Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback No small-sized Romanceable Companions :(

That argument seems weak, especially since Halfing is not the only choice. Dwarves are as common, if not more so in some locations than Elves in the Forgotten Realms. I see them a lot in various novels. Halflings are more of a Tolkien thing and not something you see widely discussed in various books from the Realms, even Gnomes are more commonly mentioned.

I agree, once again, with Niara. A halfling inflicted with lycanthropy, is not that out of normal for DnD. Most player characters in campaigns are more special. And compared with our over the top companions, Helia sounds downright normal.
Not saying, I don't like the companions, but there is a lot going on. So having ( to stay with a similar example) a high elf vampire spawn with a demonic ritual above his head, an abuse trauma, that he is working through, a sadistic master, that is hunting him is ok, but we draw the line at a halfling inflicted with something not that unnormal in a fantasy setting?
The voice lines , I heard from Helia, sounded pretty grounded ( plus the voice actress was great).

I will admit the caveat that "Halfling with lycanthropy" is what we know from the mines and the bits and pieces of scraped info - which functionally is no more than "Half-elf with vampirism" or "human with warlock pact".

Do I really believe that if Larian had gone ahead with Helia, that she would have remained as 'normal' as "good-hearted Halfling struggling with lycanthropy curse that gives her evil, violent compulsions" (As werewolf lycanthrophy is meant to do by realms lore)? No... I most definitely don't trust that Larian would have been satisfied with that. It would have almost certainly ended up being added to and stacked onto until it was something equally ridiculous and over-the-top to match the other incredibly special origin characters, by the time it reached us.

Come to think of it though... maybe that's another reason she got cut out? Maybe having a strange curse that created violent, bloody... some might even say, dark, urges was deemed too similar to their dark urge plans, and rather than rethink the character, they just scrapped her because that was easier?

So is vampirism and we have seen how much Larian cared about that.

And considering how much Larian already reuses tropes for companions like "Duped by a superior" (Shadowheart, Leazel), Ticking Timebomb (Karlach, Gale), I find it very unconvincing that similarity to the durge was a reason.

I'm not that familiar with all things vampires in the DnD canon, I only know, that vampires are evil beyond redemption. But is it the same with spawns?
I know, that Astarion becomes really evil, if he ascend and become a fully fledged vampire.

Niara: I agree, that Durge might be the reason, they decided to scrap Helia, more at least, than Halsin ( though Halsin is a boring companion and not really needed with his doubling down on race and class). I would get that, but it still would be nice, to have a halfling bard. I played a lot of halfling bards in my days and just would love to see it in the game.

If they had stayed with Helia, maybe she could/ would have been tied to the werewolfs guarding Cazadors ritual. I always wondered, why he would employ werewolves and maybe they would have been from Helias tribe and we could help her to free them from Cazadors influence. Would not have been the first companion story tied to another, see Wyll and Karlach.

Are werewolves in DnD always evil? I remember there was a good werewolf in BG and a werewolf companion, Cernd, in BG2. And Cernd was pretty good for a neutral aligned druid.

Well they haven't always been evil in the BG series; the first romance in the games was a werewolf; Delainy/Durlyle in Tales of the Sword Coast (they changed gender depending on your character; you didn't get to choose a preference back then). The other werewolves there admittedly not quite as friendly.

Werewolves are chaotic evil as monsters, but as actual characters they are not always evil. The monster manual talks about how an effort must be made to resist the bloodthirsty nature of the curse, and that even if you have someone who does resist the curse, they will go bloodthirsty on a full moon anyway.

The actual text:

Seems very dark urge-esqe when you look at that huh.

The manual also has a sidepanel about player characters as lycanthropes, and how the DM has to decide, based on whether or not the player resists their curse or not, to issue alignment changes, or even take control of the character until the curse is resolved.

Most DMs I've encountered don't approach a player character with vampirism or lycanthropy lightly. It requires a lot of communication between player and DM, with a high possibility of the character being removed from that player's control if they lean into their monstrous nature too much.

That fair, truth be told.

Vampire Spawn, by proper realms lore, aren't even really fully sapient creatures at all; they are quite literally soulless empty creatures with no will of their own and no sense of feelings or emotions - they are capable of acting like they do, but it is 100% an act. If you want a sapient undead, a spawn is not the answer.

Vampires working with werewolves is straight out of old Dracula lore, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the forgotten realms - but again, Larian mostly took the idea that h"they know what vampires and werewolves are, right?" and did their own thing, seemingly without caring that, in the forgotten realms, those things have certain rules and are defined a certain way, and not other ways (we've already covered how staking Astarion while he's creeping on you would have done little more than ruin his shirt; it would not have had any effect on him whatsoever, because that's not how vampires or their spawn work in the realms; Larian do not care).

Lycanthropes come in a variety of alignments across the spectrum, but this is generally dictated by the strain of lycanthropy they have; what are strong natural impulses and inclinations are further leaned into and heightened by the types of social structures (or lack thereof) that various types of lycanthropes tend to form or gravitate towards. Werewolves are almost always independent and fiercely Chaotic Evil (though in the wild, I think they do tend towards forming packs around themselves of wolves and dire wolves), while weretigers are generally neutral, and werebears most commonly form neutral good societies, as a few examples.

Edit: Piff beat me to it - her information is accurate to current 5e.

Both vampire spawns and werewolves are always evil in 5E rules. In 3.5 rules its the same for premade werewolves, but the lycanthrope template says that they can be any and that the "usual" alignment comes from the perception people have of the animal, meaning wolves tend to be evil. The vampire template still says always evil.

And in lore there was also some discussion about the differences between cursed lycanthropes and natural/born ones.

Also not only do many GMs and also video game producers not care about always alignment, obviously with Astarion who is a vampire spawn in name only, D&D is also phasing out alignment anyway so WotC would not really care.

Helia would also have had some very interesting interaction with Shadowheart and her fear of wolves....

Thank you all for the answers. So Helia being a good aligned werewolf ( from the lines, I heard, she sounded good aligned, having pity and trying to help) seems to be like resisting, good Durge - so I have to make a halfling bard Durge named Helia now ... I don't make the rules ( but any excuse to play halflings and bards). And it also sound like it is in accordance with DnD lore mostly.
The interactions with Shadowheart would have been interesting tbh.
About vampire spawn: that is interesting. So Astarion by all rights should be a better zombie. I can see the outcry of the fangirls
Maybe Cazador was written first, I heard, he had a bigger role in the first draft as a possible ally, and then they wanted someone aligned to him.

I couldn't agree more. I find the high fantasy and "I'm the main character in the universe" aspect to be clearly too much.

"Hello, in the same ship there are Divine Chosen, Mystra's lover, the right-hand man of an archidiablesse" etc.

This also poses a problem in terms of gameplay and character levels.

This is undoubtedly the main flaw in BG3's (and Divinity's) narrative: we're not a character in a universe, but the universe serves and exists for our character.

On the other hand, I stand by my remark that there's a difference between a character with a cheated background "I'm friend with Elminster and I sleep with Mystra" and a character built solely around a rare/strange/unique combo.

And just because there's a (questionable) direction doesn't mean we have to keep sinking into it.

Honestly, isn't halfelin and loup-garou a bit wacky?

"Oh look, it's the sweet little race, but SURPRISE it's the Big Bad Wolf!!!!" I still think it's cringeworthy, especially as it's combined with an old lady bard from what I understand.

I wonder if this concept wasn't recycled for the murdered Sharess Caress character.

I forgive and tolerate overpowered characters worthy of a fanfiction, but characters who are deliberately Swiss army knives because they're too rare, and therefore inevitably cool and unexpected, I find ridiculous.

A halfling bard doesn't have to be a werewolf to be interesting, I don't like when the identity of a character is superfial like " you know she's a halfling old granny bard werewolf".

None of the cult characters in the Baldur series have this kind of weakness...But that doesn't stop them from being cult characters, like Jaheira, Viconia, Edwin, Kagain, Imoen, etc.

And I still prefer a good evil Dwarf like Kagain concerning the "small-sized quota"

Someone ( I think Hobozone- I like his story flavored build videos) made a build video about Moradins Hammer - a dwarven elite group - I think it was a cleric / paladin hybrid. I found the lore interesting.
If we would get artificer, I could get behind a dwarven artificer ( basically a dwarven smith) of any alignment, but I would prefer a dwarven lady, we so often had male dwarf companions in DA ( with the exception of Sigrun) and BG, I want a lady dwarf.

I don't have a problem with halfling and werewolf as a concept. Nor with that Bhaal murderer being a dwarf or Wulbren being an evil gnome. Small can be evil ( or badass in halfling werewolf case) too.

Seluné has a good lycantrhope group within his worshippers, it makes sense since it is the Lunar Virgin.

The add of Artificer class will be a good opportunity for an exentric gnome of Jansen dynasty. But it's not an evil character and it's a big lack (In my opinion, Nere is a potential companion who is truly unique, with a very psionic magic, not my favorite taste because we already have a drow but the game really indicates this hypothesis).

Nah, not a lady dwarf please. I want a classic big beard dwarf in a modern game, the current trend in the design of this little adolecent down for Dwarves is a shame! :p

But the choice of class leaves me hesitant given the current consistency of the roster.

Nere would be the absolute worst to be added as a companion since Minthara already exists. Not to mention that it'd be the exact same repetition of the situation as it is with Halsin and Jaheira. So instead of 5 Elves, we'd have 6 Elves when the whole point of the OP's topic is the severe lack of racial variety, and more specifically the entire lack of tiny races.

I honestly would rather have Larian go crazy and make a Goblin a companion, like Sazza for example. A backstabbing little rat that owes her life to the player three times over. Now wouldn't that be something to have a completely unique race as a companion which would also give insight into the Goblin culture and way of life.

I'm agree but I was only pointing out that the game clearly indicates this possibility (unique skin, unique haircut, unique outfit). I am not a fan of drow in abundance but after we know nothing about him in the end and his background and evolution can be extremely interesting.

He read to be a bad character and as I said above, a character is much more than his class/race combination so difficult to judge in state.

But I'm agree, I’m already overdoing elves.

Not quite zombie like, but he should be much stranger than he is. Even when the tadpole somehow suppresses all his weaknesses (but doesn't protect from negative status effects for some reason), Astarion would still be undead which gets totally ignored.

He doesn't sleep, he doesn't breath, he doesn't tire, his hunger is not compareable to the hunger of a living being and you could cut of his arm and not only would he not feel anything, the arm would also regrow. He also wouldn't have felt anything when he was scarred, nor would the scars be permanent, unless maybe that was done before making him a spawn, but considering his backstory that is not the case. It would also be highly questionable if he could even have sex or feel anything (physical) during it because his body is a dead piece of flesh, nothing more.
Jaethal from Kingmaker is a much better representation of an undead, and still was humannized a lot.

It would probably make more sense if the tadpole (or the plot) changed Astarion to a Dhampyr, which is a living creature with vampiric traits, not a true undead. Illithids don't usually try implanting tadpoles into undead, for the obvious reason of: it doesn't work (shockingly few things are viable targets for tadpole implantation, actually. Gnomes, for example, usually aren't). We've got special magic tadpoles though, so now he's alive again, with lingering vampiric traits.

The last time people tried combining vampirism with Illithids, it... didn't go well.

Selune is a goddess, not a god
We already have an exentric gnome artificer: Barcus Wroot, he would make a great companion.

Nere on the other hand would be awful, not only is he a whiny little sh.., he would also double down on the elf squad.
Sazza for an evil playthrough would be much better.

And yes, I'm afraid, I have to insist on the female dwarf. I encountered so many male dwarf companions, I really would like a female dwarf.


Piff & Ixal: that is interesting about the spawns and Mindflayer vampires. In EA Astarion sat on his bedroll, but I think it was supposed to be normal elven trance. I wonder, if it wouldn't have been better to not make him a spawn, but a brainwashed servant of Cazador, who only could break free because of the tadpole.

And yes, I was aware, that gnomes normally can't be tadpoled. I was wondering in the beginning of EA, if that were the reason, gnomes weren't playable.

Barcus already has a place in the story and you can see with Halsin what happens when a NPC is ripped put and made into a companion after his story is written.
So i am categorically against making Barcus, Alfira or Nere into a companion/origin.

Larian sadly decided to remove all traits of vampires and undead from Astarion, both for playability and sexability.
The only thing that remains is the need for blood, which isn't really a need as apart from that one scene it never comes up.

Barcus is perfect where he is. But I'd love to have Wulbren as temporary companion, he's such an asshole, it's would be hilarious.

Lack of vampiric traits in Astarion was disappointing. Even playing his origin you think about biting someone a couple times in Act 1 and that's it.