Turn companion evil

Messi

So there are couple evil companions in BG2 that you can turn neutral or good, but not a single good companion that you can turn neutral or evil! Please address this in BG2EE, since as far as I know you can't really alter the existing companions much it would have to be either Neera or Rasaad. Unless there are of course more new good companions coming.

Iecerint

You can turn Anomen Chaotic. Kinda close to what you're requesting.

RaphielDrake

Iecerint said:

You can turn Anomen Chaotic. Kinda close to what you're requesting.

One man sneaks into a house and decides to steal a kitchen knife from an old ladies kitchen and replace it with a banana for the sake of a harmless little prank.

Later that day another man comes along, kicks the door down and beats the living shit out of the old lady, takes some cash out of her handbag and then urinates upon her mercilessly while recording it all on his iphone. The resulting youtube video gets many subscribers for reasons probably best left to the imagination. The banana succeeds only in bewildering CSI.

My question is this; are these two men kinda close in terms of personality?

Vnavekul

What is this I don't even.

LMTR14

more roleplaying options are needed throughout the entire series. influencing companions like you can (apparently) do in KOTOR 2 is only a logical extension of that

sersafir

I like the idea of corrupting a companion. As to whom it might work? Anomen for one: he's kinda insane if he abandons the order and it would only take a push for him to fall one step further. It might be cool to see him drop from "Strangers! ...are you men of justice?" to "let's slaughter the order!" Imoen's a possible target, given she'll "stick with ya no matter what" and her soul was at one time owned by Bodhi. Though, fans like me most likely wont want you to touch her character. Haer'Dalis and Jan seem too set into not making a big deal of anything to become evil, though they seem like possible candidates.

elminster

Just came across this while I was going through adding feature requests to the list. I like the idea but because of the contracts I would expect its only possible to have new NPC's being able to do this (for voiceover reasons among other things). I think turning Neera evil could be a possibility.

kamuizin

Ah an corruption Anomen quest... how i wish this could be pursued...

@RaphielDrake, Anomen in NO WAY is a good character, he can by endurance and with the right advices, police himself enough to become something alike good, but his soul is dark (and he know this, it's refered in the romance dialogues) so what keep him on the good side is his lawful behavior (if he keep it).

Anomen at the begin is more worried in appear righteous than really being righteous, many quests in the game will show you this. He will rarely show mercy (specially when the character has to kill or betray anyone labeled evil based in race or another stereotype), he will complain when we try to help the poisoned guy that start the Harper quest (refering to the poisoned man as a drunk idiot) and will hurry main char to ignore a lot of other help requests unless they could bring glory to him.

He even ignore the fact that Bodhi is a vampire and prefer to ally himself with an evil undead if that keep him from dealing with the shadow thiefs, he prefer a truly evil unknow to society than be seen allied with the shadow thiefs, an organization that isn't completly evil, but just has no qualms about resorting to evil tactcis to achieve their objectives.

Without lawful behavior to keep him straight, i found strange in BG2 the absence of an opportunity to push him to evil. In my view it's just lack of content, a shame truly.

Padenton

If I recall correctly, one of the things that can't be done for [legal bs contract crap blahblahblah] is modify the NPCs personalities(modify original content).
Maybe a good idea for a mod though.

kamuizin

Padenton said:

If I recall correctly, one of the things that can't be done for [legal bs contract crap blahblahblah] is modify the NPCs personalities(modify original content).
Maybe a good idea for a mod though.

For now my friend. for now. ATARI opened bankruptcy and so, many of their copyright rights are being sold atm, Baldur's Gate isn't listed at the official package of copyrights put in auction by ATARI on the bankruptcy procedure, but who knows what is open to dealings and what is not open to dealings?

elminster

kamuizin said:

Padenton said:

If I recall correctly, one of the things that can't be done for [legal bs contract crap blahblahblah] is modify the NPCs personalities(modify original content).
Maybe a good idea for a mod though.

For now my friend. for now. ATARI opened bankruptcy and so, many of their copyright rights are being sold atm, Baldur's Gate isn't listed at the official package of copyrights put in auction by ATARI on the bankruptcy procedure, but who knows what is open to dealings and what is not open to dealings?

I think its Hasbro/Wotc who put the restrictions in place on what can be done, not ATARI, SA.

kamuizin

I doubt it, HASBRO has copyright about D&D official material content, so probally anything that directly violate D&D official lore (as make drizzt become evil for example or permanently kill Elminster)could be taken as harming their copyrights, ATARI has the direct copyrights of the game history (while Bioware has the copyrights of the engine apparently).

By the way Hasbro owns WotC apparently.

elminster

kamuizin said:

I doubt it, HASBRO has copyright about D&D official material content, so probally anything that directly violate D&D official lore (as make drizzt become evil for example or permanently kill Elminster)could be taken as harming their copyrights, ATARI has the direct copyrights of the game history (while Bioware has the copyrights of the engine apparently).

By the way Hasbro owns WotC apparently.

I'm aware that Hasbro owns WotC.

Atari has the authority under agreement with Hasbro to publish Baldur's Gate (and a number of other D&D video games). It doesn't however actually hold the intellectual rights to the game. When it comes to modifying the games gameplay/characters while I'm sure Atari is involved I think its far more likely that it is the case that Hasbro is the one putting the restrictions in place (and by restrictions I'm talking about gameplay/story/character changes not the current restrictions on distributing the game).