil" and that's a point in ME's favor IMO.

The approach Mass Effect took to a morality system was, in my opinion, far superior to what other games have attempted. "Paragon" was less about doing the right thing and more about playing within the confines of the rules and showing demonstrating patience and fairness, whereas "Renegade" was less about cruelty or self-interest and more about flexibility and pragmatism with a dash of ruthlessness. Labeling them "good" and "evil" respectively doesn't quite fit - in D&D terms they'd be better described as "Lawful" and "Chaotic" respectively.

It's a unique approach that, to my awareness, no one else has ever really tried to take. Most other games with morality systems tend to just go for a generic black-and-white morality. SWTOR (as well as KOTOR and it's sequel) are good examples of this, as is Fallout 3. New Vegas did this a little better than FO3 by adding in a dash of gray alongside harder moral choices.

Otherwise I can agree that BG3 is underwhelming when playing an evil character. The game adequately accounts for more virtuous or even mercenary plays but is lackluster with evil-oriented content. The story is enrich, engaging, and complex and I love all of that but it's not perfect and on that point I will concede it underperforms.

Originally posted by Valar_Morghulis:

Minathara is evil yes but more in a way of being power hungry and seeks revenge , you should show her strength thats it, she is not really fleshed out IMO.

If you take her with you for a while and listen to her you can see she is just another running "Evil" cliche.

"I lost everything i gave them everything now i want revenge and i am strong"
<.<

You are clearly unfamiliar with her character. Minthara is not in the least a cliche; not at all.

First, there's nothing intrinsically evil about wanting revenge. Her motivations are entirely fair and I'm not even sure what you're complaining about - she was manipulated, abused, and basically enslaved. I'd want revenge too in her position.

Second, she is an extremely deep and pragmatic character. Her morality is clearly skewed against common convention but this doesn't mean she's a mustache-twirling villain because she simply isn't. As a result of her upbringing her worldview is entirely different from most other companions. She is incredibly fleshed out and that's what makes her character so interesting and popular. What she lacks is content to further explore her personality and worldview with more depth because as it stands the only way to truly explore that depth is if you're romancing her.

[Big Boss]

Are there any games with decent evil playthroughs? Dont think I've ever had a good one before

[Maj. Grumpy]

I just started a multi player 'evil' (no dark urge) and we're having a great time. Gosh, it's almost as if things like this are SUBJECTIVE or something.

(Loved watching the goblins attack the Grove.)

[Toaster Maximus]

I always play my urge runs has NE not mindless CE since bhaasl in life was an assassin and is dnd alignment is not chaotic evil anymore and was not original just a bad guy and the coldest of the dead three oddly, my urge runs typically have him side with the tieflings cause goblins are dirty unrurly creatures and not worth the time to use properly, then when the option comes in act 2 to pile the bodies, I make sure everyone feels nice and safe in last light then out comes the knife, no npc leaves my party and depending on sheath even get another druid

True evil waits and lurks

[votadc]

BTW before Jahiera and Minsc in act 3 NOBODY leaves if you do evil Durge. Jaheira joins you even if you kill Isobel. Even Wyll and Karlach don't care. You have to avoid a couple of triggers that don't involve Durge.

[Toaster Maximus]

"Villains that twirl their mustaches are easy to spot but those that clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged." The rule to live by when rolling has evil in bg 3

[Toaster Maximus]

Originally posted by votadc:

BTW before Jahiera and Minsc in act 3 NOBODY leaves if you do evil Durge. Jaheira joins you even if you kill Isobel. Even Wyll and Karlach don't care. You have to avoid a couple of triggers that don't involve Durge.

Wyil and the the one horned tiefling just stood there while I brutalized the strange ox has urge

[Valar_Morghulis]

Originally posted by Toaster Maximus:

"Villains that twirl their mustaches are easy to spot but those that clothe themselves in good deeds are well camouflaged." The rule to live by when rolling has evil in bg 3

Bro is RPing IRL
calm tf down

[Fitness Lauch]

Originally posted by OneDayIFedOnATreeFrog ♥:

You also miss out on good loot, but there's no alternative "evil" loot.

I agree with most of what you said but this is simply not true: Shar's spear of night and bhaalist armor are two extremely overpowered and build defining items which you can't get on a good playthrough. You'd also miss the +1 stat from the hag hair if you do a pure good playthrough. If you push Astarion into the evil direction he'll become by far the strongest character for a monk. Stealing from merchants is also an extremely rewarding mechanic.

I think that it's fully intended that you don't get the most out of your chars (from a minmax point of view) if you stick to pure good or pure evil.