Skip to content

Sarevok's Glowing Eyes

2

Comments

  • EntropyXIIEntropyXII Member Posts: 656
    I have also confirmed that unfortunately, Sarevok has absolutely no connection with Richard B. Riddick. Whereas this is initially saddening for me, I can confirm that Highlander's 'The Kurgan' served as the muse for our favourite antagonist - which is awesome anyway.

    John Gallagher:

    "...yes you're dead on with this one. When I created Sarevok it was the marching order - he's the Kurgan for the sake of discussion. He was referenced as such throughout development by Kurgvok, Saregan, SK the list went on. So I threw a little Gwar in there and he was done."

    "...Well, Pitch Black was 2000 and we were working on BG in 1996. It's a curious coincidence of near timing but Clancy Brown in Highlander was our primary inspiration."
  • TethorilofLathanderTethorilofLathander Member Posts: 427
    edited November 2013
    @EntropyXII This is awesome! Thanks for the info :D

    I love how Sarevok is a mish-mash of badasses and has become the ultimate badass!
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    This is one of the few things the novel handled pretty well, where it was described as an unnatural glint behind his eyes, and not full-on headlights. Obviously, art needs to be striking, so headlights it is.
  • GamingFreakGamingFreak Member Posts: 639
    I actually though that his eyes were just an unusual bright color and that the glow was part of the intimidating appeal behind the helmet. As for keeping that in BG2, it was either to keep it consistent or to represent his soul form, since that's when the portrait is first used. IDK, but I actually know of portraits that people used as alts for sarevok that normalized his pupils.
  • SpaceInvaderSpaceInvader Member Posts: 2,125

    So far I've come to a few conclusions on why his eyes glow and how it affected him in BG1...

    He may be an Aasimar, descendant of a god/deity which have similar attributes. Even though he loses most of his Bhaalspawn essence in Throne of Bhaal, he is technically still a child of Bhaal. As far as how Sarevok became so praised in Baldur's Gate among the nobles, considering he has ridiculously evil armour and burning bright eyes...I suspect there was some sort of illusion based magic around him, either from an item, his armour or even Winski Perorate himself, meaning that only CHARNAME and/or those who have seen his true form can see him for who he truly is.

    What about sharing that joint?
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190

    I'm not sure if this has been a topic beforehand or if it is a well known thing, but could anyone explain why his eyes glow?

    So far I've come to a few conclusions on why his eyes glow and how it affected him in BG1...

    He may be an Aasimar, descendant of a god/deity which have similar attributes. Even though he loses most of his Bhaalspawn essence in Throne of Bhaal, he is technically still a child of Bhaal. As far as how Sarevok became so praised in Baldur's Gate among the nobles, considering he has ridiculously evil armour and burning bright eyes...I suspect there was some sort of illusion based magic around him, either from an item, his armour or even Winski Perorate himself, meaning that only CHARNAME and/or those who have seen his true form can see him for who he truly is.

    If there's any actual lore on this, I would like to know :D

    No, there was no glamour or illusion. Sarevok's armor wouldn't necessarily seem "evil" to a citizen of the Forgotten Realms setting. Intimidating, surely, but not "evil."
  • EntropyXIIEntropyXII Member Posts: 656
    @Schneidend - I don't know man! Gotta remember his armour had that quite obvious unholy symbol of Bhaal etched into the front. With Bhaal been a well known and a feared Intermediate deity and his death not really being that long ago - Sarevok would have had to have been a confident man to wear it around Baldur's Gate whilst trying to persuade people of his entirely good and honest nature.
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    @EntropyXII
    Actually, cults of Bhaal were highly secretive, since unlike Bane, Myrkul, Umberlee, or Talos, there's no reason for the largely Lawful Neutral societies of the Sword Coast to have temples to Bhaal. Therefore, the Lord of Murder's iconography would not be widely known.

    Also, Kelemvor, the new god of Death and the Dead that took Myrkul's place, has a lot of skull and bone motifs, and he's a Neutral deity.
  • @Schneidend, but if you're going to have this new guy as your Grand Duke surely you'd do a quick background check on the kind of symbols he adorns xD
  • booinyoureyesbooinyoureyes Member Posts: 6,164
    This thread has been very enlightening.
    I always just thought he had a bad case of jaundice
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190

    @Schneidend, but if you're going to have this new guy as your Grand Duke surely you'd do a quick background check on the kind of symbols he adorns xD

    There's no Internet to run a wikipedia search for symbols of Bhaal. There's no background to check. The last cult of Bhaal was destroyed twenty years ago, and it was a secret cult to begin with. Also, more than likely people just assume he's worshiping Kelemvor, or, being a mercenary general, is just trying to look badass. Even more likely, people just don't care because he appears to literally be saving them from total annihilation.
  • marcerormarceror Member Posts: 577
    Why do his eyes glow? That's easy. It's because he's so darn eeeee-viellllll!

    Really, like, duh! :P
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632
    I wonder how these evil guys get elected in the first place. Forget Bhaal symbols, did no one have Detect Evil memorized? Maybe Sarevok keeps a non-cursed Helm of Opposite Alignment around to look good in public.
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    nano said:

    I wonder how these evil guys get elected in the first place. Forget Bhaal symbols, did no one have Detect Evil memorized? Maybe Sarevok keeps a non-cursed Helm of Opposite Alignment around to look good in public.

    The spell detects Evil, not baby-eating or puppy-kicking. It's more or less useless when deciding who leads you except maybe as one extra bullet point in the list of Cons. But, at the time, Sarevok's Pros were a bit heftier.
  • EudaemoniumEudaemonium Member Posts: 3,199
    I'm pretty sure there a significant number of statesmen and head figures in the Forgotten realms that are technically Evil-aligned, even in ostensibly good nations.
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632
    Um, no idea what you're getting at with the baby-eating.

    I wouldn't elect anyone Evil. Of course he says he's going to save us all, but if he comes up as Evil you know he's probably going to screw you over when the time is right. And in Sarevok's case, he did. Just think about how many quests you can solve by casting Detect Evil and then siding with the good one. Even if you're wrong no one really cares if you splatter the evil one.

    That's really the craziest thing about D&D alignments. You can actually measure how bad of a person someone is. And it's not even hard, because it's a first-level spell.
  • KamigoroshiKamigoroshi Member Posts: 5,870
    edited November 2013
    The secret of Sarevok's nearly political success in Baldur's Gate clearly lies in his charming business smile.
    image


    His honest, shimmering eyes (which are no doubtly full of childhood dreams) give him a rather innocent expression as well.
  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 801
    @nano
    Evil means they are out for themselves, now that you know that, look at our world's current politicians.
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632
    GemHound said:

    @nano
    Evil means they are out for themselves, now that you know that, look at our world's current politicians.

    Exactly. If we had Detect Evil why wouldn't we check them?
  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 801
    @nano they would get there anyway as the mob rules in democracy, not a random paladin who says something.
  • ankhegankheg Member Posts: 546
    edited November 2013
    First thing that came to my mind... from 1:58. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NejZ2pTa18w
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632
    @GemHound That's a pretty shallow view of democracy. If you have a Good candidate and an Evil candidate, who do you think people are going to favor?
  • SchneidendSchneidend Member Posts: 3,190
    nano said:

    Um, no idea what you're getting at with the baby-eating.

    I wouldn't elect anyone Evil. Of course he says he's going to save us all, but if he comes up as Evil you know he's probably going to screw you over when the time is right. And in Sarevok's case, he did. Just think about how many quests you can solve by casting Detect Evil and then siding with the good one. Even if you're wrong no one really cares if you splatter the evil one.

    That's really the craziest thing about D&D alignments. You can actually measure how bad of a person someone is. And it's not even hard, because it's a first-level spell.

    It doesn't take much to be Evil. There are relatively benign merchants who would ding as Evil. Because, no, dinging as Evil doesn't actually measure how bad a person they are. An Evil character could be evil without doing anything most societies would consider completely unacceptable, hence my reference to taboos like eating babies. There's a big difference between the Evil miller that puts his thumb down on the scale to get more money for his grain, and the Evil god that demands all of its followers sacrifice virgins and raid, rape, and pillage.

    If the guy who dings Evil gets things done, nobody will care. Also, none of the characters are aware that alignment, at least not as we the players understand them, is even a thing. When a character detects alignment, such an ability does not come with a robotic voice in the character's head that says 'This person is Chaotic Evil.' It's more a feeling of 'this man bears the stench of chaos and destruction about him.' Also, such religious nonsense would not be admissible in courts or politics. Paladins don't get to look at people, kill them, and claim they were "evil," at least not without landing in jail.

    You can also take the route of any good D&D novel and pretend that those spells only exist mechanically for the benefit of players and not for actual characters in-universe.
  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 801
    @nano the one who offers more.
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632

    nano said:

    Um, no idea what you're getting at with the baby-eating.

    I wouldn't elect anyone Evil. Of course he says he's going to save us all, but if he comes up as Evil you know he's probably going to screw you over when the time is right. And in Sarevok's case, he did. Just think about how many quests you can solve by casting Detect Evil and then siding with the good one. Even if you're wrong no one really cares if you splatter the evil one.

    That's really the craziest thing about D&D alignments. You can actually measure how bad of a person someone is. And it's not even hard, because it's a first-level spell.

    It doesn't take much to be Evil. There are relatively benign merchants who would ding as Evil. Because, no, dinging as Evil doesn't actually measure how bad a person they are. An Evil character could be evil without doing anything most societies would consider completely unacceptable, hence my reference to taboos like eating babies. There's a big difference between the Evil miller that puts his thumb down on the scale to get more money for his grain, and the Evil god that demands all of its followers sacrifice virgins and raid, rape, and pillage.

    If the guy who dings Evil gets things done, nobody will care. Also, none of the characters are aware that alignment, at least not as we the players understand them, is even a thing. When a character detects alignment, such an ability does not come with a robotic voice in the character's head that says 'This person is Chaotic Evil.' It's more a feeling of 'this man bears the stench of chaos and destruction about him.' Also, such religious nonsense would not be admissible in courts or politics. Paladins don't get to look at people, kill them, and claim they were "evil," at least not without landing in jail.
    It doesn't have to mean he's killed people in the past. But it does mean he probably doesn't have our best interests at heart. Who do you think is more likely to start a war for his ascension to godhood or to line his pockets - a Good person or an Evil one? Why would I vote for your Evil miller, when I could have someone who's actually honest?

    I didn't know about "the stench of chaos and destruction", but that's just fluff... unless you change your alignment in some way I've never seen it give the wrong answer.


    You can also take the route of any good D&D novel and pretend that those spells only exist mechanically for the benefit of players and not for actual characters in-universe.

    I don't think these spells should exist at all. Alignment shouldn't be physically detectable.
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632
    @GemHound Not really. Many people vote based on who they like better, or who's they think is a nicer person, who served in the military or whatever. A lot of it is about character. You can bet that if we had Detect Evil available people would be using it. What better way to discredit your opponent than to reveal that he's evil?
  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 801
    @nano then you find out that both candidates are evil. Who will you vote for now?
  • nanonano Member Posts: 1,632
    @GemHound I guess you think only evil people can run for office?
  • GemHoundGemHound Member Posts: 801
    @nano I like how you twist peoples words to come up with completely stupid conclusions that make no sense.

    The answer to what you just spoke is that evil people are far more likely to get into power since they would actively strive for power, whereas good people would not want power as much.
Sign In or Register to comment.