Justify Sarevok in a good party?

EnterHaerDalis

Playing an Undead Hunter with a party of righteous mates consisting of Aerie (will be more than mates soon), Sir Anomen Delryn, Nalia de'Arnise, Mazzy Fentan and Valygar Corthala. We are obviously law abiding citizens and try to be strapping representatives for the forces of good across Faerun.

Sarevok Anchev has appeared in the Pocket Plane and is trying to sell his case to join my party. He vows to swear an oath but what I want to know is if, at all possible, how do you justify his cause? Are his heinous acts forgivable?

I need a solid argument. I am torn between role playing and simply wanting his raw power under my command.

Thoughts?

Tresset

Reminds me of an encounter at the beginning of the Shadows of Undrentide campaign of NWN where you have the option to teach a young paladin that paladins are supposed to be merciful as well as righteous.

Perhaps you believe you could change him by showing him your mercy. Perhaps you think he still can be saved.

Shikao

I would say it depends on how your UH sees the world:

Is everything black or white for him? In other words once bad, always bad. There is a lovely Pirates of the Caribbean quote on the topic:

Norrington: One good deed is not enough to redeem a man of a lifetime of wickedness.
Jack Sparrow: Though it seems enough to condemn him.
Norrington: Indeed.

Or is he more of second chance/always see good in people?

If it's the former then taking Sarevok would be out of question. However, if it's the latter, then you can definitely take your half-brother with you =D

Khyron

I always take him with me, regardless of protagonist alignment.

I find it easy to justify.. even if you do play a paladin, you're at your wits end as to what is actually going on.
Sarevok is very knowledgeable about what's in store for you and can help you.
I'd never forgive him for what he has done, but as the prophecy reaches it's climax chances are you'd feel like your need of his skills and knowledge temporarily outweighs his crimes.

This might not be the optimal choice for a paladin.. but neither is working with, and even paying, shadow thieves.

For evil and neutral protagonist, you can choose whatever reason you like..

Permidion_Stark

I nearly always play a paladin and she hangs around with the worst kind of creeps (including the likes of Montaron and Xzar in BG1) because I tell myself that you can't always choose your team mates. She tries to lead by example and keep them out of trouble but she doesn't always succeed because when my reputation gets too high and people talk about leaving the bad guys sneak off (without her knowing of course) and commit a few robberies to bring my reputation back down.

I tend to think of it in terms of a movie: if you have got a group of people involved in an enterprise there is no way they will all be after the same thing (at least not if the movie is any good). They will all have their own agendas and that's what keeps it interesting.

Wesboi

Bros before hoes.

Permidion_Stark

Wesboi said:

Bros before hoes.

That one genuinely made me laugh out loud.

abacus

Better to have him inside the tent and pissing out, rather than outside and pissing in...

UnderstandMouseMagic

Well you have one advantage, none of your party were with you in BG so they have no history with him at least.

Personally I never take him RP wise, not because of the attempt to start the war and all the Bhaal stuff, but because of the dopplegangers. And what happened in Candlekeep.
Unforgiveable.
Plus you are blackmailed/forced to revive him by the game.

The only thing I could think of is that your long term plan was to hand him over to the BG authorities to stand trial for his crimes. So they could kill him again but this time publicly in the town square.

If you are righteous then you should be conscious of the fact that you are not the only person he has wronged and that it shouldn't be just up to you as to whether he is forgiven. He left a lot of dead people in his wake, they deserve justice just as much as you.

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

OrlonKronsteen

Personally, I can never find a RP justification for bringing him, whether I'm playing good or evil. His transgressions are too many and too great: my good characters would leave him in hell out of a duty to justice, while my evil characters would leave him there for revenge. And it's not like BG1, where you can make the argument that you 'need the help to survive.' By TOB you have a full, powerful party at your disposal, and can use the pocket plane to summon any other allies you want.

That said, the others have made as good arguments as can be made for bringing him, such as redemption, using his raw power, etc... It's your fantasy game - if you want him around, bring him and enjoy! I've done the same thing in the past.

One thing to consider: in pre-EE BG2, he complained constantly when in a party with high rep. I don't know if the EEs have toned this down, but I remember finding him unplayable in a good party due to the amount of complaining - and this even after

changing his alignment.

ThacoBell

Sarevok has knowledge that can be helpful. While his alignment makes him cynical at the best of times, he was what you are currently fighting, and can provide insight on the Five may have in store for you. Plus, in your party, he can do some good. He has dies once, and while he certainly deserves the fate he received, him staying dead won't fix what happened. Allowing him to actively do some good in the world leaves things better off than otherwise.

Borek

I think the fact that you can force him to be loyal mitigates the history, although definitely a hard sell for a Paladin or other Lawful Good to make lol. But at this point in the game you're well aware you are a Bhaalspawn, you've had to kill countless enemies including other Bhaalspawn and Sarevok himself, it seems somewhat hollow to start throwing out moral justifications regardless of alignment.

You know he has more knowledge of your situation than anyone else, at least anyone else you have access to ask about it, that alone makes him invaluable. By this point you have a pretty good idea that it's basically you and a small number of hyper-powerful Bhaalspawns, the rest of which seem to be causing untold carnage and suffering, seems like a non-issue to essentially Geas the most knowledgeable resource you can find into not betraying you and helping clean up the mess he pretty much started.

Mirandel

Well, there is always an argument - who but me can keep an eye on him? While he is with you you know what he is up to, while if he is by himself - he might actually get back to his old ways.

For me the problem is in resurrecting him. But that you can not avoid.

Chnapy

As for the big guy deserving to die for his crimes, I guess you could make that argument, although not every "righteous" character has to support the death penalty. The thing is, though, he did get (informally and extra-legally, by the grand duke Belm) sentenced to death, sentence that was then promptly carried out by the protagonist. While you could say that being resurrected invalidates the previous sentence and that he should be brought before the courts to answer for his crimes again (or just be executed again), you could also say that there is no legal ground (that we know of, at least) for him to be held accountable for crimes that he was already tried for.
You could even make the argument that the essence of Bhaal influenced his actions/made him insane and he shouldn't be held accountable for what he did under its influence.

PaulaMigrate

By the time you reach early ToB and face Sarevok again, much has changed between the two of you as well as your relation to the *law* or *justice* etc.
You have experienced the Dukes and Councils, their politics, their praise first of the new Duke Sarevok, shortly followed by replacing him with yourself as the next hero. Just before you were kicked out as well for the *faked* Skie issue.

Even as a most lawful paladin, the time is now that you are beyond (or above) those representatives of *law and order*. Your experience up to that point have made you your own legal authority. Whether you take it in the end or not, you are one within reach of godhood.

The Sarevok you now face does not scare you. You can control him any time, Use him, play his warder, try to redeem him. Do not seek any justification for your decisions anywhere else but inside yourself. You are in a position where all others seek guidance from you. Your companions risk their life for you daily and trust on your right decisions. You carry the burden of an ever growing responsibility.
Sarevok returning is one of the tests you face throughout ToB. The enemy in the end are neither the Five nor Melissan but the enemy inside. The enemy is weakness because if you become weak now, Bhaal will triumph. Strength or power in this context is not to be understood as something negative (nor positive as it is), it is the ability to shape things. This includes the change to something better or worse, whatever, but you have the power to do it.

Is it lonely up there? Maybe it's what achieving godhood will be like. Nobody takes decisions for you or can justify your deeds, only you can.

fateless

Atonement. Sarevok can't atone for what he's done if he stays dead and in hell. However. Brought back to life and under a sworn magical oath (or not) directly of say, a paladin, can be a long way towards attempting to atone for everything that he has done. Even if it's technically impossible. The act of forever trying is right up a Paladin's alley as well as many a good aligned character.

This is represented on smaller scale by the Commander Brage near Nashkel.

unavailable

Lots of cliche reasons mainly, but who said a good person can't be petty enough to make Sarevok think he's watching you get what he tried to have.

scriver

There's also the thing that Sarevok is perhaps one of the only sources of Bhaalspawn knowledge that isn't aligned against you (as far as you can tell). He studied the prophecy in-depth and was tutored by that-guy-whatever-his-name-who-he-leaves-to-die-in-the-maze, who iirc was some sort of cleric or at least sage of Bhaal. He has a lot of knowledge about what you are that was lost with his death. CHARNAME, on the other hand, has stumbled forth blindly without understanding much at all, only having to go by what his enemies are willing to share with him as far as knowledge about Bhaalspawn goes.

The way I see it, even if you don't trust your old pal, that knowledge he sits on could be valuable enough to keep him at your side.

OrlonKronsteen said:

Personally, I can never find a RP justification for bringing him, whether I'm playing good or evil.

I'm sorry that you feel that way, old man...

EnterHaerDalis

I decided to drop Anomen Delryn from the group and take Sarevok. In response to previous posts, my Undead Hunter is not white or black unless the scourge (undead) is involved. Anomen has had a lasting effect on my party and we conquered many evils together but noticed even after becoming a full fledged knight of the order he lacked a certain calmness to approaching certain situations. He is a great knight and hopefully he can serve the order instead of a spawn of murder.

Sarevok will be watched closely.

redline

Depends on the god your OC identifies with, too. A cleric or paladin of Lathander has almost no excuse not to bring him - redemption, new beginnings, etc.

fateless

Ilmater is another one that really justifies bringing him along to make up for what he's done if he's actually willing to do so and change. If your going for rp perspectives.

Zaghoul

Evil is as evil does as far as Im concerned with bringing along 'helpers' in a party, just depends on what they can do NOW, as that is what matters the most as regards Ms. M getting the throne.
Ifin I get to ToB again after SoD I might think differently about bro as I usually leave SoD feeling pretty well betrayed by the rulers there.

xzar_monty

He is your brother. That is all you need. If he remains evil and you're a paladin, you'll get the added benefit of having to deal with a real moral conundrum: on the one hand, he deserves punishment, but on the other, he's your brother.

Cast your gaze down, take a sombre tone and utter the following: my god, you have put me in an impossible position. Verily, he deserves death, but he is also my brother. I will keep him close, for that is the way he causes the least evil.

Lo and behold, you have just been gifted with a halo. (No bonuses.)

dib

Being forgiving and giving a person a chance to redeem themselves seems like a "good" quality, no?

koz

imho there is more in play than just a possible redemption arc, the PC knows that the realms are in danger and this particular threat is directly related to the Bhallspawn prophesies - Saravok despite being an all around bad guy - knows the prophesies better than anyone. That makes him a potentially powerful ally.

There is plenty of precedent, starting with the phrase "the enemy of my enemy is my friend..." (at the risk of invoking Godwins...) the allies in WWII were a textbook example, everybody knew Stalin was a bad guy, and perhaps they even feared him, but he wasn't as big of a problem as the Axis / Germany represented. Suddenly Stalin becomes "Uncle Joe" and we're best friends - at least until the war is over...

From a fantasy perspective, I'm reminded of Steel Brightblade & the Knights of Takhisis in the Dragonlance book Dragons of Summer Flame. Likewise any number of WoW expansions have focused on a larger enemy than just the standard conflict of Horde vs Alliance - and former enemies have to find a way to cooperate...

Lastly - turning Saravok away could also be a tricky thing - it could be seen as a sin of pride that leads to refusing his help. If nothing else keeping him close allows you to keep an eye on him.

Artona

Reason could be simply a weakness on your side. Just because you are good doesn't mean you can't be unfair, misguided or cruel occasionally. Even saint Peter wasn't always saint.

jacob_

The world is in chaos and Sarevok knows more than anyone why this is happening, I think even a lawful good Paladin would be forced to bring him along. The consequences of failure are too great, and he has knowledge that could help you in achieving your goals.

It is a bitter pill to swallow. But I think the answer is clear.

unavailable

dib said:

Being forgiving and giving a person a chance to redeem themselves seems like a "good" quality, no?

Sarevok is as bad as any Russian Tsar from the bad old 18th century. Imagine Jeoffrey Lannister if he grew up (I got roaring drunk the night he was killed) Sadists with delusions of godhood, the whole lot of them. I would give them no such chance.

UnderstandMouseMagic

dib said:

Being forgiving and giving a person a chance to redeem themselves seems like a "good" quality, no?

But "redeem" himself to whom?
Who gets to judge this?
Charname because he turns out useful?
But how does that effect whether he is "redeemed" in the opinion of somebody who's father/mother/lover/child ect. has been killed by his actions?

tbone1

I could justify it once to try a playthrough with him. But from an RP side, no, I can't justify it.