Does Overlord: Dark Legend take place in the past or an alternate universe? I can't tell.
It's a Prequel.
Seriously, in Overlord 2, what the HELL was Rose thinking marrying Marius? It's one thing to marry down but that guy is the most staggeringly annoying guy in the entire game.
Actually, Rose was marrying UP. If she wanted to aid the Empire, getting a position of power would have been necessary to do anything. She would have had nothing after the Tower was destroyed, and Marius seems to have been Solarius's right hand man, making him the second most powerful person in the Empire. By marrying him she was getting what she wanted.
A better question might be HOW she managed to get married to him.
What exactly was Rose's motivation for abandoning the Witch Boy in Nordberg prior to the events of Overlord 2? She had to have been smart enough to realize that was going to be a bad idea.
She was going to go work for the magic hating Empire, so having a kid with magic around would be bad for her. By that time the old tower had been destroyed and the minions had gone underground, so as far as she was concerned the Witch Boy was incapable of becoming an Evil Overlord. It doesn't seem like she was very attached to the Witch Boy, so she had no problem leaving him behind. One or all of those reasons could be why she decided to abandon him.
I like to think that Rose still had maternal instincts and chose Nordberg because it was as remote and isolated a backwater as she could find, populated mostly by easily cowed yokels dumber than minions and as such, was WAY down in the list of places the Empire would look for magical creatures.
Staying in the ruins of the Tower, even if the Minions could make it livable again, would just be far to open and exposed place for her child to live safely, he needed to hide and she had to do what she could from within the Empire to moderate it least it goes out of control. Went From Bad to Worse anyways.
Same reason why the Minions were not with the Witch Boy since day 1. As magical creatures, a horde of them following Rose's baby would just make them a bigger target, best to scatter, hide, and bide their time. Look at what happened to the Blues. Caught and used for fodder.
There's quite a few facts in the sequel that contradict choosing Rose over Velvet anyway, such as the Demon statues in the wasteland and the Greater Fang Top Upgrade that are only available with Velvet and that the third Overlord is mentioned to have destroyed everything, something Rose doesn't want, among other things. In fact, Rose's actions throughout Overlord 2 make significantly more sense if the Third Overlord DID choose Velvet, such as abandoning her "son" in Nordberg, bringing about the destruction of the Overlord's Empire while he was incarcerated, and joining up with a magic hating empire that would only pose a danger to her son and would oppose her husband's rule upon his eventual return. All can be explained by Rose not being the Overlad's mother (which could still be possible even with Rose as the true mistress if the Third Overlord "got something on the side" from Velvet) and her continued resentment over being abandoned and the killing of the Wizard who she believes is her father by the Third Overlord. Either way it's made intentionally vague as to who the mother of the Overlad is precisely so that the choice between the two mistresses can be whoever the player wanted it to be.
Are Velvet and Rose the daughters of the Wizard or the Evil Overlord possessing him?
They're the daughters of the Wizard. They flat-out say so if you stand around them after the Wizard moves into the cellar.
Why didn't the Overlord in the first game execute Gnarl for his betrayal?
Being evil is fine and dandy, but getting rid of the one guy who actually knows how the place works is crazy.
Gnarl had already told the Overlord how it all worked by that point, and besides, what kind of idiot would ever even consider trusting the evil sidekick who just betrayed him not 5 minutes ago? How could the Overlord trust him not to give false information that would kill him, considering Gnarl is a known traitor?
Now, now. Gnarl didn't betray the Overlord directly. That was Rose/Velvet's doing. Gnarl merely serves the current Overlord in control of the Dark Tower, and that was the Wizard. Gnarl even pointed out that he'd gladly go back to serving you if you could wrestle control back from the Old Overlord.
Gnarl didn't actually do anything against the player.
If the Silent Order had their mouths sewn shut, how do they eat or drink? What happens if they get sick and vomit? Or their nose gets stuffed up?
If one of them starved to death or suffocated, I would imagine that another member of the Silent Order would revive him. Probably happens about once every other week.
After being turned evil by the Overlord in Overlord II, why does Queen Fay declare him ruler of the elves? Wouldn't she want to be an evil tyrant instead of the mistress to one?
It's the domination spell. Subservience is part of the package.
If the Overlord is now Ruler of the Elves, where the heck are those useless blighters??? You'd think that given a choice between sticking around a collapsing underground lair or jumping into a portal to the Netherworld, the hippies would have gotten their act together and joined the Overlord's ranks. Having minions on your side is always a good thing.
In the ending of Overlord II, it is implied that Gnarl is biding his time, waiting to betray the new Overlord. If that's the case, why did he go through all the trouble of finding and raising him in the first place instead of simply taking charge of the minions himself? And how does a frail old minion intend to defeat a huge, magically-empowered man?
Gnarl takes command of the Tower and the Minions between the rise of each Overlord, and every time the Hives are scattered and the Tower Objects stolen. Obviously Gnarl can't wield the Overlord's power alone.
In Overlord II, when each of the three mistresses offers to ensure that one of the animal types cooperates with the Overlord in his final battle with the Glorious Empire in return for being made First Mistress, why doesn't he just say "You three will get all the animals to cooperate with me or I'll kill you."? That's sounds exactly like something an evil overlord would do.
Sounds more like something a misogynist tyrant would do. Let's just pretend that the Overlord prefers happy mistresses rather than cowed ones.
Misogynistic? How? I can assure you that I would have said that in his place to any man or woman, were I an evil tyrant.
That and I doubt any of the Mistresses would take such a comment. They can easily floor him with a slap and they aren't exactly weak-willed individuals.
A slap? He's wearing armor at least several inches thick, is far bigger than they are, and is magically empowered. 2 of the 3 are normal humans, and the other had her magical power drained. He's also wielding a friggin huge weapon o' doom. And you'd be surprised how weak your will can be when such an individual is threatening you with death.
The slap part is true, you can target your mistress and if you take a swing at her, the weapon misses and she slaps you back, and the Overlord staggers. I was equipped with the end-game helm, armor, and mace, in case anyone was wondering. They should make / name the next game Overlady if this keeps up.
Presumably the Overlord listened to Gnarl's advice on not trying to get on his Mistress' bad side.
Why not just use the Evil Presence spell to dominate them and make them do it? As a bonus, it would ensure their complete and eternal loyalty to him. No one likes being back stabbed by a mistress-turned-traitor, after all.
If I were the Overlord I'd much prefer affectionate mistresses rather than obedient slaves. Beyond that, it's a gameplay element, dude. You get one bonus for the endgame portion, and you get to choose which.
In Overlord II, why waste the fully charged Tower Heart just to take down an anti-magic shield as opposed to, say, manually digging under it?
Just being inside the shield is enough to render the Overlord helpless, which is exactly what happened prior to getting sent to the Arena. Even if it were possible to dig under the shield, anything sent inside it would instantly lose all magical powers and be a sitting duck for the Empire.
Was Gnarl in on the old overlord's plan the whole time? He didn't seem surprised at all when he returned. Also, it would explain why he and the minions went looking for a new master in a coffin.
Good question. Someone certainly ordered the Minions to save the eighth hero and nurse him back to health, and I doubt any of the other Minions could possibly carry out such a plan without Gnarl knowing about it. Well, maybe the Jester...but it seems unlikely.
For all we know, Gnarl was in on the old overlord's plan because he came up with it in the first place. I wouldn't put it past the crafty old geezer to come up with something like that and have the skill (and proper choice of words) to make his 'master' think it was his from the get-go.
The Overlord's actions in the first game are, for the most part, the opposite of evil. Even if he's doing it for revenge, he saves multiple peoples and revives a forest. Even if you take the uncorrupted route, Villain with Good Publicity has to end somewhere.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by the last part, but if you take the corrupted route, then the Overlord is pretty much the most evil character in the game. The good path isn't as bad, but he is still conquering everything he comes across. And killing everyone who gets in his way. Due to the nature of his opponents this might not make him evil, but it isn't very heroic either.
It's dark Legend that you'll have a problem finding anything evil in it. The only saving grace is that you cause the war between the Elves and the Dwarfs.
You can get around 80% corruption and still not contradict the sequel. Maube he destroyed Evernight(since it's gone), starved Spree and killed rebel leaders etc. etc. I also think he kept Rose not because it was "evil", but because she has more brains. Oh, and since Dwarves are gone in Overlord II, I think Overlord Mark 3 might have actualy cause a genocide of Dwarves.
Also, considering the whole series, a 'good/uncorrupted' Overlord is preferable to an incompetent ruler. I believe there was the case of the Black Baron, uncle of the First Overlord from Dark Legends, that enslaved towns, but was so adept at keeping everyone safe and alive, the only problem they had was being enslaved. And they supposedly took that as part of the deal, since he was overall a much better ruler than the one they lived under beforehand.
Why isn't Gnarl considered the Overlord, when he's the one running the show and bossing you around? I certainly didn't feel like a big bad ruler with him constantly chiding me like I was an annoying little kid.
Because he isn't the Overlord. He can't control the tower objects, or use magic, or wield the weapons of doom, or even hang on to the minion hives. He's been around a long time, and knows pretty much everything there is to know about being an Overlord, but he cannot actually do any of it. He is basically an advisor that gives really good advice.
If he's such a sage advisor, he should at least know how to address his Overlord with some respect, instead of constantly goading, nagging, demanding. At least in II it was justified, since he practically raised him, and he also wasn't as grating and Scrappy. I think it was just a player hand-holding decision on the developer's part, to keep constant cues for younger players. But it does wreck the purported gameplay dynamic, and makes the player less of an Overlord in command than a leashed gofer.
Gnarl's Evil, and invaluable enough that you can't just execute him. So he abuses his position for all its worth. Not really surprising he would do that, all things considered.