Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 11 2013, 08:33 PM

Do you enjoy being evil ? Overall do you enjoy characters being evil or are you just opposed / dont enjoy the idea or playing of it

I love going to the dark side , it gives a lot just like being good does.

Also : do you think there comes a "point of no return" or can any character turn around

Do you think being a vampire makes you "bad" ?

And which people in the game / acts do you consider truely evil?

Posted by: Lopov Feb 11 2013, 09:06 PM

I usually switch from good to evil... if my current charater is good, then my next will probably be evil and so forth... I'm currently at the evil side and having a lot of fun.

My character - Falador - has passed the point of no return way back if there ever was any and I don't see him going to be bright side of life. He enjoys being a Dark child, a messenger of death, a servant of Sithis. There's nothing else he can do.

I don't think vampirism makes one necessarily bad.

Truly evil - most members of the Dark Brotherhood definitely, especially Gogron, he even admits killing a child.
Apart from them none comes immediately at mind, at least not truly evil.

Posted by: mirocu Feb 11 2013, 09:10 PM

No. Being evil for the sake of being evil is something I don´t understand and don´t like. To me there´s no point and I could not play such a character and enjoy it.

Lothran may not be a saint but he is a good character who helps out when he feels it´s needed and if he can. Of course, he doesn´t help evil characters

Posted by: King Of Beasts Feb 11 2013, 09:16 PM

I enjoy being evil when I do decide to torment the citizens of Cyrodiil.




My character isn't completely evil, but he's no messiah either. But during those brief moments if being evil, Westley stops and savors the suffering and grief around him(just kidding, the farthest my character has gone to being "evil" is stealing stuff.

My character isn't a vampire, but being a vampire doesn't mean that one is automatically "bad"

Truly evil? Some of the vampire characters in game. Mannimarco and Mancar Cameron are pretty evil too. Other than that? Nope.

Posted by: Lady Saga Feb 11 2013, 09:18 PM

Depends on the character. I've had more 'good' characters than "evil" ones. Matter of fact, back in my tabletop days, I only played good or semi-good types. It was only in 2009 with http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad208/xenaclone/Photo-0051.jpg that I got the true urge to play a dark character.

I gotta say I do enjoy playing evil characters. This is mostly because I get to do things I would never dream of doing in real-life.



Anybody can "turn around", but in my experience (in real-life) it's not common to see somebody who's totally mean/evil turn all-a-sudden into a saint, or vice versa. I did have one character (http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad208/xenaclone/Image012.jpg) who was mildly bad (she was a rogue fighter with a mild habit of stealing) try to "do good". She took up Knights of the Nine. But her habits were so ingrained, she kept having to redeem herself during KotN. She tried to do good, but could not completely give up her old ways, in other words.

What's weird is my Paladin (http://i936.photobucket.com/albums/ad208/xenaclone/armor_stand.jpg) was a "good" person from the very start, and I NEVER had to force myself not to steal or commit assaults (etc.) when Dyan's game was active.



Essentially it does, unless the vamp never ever drinks blood or steals health from another person. I define "evil" as the desire, means, and habit of going against the wills of others, by the way.



I will have to think about this one. A lot of NPCs have a mixture of both good and evil. I don't consider most bandits and other such NPCs to be truly evil, for instance. They don't just attack us unprovoked, for instance; instead they often give us a chance to leave them alone.

Posted by: Darkness Eternal Feb 11 2013, 10:04 PM

My characters are usually necromancers or vampires or werewolves. I hate playing as noble characters. For some reason it gives me a bad feeling.

My vampire characters don't consider themselves evil at all. Because they know they need to kill to sustain themselves and survive, and it's just a matter of life and death. They know innocent people die but it is a price that must be paid. Everything dies, and it's just time and method.

Do you consider a lion is evil for stalking a man and killing him? Or a serpent waiting at the bottom of the ocean to snatch up a swimming fish? Or a wolf striking the weakest prey or the diseased one? Vampires are not so different. If they don't feed they become feral or lose their sanity and even in some cases, may fall into a coma. Of course, there are some who are extreme and cruel who feed on people while they are still alive and suffering for prolonged periods of time such as the vampires in Castle Volkihar. Also, they keep people as prisoners in their cattle cells.

My Cyrodiilic vampires are the same but less cruel. They feed on sleeping people, or seduce them into a trance/hypnotic state before draining them. In my story they have political power, and can easily transfer criminals and prisoners from jails to other locations so they can do what the Whet-Fang clan does, which is put a victim into a deep coma where they can never awake, and slowly the vampire can harvest blood from them like spiders do sometimes. They own blood-farms composed of criminals and the general threat to society. Not because they want to be heroes, but because it's more efficient to kidnap people who no one will miss than say, a noble's daughter or a prince-rich-boy.

Janus Hassildor feeds. He says he embraces his vampirism and even refers to it as a "gift" if he gives it to the player(PC only). He has the Pale Lady in his dungeon harvesting prisoners' blood to give to Rona. I am sure he also drinks blood of the criminals or sometimes his own servants while they sleep. Sybille Stentor also feeds on prisoners.

On werewolf characters: Ah. They are much the same, except they don't go around kidnapping people. They are literally wolves twice a month or on certain days and will have to hunt people to survive. There is a whole philosophical and moral issue here. Ever read "Posting of the Hunt" in the ES games? It somehow ties in with the aspect of hunting.

"In the highest aesthetic realization of the ritual, the ecstatic rapture of the kill is balanced by the Huntsman's identification with the sadness and despair of the Innocent Quarry. As in pieces the body of the innocent Hare is torn, the Huntsman reflects on the tragic imbalances of power and the cruel injustices of the world."

The truth is the world is inbalanced. There is violence everywhere. and not even the innocent can escape its wrath. Tamriel is even called "The Arena" because it is so violent. For my hard-boiled werewolves, they understand that Lycanthropy has a price. Hircine is the Daedric Lord of the Hunt, obviously, and his sphere shows no mercy to even children. Hircine is also known as "The Sacrifice of Mortals", and it's no coinscedence he hunts down creatures that represent purity such as the unicorn in Oblivion, the Spirit Bear in Bloodmoon and the White Stag in Skyrim. Or how his rituals of curing Lycanthropy has to have a sacrifice of flesh and innocence.

Werewolves are a whole different story because they sometimes have no control over their lupine form. And their natural instinct and bloodlust, guided by Hircine's power, are driven to hunting specifically men and women and children. Because in both hunting them down and devouring them, werewolves are sustaining themselves with the blood and flesh of their prey. That's why in Daggerfall and Bloodmoon you lost health periodically if you didn't feed. Or in SKyrim where only the blood of people can heal you. So they are hunting people down to survive and because it is their instinct. And that, in and of itself, is not entirely evil.

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 11 2013, 10:43 PM

Well i had a character - stacy , and she was so interesting . She changed my belief that there is a "no turning back" point , she was very dramatic.



We started off as a young , pretty and optimistic young lady , decked out with silver claymore , full chainmail and the blessing of the nine divines..she was a textbook pilgrim , and my orginal intention had been for her to go through the KOTN questline

we got to anvil , the one thing she needed before her pilgrimage was a white stallion - 4000 gold!

She spent over two months in anvil working steady routines with 4 jobs AND juggling quests and free time as well . She worked as a bar maid + lived at the flowing bowl . worked as a lighthouse keeper , a cleaner for the inventius's and had a monday/saturday job at the counts arms . her free day was sundas , usally spent questing or relaxing

It was hard work , but oddly satisfying , slowly she made it and got the horse

But by the time she had her pureness had been dimmed , she had been degraded by sailors and the working class life . had done things she would of prior to arriving unacceptable , i sensed a change in her.

After that we went to the gold horse courier , and did a half-dozen jobs there . hard work but the pay was decent. But then , whilst on a inn job to the fargyll in , her stallion was savaged by a boar..suddenly it all felt so worthless ...the horse was dead barely a week after purchase.

It completly unhinged her , she went nutty for a while , she continued on foot , and when she got there ? a massacre ensured , seven people were left dead , 2 locked themselves in there room , begged for mercy but she just slaughtered them . It actually disturbed me , it was that violent.

After that she got so drunk she almost died , and ended up walking along the gold road drinking from a wine bottle...it was a very powerful scene ..i felt her sorrow and shock

She was picked up by a forester and slapped in irons and served a long sentance in anvil jail , when she got out she went to the prophet asking for a new map...she didnt get it

so she went over to the dark side, she signed up for the dark brotherhood . She got far in , enjoyed it , but the final straw came at "whodunnit" . She couldnt kill nels or the breton woman . So she unlocked the door and they all fled to highrock , where they lived the rest of their days out as happy nobles..

but like i said , she went from bad to evil to saint to good . It was a rollercoaster but finally she renounced her dark ways , intense character .

Posted by: Lopov Feb 11 2013, 10:48 PM

That's interesting story about Stacy, flowerboom, but did you use some mods for her roleplay or was it mostly your imagination?

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 11 2013, 10:52 PM

Thank you! Nobody hardly ever says that!

No ,i do use mods but that is all creative roleplay ie i would go to the counts arms , wait - "work" - for five hours , then add money through the console . It took a long time but i did it legitimatly .

And your writing is great I love writing about summermist manner but your POV of neville ? Blew it out of the water for me .

Posted by: Lopov Feb 11 2013, 10:56 PM

Cool, how come that I didn't remember that before? Perhaps in one of future playthroughs.



Neville was the most fun to write from his perspective because he was the most intelligent. Or so he thought.

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 11 2013, 11:05 PM

I have always thought it would be funny if somebody wrote it but every guest was trying to bed them , so you get neville just happening to patrol your bed at night , and the old bat just happening to be to scared to sleep alone at night

Posted by: Lady Saga Feb 12 2013, 12:56 AM

I disagree (sorry!) Animals don't have any sort of concept of what they are doing when they attack and kill, so far as if this is right or not, they are merely surviving. Good and evil does not apply to them (from their perspective) because they are not able to think and rationalize like intelligent beings are.

A wolf sees a rabbit. It's not going to stop and think "well, this is gonna hurt the rabbit if I eat it. So maybe I should not eat it". No, they can't even conceive of any of this. They merely react, and employ their strategies, which are their instincts.

An intelligent being (including a vampire) has a choice. They know what they are doing causes harm to others. Most of the time, they don't care, of course. Now there are also some vampires that don't have this super sort of intelligence. I've read about these in various books from Anne Rice to Stephen King: these vamps are more animalistic types, not much different from wolves. They merely react and survive.

But the typical vampire we see in the game? Evil. These vamps have a choice to not drink blood ever. It will not kill them to stay "dry". In fact, it makes them stronger if they avoid drinking blood (assuming they stay out of sunlight). But my new vampire character? She is evil, and I don't have problem admitting this

Posted by: Darkness Eternal Feb 12 2013, 02:22 AM

Vampires are products of Daedra, and Daedra are not evil. They are considered evil by mortals, but it doesn't make them evil. I knew someone was going to bring up the intelligence debate. We had it back in the Dawnguard sections of the Bethesda forum.

Vampires have to feed just like everything else. If we humans stopped eating, we would die, wouldn't we? Or suffer from hunger. When people are hungry, they do insane things. Some people have been known to even commit cannibalism when food was scarce.

They have to constantly drink blood. Every week. If they don't, they do become stronger, but of course they sacrifice their appearance. Like the ones from Cyrodiil. If they walked around with fangs on display with a pale face looking like they just rose from the grave, people will kill them or attack them. There is no law in the Elder Scrolls that protects vampires from harm. No legal decree or document. It makes sense for some of them want to blend in to do their daily thing, that's why some of them feed to survive in society.

Now, of course, it goes into a deeper level such as sanity. When a vampire is blood-starved, some go feral. They don't have control over their frenzy and of will attack people without second though in an uncontrollable state of orgiastic abandon. So which is worse? Feeding and killing using seductive methods to calm the victim's mind(far less malicious) or ripping out their throats?

They can't simply choose not to drink blood. It's like a werewolf with the normal strain of Lycanthropy trying to choose not to transform under the full moon. They live off blood. If they don't, they may slip into a coma.

"The worst effect, of course, had to be my blood lust. My hunger would gnaw at me, and any wounds I suffered would not heal no matter how much I rested."-vampires of Illiac Bay.

"Try as I might, I cannot free myself. I cannot breach the doors! If I don't feed soon, I feel I will go mad.-Journal of Lord Lovidicus.

Vampires don't need morality to apply to them because they aren't anchored by concepts of good or evil. They are predators and mortals are often made their prey. It is what it is. Of course, people may consider them evil for that, which in my opinion(sorry ;P) is subjective. It is all relative. One man's good is another man's evil. Vice versa. I don't think vampires are evil because they kill to survive. Preserving themselves in society and by not falling into a coma or going into madness is a form of survival.

Posted by: Lady Saga Feb 12 2013, 03:14 PM

Yes we would, be we do not have to subsist on killing other beings nowadays just to survive. We don't have to factory farm (which I consider to be evil), we don't have to torture animals and make them live in pens or cages, and force-feed them just so we can continue to work our little jobs, drive our little cars, and play our little videogames when the day is over. And go to Costco.. .... all the trivial things we do in life. Some animals are being tortured and die just so we can continue to do all these little things. It's not right.

I don't really wanna get into a whole big debate on this because I like you DE, and I don't want this to turn into an argument like it would (for sure) at Beths' forums. I'm a vegetarian though, and one of the reasons I became a vegetarian is because one day I asked myself if I could take the life of a chicken, or a cow, or a pig, etc. I cannot do this. To me, such animals should have just as much of a chance to live a full life as we humans do.

I hear (see) what you're saying on vampires, and you make some very good points (as I expected you would) but we'll have to agree to disagree on this one! I just see vamps as essentially evil beings. And I admit that I enjoy being "evil" when I'm with mine. I actually wish Bethesda would have stepped up the reality of being a vampire a bit. I want to see NPCs struggle at the moment of blood-drinking, and get all awkward (and fearful) when my Stage 4 vampire rolls into town!

....I enjoy being a vamp with Mycharonna, but I dislike it as well in certain ways. I'm finding myself "RPing" certain moments a little too much, just like I did in Oblivion. Sigh.

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 12 2013, 08:30 PM

YES, lady saga is in a lore war!

I dont have time now but i will read both of your arguments later , no doubt dropping my own bombshell into the mess.

Posted by: mirocu Feb 12 2013, 08:42 PM

Sometimes what is evil can be hard to identify. I´m a hunter myself but I really hate how they treat animals in modern farms and factories to provide us humans with food. They don´t really need to do like they do and they only do it to make as much money as they can in the shortest amount of time.

Greed. I consider that to be evil if it goes too far. My greed for finishing my game collection is something else, hopefully

Posted by: Lady Saga Feb 13 2013, 12:24 AM

It's not an argument and it's not a war. It's a discussion.

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 13 2013, 03:08 PM

Yes and no

your suggesting that we get all our meat from hunting ? Thats logistically impossible .

Its the only way they can feed the demand , think how much meat is consumed per sec and how much hunting could produce . Look im not digging you im a conflicted meat - eater myself but realistically it not possible .

So i think saying "they dont really need to do like they do" is , for you prehaps , viable but for a couple billion people living in cities wanting meat ?( to much , greedy chops) i think you know the answer

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 13 2013, 03:09 PM

dont get sniffy , its just a figure of speech

"lore war" - thought you would of got it

Posted by: ghastley Feb 13 2013, 04:19 PM

The game is really missing the "unintentionally evil" characters that you get in real life. The dictators who take control to try and create order from the chaos they perceived, or to rescue the people from the previous misguided hero. They think they're doing good, but it doesn't work out that way.

There's plenty of opportunity for that. Mazoga, for example could easily have turned into a major vigilante obsessively hunting down the former members of Mogens Wind-Shifter's gang, or anyone she suspects has a connection. Let her get a suspicion that Count Caro was bankrolling them, and see what happens.

Terentius Regulus could have been that kind of character, trying to rid Bravil of the Skooma trade, but instead persecuting the group he mistakenly thinks is responsible.

That kind of character gives the player choices in how to deal with them. They can simply eliminate them, or they can attempt to redirect them along their original "good" path they strayed from. But choices make for more complicated quests, which is why they probably don't get produced.

The DB quest line could do with a bit more of that ambiguity, too. It starts off well enough, with any friendly fire accident triggering LL's visit, and the first victim being a rapist/murderer who's got away with it, but it was written for the intentionally evil character to find he's unintentionally doing good, instead of the other way round. I think it would have been possible to have it work both ways, with just a little more effort.

Posted by: Lady Saga Feb 13 2013, 04:24 PM

Only because we humans colonize every square foot of space where natural animals used to dwell. We overpopulate our world, and force natural free-living animals into certain "niches". Natural animal populations decline, while billions of us live on (and keep on growing).

And mirocu has a valid point. An animal which has a chance to live in the wild has the better deal, in comparison to a domestic factory-farmed animal. At least the wild animal gets to live (perhaps enjoy) in its natural habitat before the hunter comes along. And the hunter has to deal with a number of variables as he or she stalks the prey. There is a chance for failure (the animal gets away) and if we're not talking guns or snares, there is also a lot of skill involved in hunting.

Posted by: mirocu Feb 13 2013, 04:50 PM

It sure is. One has to stay awake for one thing!

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 13 2013, 05:02 PM

Well it seems like everyone is jumping on me , that really friendly. Thanks.

Whatever the in's and outs of it are its not possible to feed demand , i DID NOT say mirocu didnt have a point . Unlike many im not rude and just troll over people , its not very friendly and i dont appreciate it .

The simple fact is 9/10 of people dont hunt and they get food produce from supermarkets and/or commercial shops , there are huge issues with this , Britain is currently in the grips of a horse meat scandal , given i own two horses , i find this disgusting and wrong . But thats how the world is , whatever you think of the world mirocu said that it didnt have to be that way . well in reality it does , we cant have billions of people hunting , you , lady saga , should be happy humans arnt wiping out natural land animals and that SOME of us are making an effort to conserve there habitat . I get fed up whenever somebody mentions "man" its such a generic term , not everybody want to ruin the world . I get kids driving to fast chucking mac donalds out on the road , the roads i WALK on , you think that does not make me angry ?

If i had said what MC had said i would of been trolled , its as simple as that .

Posted by: mALX Feb 13 2013, 05:11 PM

Lol! Here where I live there is a LOT of hunting. Surrounded by mountains and forests, lakes - a lot of hunting. (That is why I started breeding hunting dogs).

The hunters around here cover themselves in deer urine and set up either in a tree or brush and then wait it out till the prey is drawn in - and still sometimes the animals can smell the slightest human scent and are wary of the area. Lots of waiting time, and if they sleep they'll miss the game.

The dogs I breed are used for hunting boar/bear/etc. - heavy game.

Posted by: flowerboom Feb 13 2013, 05:17 PM

OK no more hunting posts


This thread is completly de-railed , if you have a comment to make about hunting make a non-tes thread over in the allocated section .Otherwise stay on topic.

Posted by: Destri Melarg Feb 13 2013, 09:12 PM

Interesting topic, and a lot of lively discussion. My two septims:

I personally can’t sustain an ‘evil’ character in any video game because most of the time what a game considers evil I just chalk up to being an a-hole. True evil is much harder to quantify because, as DE said, it is all subjective.

That doesn’t mean that I agree with the notion that ‘survival’ behooves a vampire (or werewolf) to put him/herself beyond the reach of morality. If said vampire (or werewolf) were born a vampire (or werewolf), and therefore not human, then that individual would have an argument. Catching a disease does not somehow lift one from moral obligation. Especially when the choice also exists to end one’s existence on the grounds that it endangers others.

Becoming a vampire does not make one evil. It simply makes one unfortunate. Choosing to remain one when a cure exists (except on the PS3), and then keeping people as live cattle simply to fulfill a selfish need for nourishment is morally wrong (and therefore, by definition, evil)... no matter how you try to justify it.

Posted by: Elisabeth Hollow Feb 13 2013, 09:20 PM

I'm inclined to agree.

Posted by: SubRosa Feb 13 2013, 10:27 PM

I only rarely play characters who are evil. As Desti said, in most video games (the KOTOR games especially) the 'evil' route is usually just the selfish dickweed's path. And that is not what I have fun playing. One thing I like about the ES games, is that the open world tends to give you more room to roleplay your 'evilness'. That lets me play a character who might be a sadistic murderer, but not a prick, if that makes any sense.

For example, I did the Oblivion DB questline with http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v90/subrosa_florens/oblivion/Oblivion471.jpg. Before the events of the game began, she was raped and left for dead by Rufio. This transformed her in an I Spit On Your Grave way. Afterward Lilith learned to fight and to kill. Moreover, she found that killing gave her a feeling of power. That overrode the feelings of helplessness she had been filled with after what Rufio had done to her. The more she killed, the more she liked it, and the less she cared who it was or why. Ultimately she became a pure murder machine, who killed for nothing but the sheer pleasure of it. That is why she did not flinch to kill the other members of the Sanctuary, and did not bat at eye at seeing Lucien's corpse.

It was an interesting roleplay, to the say the least, and took me to some very dark places. It was a powerful experience, but not especially pleasant.

The nearest I have come to that since was playing http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v90/subrosa_florens/Skyrim/Skyrim643_zpsf12446ca.jpg. She was an ordinary Nord living out in the wilderness. She was hunting and fishing in those parts for years. Her poaching never hurt no one, it's not like the Jarl could eat every deer after all. All that changed when she was infected with Vampirism. After turning, she found herself consumed by the desire to feed on mortals. Since I used the Better Vampires mod, she did not have to sneak up on people while they slept. She could feed off them after killing them. So she went on a killing spree across Skyrim, and whatever conscience she once possessed was drowned in a sea of hot blood. The more she killed, the more powerful her vampiric powers became (again, the mod), and the more powerful and special she felt. She very quickly came to view mortals as being objects, things that only existed for her to destroy. In her worldview, they had no other purpose.

Meeting Serana actually mellowed Helregin out a great deal. Serana awakened her ability to feel love once more, and taught her that she did not really need to kill every mortal she met. That is not to say that she went cold turkey. But for the first time she was able to conquer her blood lust, and walk past living people on the road without anyone dying.

Posted by: Destri Melarg Feb 14 2013, 12:35 AM

Okay this is much better than the way I put it!

Helregin sounds like an interesting character. I especially like the fact that she knew what she was doing was evil, but the power gained from doing it was too much to resist. It gives her much more depth than the simple 'look at me, I'm evil because I have various body parts strewn about my home' mythos that Bethesda's games too often give us.

That brings up a question that I would put to the rest of you: Why do vampires have to be so incredibly messy? The blood that's been drooled all over their clothing is food, after all. I like a good potato salad as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean that I smear it all over my face and clothes! Nor do I keep bits o' cow laying around the house for any visitor to find!

Posted by: mALX Feb 14 2013, 12:39 AM

SPEW! (and URGH!)

Posted by: Darkness Eternal Feb 14 2013, 01:00 AM

Not all vampires. Just the ones from Skyrim. Daggerfall. Morrowind and everywhere else except Cyrodiil. At least in the Imperial province they have table manners.

Posted by: SubRosa Feb 14 2013, 01:56 AM

I am not especially fond of terms like good and evil, because as it has been so well stated, those ideas are entirely subjective. For all of my life I have had people calling me evil because I am not attracted to the same people they are, or believe in the same religion they do. Likewise studying history quickly reveals that everyone immediately decries anyone else they do not like as evil. That helps me to see the hypocrisy that often lies behind these terms.

Instead I prefer to view things through a lens of positive and negative. Some people do very positive things for the world. Some people do very negative ones. Most tend to cause a mix. But there are certain few folks who are so utterly negative in their behavior that I can find no excuse for it. These are people who are incapable of feeling empathy for others, and whose actions are purely based upon their own convenience, with no concern for the harm they do for others. In other words, sociopaths. Or people who have so beaten down and obfuscated their consciences with self-deception and rationalizations that they might just as well be sociopaths as far as their behavior is concerned. Serial killers are good examples of the first. Religious zealots who have no qualms about torturing and murdering others of different religions are stunning examples of the second type. So I base my 'evil' characters upon this sort of person. Someone who is utterly selfish and caught up in their own desires, and completely incapable of feeling empathy for others.




I know! It is such a waste of good food! If I spend $15 on a pizza, there is no way I am throwing half of it on the floor! Vampires are like that in films too. They are always getting blood all over their faces and torsos. It seems like it goes everywhere but their innards. Haven't any of them ever heard of a straw for goodness sake?

Posted by: King Coin Feb 14 2013, 05:16 AM

http://www.inpapasbasement.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Kid_With_Chocolate_Pudding_On_Face.jpg Must be a vampire.

Posted by: SubRosa Feb 14 2013, 07:02 AM

Are you sure that is pudding?

Posted by: Elisabeth Hollow Feb 14 2013, 07:05 AM

Ohh... that's not normal?

-shuffles bits of deer and cow carcass under bed nonchalantly-

Posted by: Darkness Eternal Feb 14 2013, 07:30 AM

Are you a female version of myself, SubRosa?

Posted by: Colonel Mustard Feb 14 2013, 12:55 PM

When I think about it, I don't think I've actually played a TES character who has been properly, properly evil at any point, really. Not sure why, but there we go. I think the closest I ever came was with a Dark Elf assassin/thief character I played, who I did the entirety of the Dark Brotherhood and Thieve's Guild questline with; with her, however, she generally didn't do it for any sense of the thrill of killing or anything like that, but instead because it was something that she was good at and it paid well. She would go to the location, find the target and eliminate them, just like that, driven by a sort of cold, dispassionate professionalism; so long as she didn't form any kind of attachment to the target she simply didn't care for them, and their deaths were simply for the sake of profit. On one hand, it was heartless to the point of being sociopathic, but on the other it was always as clean and quiet as possible; she actually found it rather difficult to do the whole 'cleanse the sanctuary' thing because she'd got to know the rest of the Brotherhood members there, but when she found out she'd accidentally wiped out half of her organisation she didn't feel that bad because she never knew those targets and felt no bond towards them.

That was probably the closest I came to being overtly evil in a TES game, but it's kind of tricky to be a proper, proper bad guy in those games; aside from the Dark Brotherhood, there isn't really an overtly 'evil' faction about. In the Fallout games, on the other hand, I find it much easier to be a puppy-kicking, town-burning, raider-fistbumping, complete monster who makes babies cry just by looking at them. I think it's because Fallout lets you style your character's hair into a mohawk, for as we all know, in post-apocalyptic settings people with mohawks are evil!

Posted by: mirocu Feb 14 2013, 04:54 PM

I have often had these exact thoughts myself, it doesn´t make any sense does it? Nor would I ever grin at my potato salad and shove it down with an evil smile on my face.

Man, vamps are weird, arent they?

Posted by: Grits Feb 14 2013, 05:09 PM

I like to play characters who experience conflict with their own values. That might be a knight who justifies becoming a werewolf but then slides into moral decline while denying her own wrongdoing. A reluctant vampire who stays in a blood-starved state but still lives in proximity to people knowing that she is a danger to them. Another vampire who can’t control her hunger enough to go without blood, but only feeds on the man she loves even though she fears it will turn him too. (She didn’t have the uesp to look up these things.) They are hypocrites to some extent, and coming to terms with that within the context of their external challenges (dragons, war, spouse wants a bigger house, alchemist’s bill to pay) makes them interesting to me. Even my shining knights have personality traits that are less than stellar. Vanity mostly, or selfishness that they justify as being their reward for good deeds.

I also enjoy the ones who act according to their own beliefs though their values are not the same as mine. The thief who believed that emptying rich peoples’ houses showed them the value of what he had not taken (their sleeping families’ lives). Or the assassin who believed that he was granting peace to his targets since they were carefully chosen by the Night Mother.

The remorseless a-holes just don’t last long with me. This would be the ones who know they are supposed to obey the laws of the land, but they just don’t care for whatever reason. Within their context they’re not evil, since their values don’t prohibit anti-social behavior. Within my values they are evil, but worse (because this is for my entertainment) they are boring.

Lol. I am reminded of how a certain friend eats chicken wings. It looks like a feeding rather than a meal. I will never again take him to a wing joint on game night! There are not enough pitchers in the world to wash away the shame!

But seriously, maybe the blood drooling is a symptom of lustful attack rather than civilized feeding. There is a location in the northern province that I will not mention where it looks like the aftermath of a vampire food fight rather than a high court. I found it disappointing. To me the blood-soaked dwellings should be feral nests, not the places where people who should have refined their behavior over a thousand years live. I mean in my terms the blood should be as precious as, say, homemade gravy. Anyone who splashes my gravy all over their shirt does not get seconds!!

Posted by: mALX Feb 14 2013, 08:55 PM

There is so much I agree with here! Especially in stories where the protagonist is a vampire or werewolf - they have to have interesting personalities that draw people to the character and make them want to keep reading.

If the character is wholly devoid of any personality but their dark side, (emotionless/cold/distant/brooding/antisocial/sociopathic/egocentric/etc) - where is the interest?

Even their bloodlust can’t be described too often without losing interest or impact. After the first descriptive “feeding” takes place; additional gore-fests can only be reiterations of the same thing.

That boils down to boring because that is all they offer is that flat, one-note darkness (or as Mustard would say, “Moustache twirlers”). You can’t love the character, or even hate them. The only emotion they can bring is apathy.

(Exactly the same as the polar opposite - perfect characters whose lack of flaws or erroneous decisions and excess of virtuosity leaves them eye-rollingly shining and uber).

To me, the attacking indiscriminately/wild orgies of feasting and egocentric sociopathic existences - that correlates with the mindless feral vampires that are no more than animalistic beasts one finds in feral vampire dungeons in Tamriel. They can't be protagonists because they have no personality. They can't hold the reader's attention because they are one-note.

While the vampire's beast within can be compared to the feral nature of a leopard or lion - that isn't the whole makeup of either. The lion/leopard loves, rolls, plays, enjoys other things in life besides the hunt - that hunt is for survival, to feed the hunger of itself and its pride. Other than that hunt, they are social, loyal, protective, affectionate, and playful within their group.

That is how I see the ancient vampires, a part of a social order. Most especially, they should personify the ability to smoothly function socially, as they stand for “the elite” in vampires. They should have abundant charisma from the “vampire charm” they exude. They should have the ability to walk a fine line between society and the seduction of their nature without it being discernable to those around them (so only their victims see that dark side and know for sure it is there). If anything, their personality should be more drawing than other characters, more enticing.

New ancient vampires - I would expect a struggle between the human they were and the nature and bloodlust they haven’t yet learned to garner control over; but surely by the first half century they would learn to balance out the human side of them with the beast and develop the finesse one would expect from these “noble” ancient vampire lines.


*

Posted by: Elisabeth Hollow Feb 14 2013, 09:08 PM

I enjoy evil characters, in moderation. I identify with underdogs. Usually on my first playthrough, I will have a character that does everything. Just everything. I explore every nook and cranny and do every quest I can. Then my next character is the one that I take seriously.

That is the one who helps instead of hinders. My characters like to uplift people and help them, not bring them down.

But if you're going to be a bad guy, in my opinion, like mALX said, be interesting about it. same with good guys. I feel like there are different shades to everyone. Good people do bad things, and bad people do good things.

It happens.

Posted by: Lopov Feb 14 2013, 11:49 PM

If I may elaborate a little here since my current character is an evil one... Falador is evil and doesn't care much about taking lives of innocent people (or harvesting souls as Lucien Lachance says) but he isn't a mindless killer that would go on a rampage killing anyone that crosses his path. He has a 'good' side on occasion but it happens very very rarely. Something about his personality and his deeds:

-He finds himself ugly & repulsive, that's why he thinks of himself to be a chosen of Namira. Since beggars are chosen of Namira as well, Falador doesn't have anything against beggars and gives them gold on occasion.

-In most cases he doesn't kill without a reason although there were exceptions. More about exceptions later. He serves the Dark Brotehrhood and obeys the tenets, so he doesn't have qualms about killing his targets. But he likes challenge that's why he (if possible) killed only the person required and not the others. But there were few exceptions - he killed whole crew of Marie Elena although the contract was only on the captain. He killed a man who lived with Matthias Draconis although the contract was only on Matthias - but his roomate found him and Falador had no 'choice' but to kill him. Another exception was after assassinating Phillida - when he went to IC to place his finger into a desk, two random Imperial soldiers were standing in his way and he picked them off. There was no need, he could as well sneak past them he wanted to show other people that nobody should mess with the DB. In his early days he was more savageous but then sort of 'calmed' down.

-He smiles rarely and even if he does, it's a wicked smile. But when he saw Carwen for the first time, he smiled with honesty. But because he finds himself ugly, he didn't dare to talk to her. When he found out that she's member of TG as well, he encouraged and asked her about Rumours He actually didn't listen to her but only admired her beauty. It was the only time so far that Falador realized that he will never be able to have a family because of his life-style. But he pushes these thoughts away and continues with what he knows the best - killing.

-His hideout is (modded) Fort Caractacus and he pays proprietor of the Aleswell Inn Diram Serethi 50 gold on occasion to warn travelers / adventurers to stay away from the fort. I don't use any mods for this, it's just something that happens in imaginary conversation (but he still gives him 50 gold each time).

I think he would be boring to play if I roleplayed him as a mindless killer slaughtering everyone so I very much agree with this quote.

-I tried to give him some traits in his personality that make him more interesting to RP (I might still add him some trait since we've only reached a little over hundred hours). He's mostly a loner and stays away from towns, unless he's got 'business' to do there. He would never attack shopkeepers without a reason and he doesn't even think about it. Because of high infamy he gets nasty & arrogant remarks all the time but he ignores them as he also ignores most of the people that pass him. He would never kill somebody because of a remark.

-But being evil an all that, he likes to 'play' with his unsuspecting victims... for example - on his way to Bravil he noticed an Imperial guard who was turned towards him with his back. Falador dismounted, readied his bow and targeted the guard. If he fired an arrow, the guard would die instantly. He was moving the arrow up and down, deciding whether to do it or not and in the end he didn't fire the arrow. The power of deciding about someone's fate without that person knowing it makes him feel superior. When he passed the guard on Shadowmere, he said to him:"Not this time," but the guard had no idea what Wood Elf was talking about.

But when he's out for revenge... things get messy.

Posted by: Darkness Eternal Jul 24 2013, 07:05 PM

"The core conflict, the central dichotomy of TES lore is not Good vs Evil, it's Change vs Stasis, with no moral qualities applied to either. There are some individuals who are going to seem unambiguously good or evil when viewed through a modern moral lense, yes, but that's not the central issue at hand here. There's no evil dragon kidnapping the fair maiden, nor any rescuing knight. There's a long, long history of philosophical conflict over an open-ended question posed by the deaths of the Aedra at Convention. Is it better to transcend or regress from the Mundus and mortal death?

It's worth noting that the heroic ideal within the TES mythos is the silver-tongued traitor, rather than any moral paragon. All the greatest heroes were liars, or murderers, bastards and betrayers, from the start to the end without exception. Pelinal killed Ayleid and Nede indiscriminately when his madness overtook him - Tiber slit Emperor Zero's throat and then betrayed his closest friends, and in doing so became the most important deity in the mythos. Vehk betrayed the closest friend he'd ever had and stole godhood with a lie, then rewrote history as it served him.

The Heroes aren't the good guys in TES. They're just the ones who win."

Posted by: mALX Jul 24 2013, 07:27 PM

Super Mario Brothers!

Posted by: PhonAntiPhon Jul 25 2013, 12:43 AM

Niamh is morally ambiguous, and her motivations are often unclear.
The Cyrodiil, indeed the Nirn, that she inhabits is often an unpleasant place and aside from her fundamental nature, she is also in part a product of the world in which she lives and of her experiences within that world, for good or ill.

Although I have in the past described her as mad, bad, and dangerous to know - in truth I think that's doing her a disservice, she's more complex than that, and whilst she's certainly not evil, she definitely isn't good either.
As her character develops, I see that whilst she is or has been guilty of certain things, she is not always culpable; she is a woman who has sinned, but has also been sinned against.

But, she can be as good as she is bad, she just needs a chance to show it...

An anti-heroine? Very definitely.

Posted by: Renee Gade IV Jul 25 2013, 01:20 PM

You have saved the day! ... But the princess is in another castle!



Very true.

Posted by: mALX Jul 26 2013, 04:55 AM

Aah, I miss it! But not enough to fool with my old NES system, lol.

Posted by: Darkness Eternal Jul 26 2013, 12:39 PM

Guys, not lets get off topic here.

Posted by: mALX Jul 26 2013, 10:31 PM

"Huh?"


*mALX scans the upper topics*


"Wait, hasn't this all been hashed through already? We can only repeat everything that has already been said in the previous pages...oh, okay; if you insist!"


IMHO, the developers aren't trying to represent good vs evil, but to encourage players to see and embrace the shades of gray in that world/realm and make choices on how much of the gray within themselves they are willing to get in touch with.


Example: Which would you be more willing to do, kill a person for this extreme weapon or just steal the weapon? How many of us end up with that weapon of choice at least once?

(or like Example: Tenpenny Towers in Fallout 3; another place where there is no right choice).

The whole roleplay of a lot of these games is that it immerses you into a universe where good and evil are no longer the issue, but what you are or aren't willing to do to find whatever success you desire to achieve is.


*

Posted by: Elisabeth Hollow Jul 26 2013, 10:33 PM

Thats what I like about RPGs, mALX. They're not linear. Instead of going for the obvious choice, you can say, "Well, I WANT this, so how can I get this? How could I justify getting this?"

Posted by: mALX Jul 26 2013, 11:07 PM

Exactly; and why I love them too. The barriers are removed; an ambiguous playground that tests our imaginations and creativity. I couldn't get into FPS's because they only offer a limited path with a certain outcome.

Posted by: Renee Gade IV Jul 27 2013, 12:07 PM

Interesting. Both of these are great points. As long as I've been playing RPGs, neither of these realizations have ever occured to me, not the way you two have put them just now.

Posted by: mALX Jul 29 2013, 12:00 PM

Oblivion is the first RPG I've ever played, it was a stunning and eye-opening game and experience for me to roleplay in a game. I can't go back now, lol.