Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion I just replayed Baldur's Gate 1, 2 and ToB and I have to say this. Why Larian? Why?

Honestly, I don't think a bland image like Halsin could outshine anyone, no matter what Larian does with old characters, even though they PR him and shove him in the player's face as much as they can. Maybe they're trying to make him brighter than Jaheira, "Look at what a druid we have, strong like Minsc and a druid like Jaheira". He manages perfectly well to only provoke anger with his brash behavior and all the threesomes, thus cheapening Orin's kidnapping quest (which should, in theory, be perceived as a misfortune, and, the player, nervous and worried about their companion, should strive to get him/her out as soon as possible, becomes a grace: "Oh, my dear enemy, thank you, now I won't see him in my camp again until the end of Act 3!" and Orin's quest is postponed to the very end of the game). Also, I can't help but note that Astarion, unlike Viconia, is literally made a toy for a "mass audience" here, while at first a player in their headcanon might think it would be difficult to gain his trust, when you later find out all the options for his romantic line, it's sad. You can even bring Gandrel into the camp and still get a romance with Astarion at a party, it cheapens the very idea of gaining trust and establishing a close relationship with an embittered and distrustful character. Viconia, as I recall, was pretty good at ironizing and teasing the player character when they did stupid things from her point of view, not just the companions. I was interested in revealing her more fully, and I created a male Tav in the second playthrough of BG2 specifically to romance her. And it wasn't an easy thing to do. My character, I thought, behaved in a very caring way towards her, but was honored by criticism that he was "sucking up". It was interesting, I had to replay it, try different things, explore the character - yes, it's an interesting and complex novel. I consider Astarion an unusual and original character, unlike anyone else, including in BG2, but I can't help but admit that I have a subjective attitude towards him, I stay in this game just for him, I just think that for this character (especially if they left the original idea of Stephen Rooney, didn't make him "less evil" and stuff) there is no need to deliberately spoil old characters. Minthara could be compared to Viconia, but that wouldn't really be fair to Minthara - Viconia had a sea of text and lines, but poor Minthara has how much? I mean, I understand what you mean, I just wanted to say that Larian and their own evil characters are clearly treated without much love - Astarion becomes a symbol of "needing to be fixed and redeemed" and pays dearly for his popularity with the pain and humiliation of his most popular "good" ending, and Minthara was given the least attention. Viconia in BG2 could have been attached much more easily - an evil character had the motivation to save her because she was a drow, or out of hatred for the Inquisitors, a good one also had the excellent motivation to save someone from being burned alive. And could also dislike the Inquisition, but to want to kill Tiefling children, squirrels and cute bears - no motivation, either "evil for evil's sake" or metagame and do it purely for Minthara's sake.

BG's lore has been distorted as much as it can be, that's a fact. For the sake of promoting their characters or their "moral lessons", or on the principle of "that's fine, we won't try too hard here". But for some reason it's the evil characters that are used as punching bags, and it's them that are purposefully killed. Minsc made some kind of "source of wisdom" - he gives characteristics to all companions, naturally, on the principle of "good and asses". I can't say that Larian spoiled him somehow, I don't know, but for some reason in BG2 he was funny, but here he is so annoying by the end of the game that I want to say to him at the party: "Get away from this little guy (the thief, whom Minsc first cheerfully held upside down on the roof, and then brought to the party), take your good, shove it up your ass and... Next time I'll be a monster, just so my eyes don't see you or Jaheira." They beat to a pulp the very spirit of RPG, which was in BG1 and 2 - realistic world, where you can do anything, make any decision, the consequences can like or dislike, but they are realistic, companions are independent and autonomous, they tell you off sometimes so that no BG3 with their "crown on the head" and did not dream, the player is not licked from head to toe, but not trying to "teach lessons".

About Bhaal - thanks for the information, I didn't think of that at first, but it's really true.


For myself, that's the rationale behind Jaheira's reluctance to use this ritual on herself, though really, she doesn't express it herself. Karlach, who could die at any moment and is clearly not concerned with this motivation, looks like a complete fool admiring Jaheira's speech instead of latching onto that hope and demanding the ritual be performed on her.


Beautiful words. That's how one should present a "dark romance" (and not only a "dark" romance, the options for immortality can be different) in a game. Larian, in my opinion, and here again "moral", only "evil" and "bad" character can want immortality.

I really don't think Larian is trying to actively teach any moral lessons with the game. They have their own perspectives that are appearing in the story, but that happens with every story. But I do find it baffling why they turned that druid immortality thing into a ritual when it's meant to be just an automatic thing that happens. However in defense of Karlach not asking for the ritual to be done to her, the way it works is that druids are ageless, but they can still be killed. So it wouldn't fix the engine. And doesn't Jaheira say that it's a thing for old druids anyway? I've only seen the scene once so I don't remember it very well.

There are such " perspectives" that it's as if they were put there with a sledgehammer, trying to leave a wet spot instead of "evil character" (of course, old "evil" characters of BG2 were the first candidates for this role) or the psyche of the player, if the player has the nerve not to support Larian's own perspectives (this is already something that concerns directly Larian "evil characters"). Clearly, someone who plays "good" is fine with it and doesn't see it that way - tastes differ, with different playthroughs, of course, there will be different experiences. The thing is, in BG2 it was "okay" for everyone to play - I don't remember a single review or opinion that the game tries to impose something, "teach" something, or favors "good" characters over "evil" ones, or tries to "punish" the player with "isolation" or worse for them "going the wrong way". So what Larian did with Viconia and Sarevok is perfectly invested in their concept and shows their " perspective". That's how you should "show evil." So that no one likes it. Those who haven't played BG2 will believe it ("Oh, your favorite companion was Viconia? That creepy aunt? She probably wasn't any better when she was younger, come on..."), those who have played are predictably outraged by it. Honestly, in my playthrough I wasn't surprised by it and took it as a given simply because by that time I had already spoilered Astarion's "redemptive ending", "liked to degrade myself", read all sorts of articles, talked to an acquaintance who was playing purely "evil", I came to the temple of Shar quite late, and saw Sarevok near the end of the game as the last quest before the final battle. The only difference with the OP in this thread is that it didn't surprise me, it wasn't a surprise, just an extra brick in the main building. Well, or a brick on the head, depending on how much someone who played BG2 appreciated these characters.

Jaheira tells Karlach in this scene that Karlach "really deserved it" (referring to the ritual, not verbatim, can't find a nearby save). The whole thing seems like an unfinished opportunity, no, there was no specific explanation there that it can only and exclusively be done by druids, just a line about it being a druidic ritual. Then Jaheira starts spouting all sorts of philosophy, Karlach gets all excited about it (and the fact that she's probably going to die soon, probably too). There's no coherent explanation about the ritual not working and why, or about how it can't be applied to anyone but Jaheira, so it's unclear whether this is unfinished content, or whether after "blah blah blah immortality fu" the player has to be convinced, realize that "fu" and appreciate the "philosophical implication".

Ironically, the Orin kidnapping thing is taken straight out of BG2 but implemented pretty poorly, when you first see your Romance disappear into thin air after Bodhi's dialogue, you start sweating bullets... (unless you are romancing the "A MAZ ING" EE companions that just "... you thought i'd need to be saved? I DON'T NEED NO MAN/WOMAN")
I've seen Viconia disappear so many times i've lost the count but it still gives me the same exact feeling of urgency every time, it doesn't matter that i know she's just a few chambers away under the graveyard.
The way you also have to carry your Romance's body afterwards, running like a madman/woman to Amaunator's temple and the dialogue at the altar also really add to that... solidifying the fact your Romance is really important.



Yeah, it's druid exclusive and causes you to age 1 year for every 10 that elapse... not real immortality, that's achieved in other ways.
But the annoying thing is that it isn't an "old druid" thing, it's a reward Nature bestows onto the most experienced Druids for their devotion(In the form of primal energies coursing through their body)... no ritual required.
About the moral thing, i think it's more a matter of them trying to elevate their own characters and convince people to hate the old evil characters(they succeed with most of those who'd never played the originals or weren't really invested/didn't know their characterization real well)... they even shit on the Dead Three by having Jergal chastise them and imply they will never be relevant again. Bhaal and Myrkul don't even get stronger despite all of the death and destruction that happened during the campaign.
Jergal is also wildly out of character and acts as a sort of moral validation for Durge "oh you made a life for yourself, separate from being Bhaal's chosen... uwu"

*Looks at the fact Quasi-gods can't bestow power, and at how Jergal's dogma includes "Never prolong life unless it furthers the end times", with him being Kelemvor's scrivener and knowing everything about anyone who dies but also making sure Kelemvor doesn't act too kind*

Yes! It's a very interesting and really emotional quest, it's nice to remember. I still played the first playthrough without the romance and after the dialog with Bodhi in the walkthrough with Viconia (especially since I was totally not expecting it, I thought I knew the game and it turned out Bodhi just didn't have a reason before) I myself just had a definitely emotional line burst out. The sense of urgency - it's definitely very easy to understand him (the character) and imagine what he's feeling right now. There's no other way to play it other than running like a madman.

Orin, of course, can kidnap not only Halsin, but also Lae'zel and Gale, and those players who have a romance with either of them can also experience something similar. Orin kidnapped Lae'zel first, and I myself sinned with a spoiler, as Lae'zel is an important fighter, I absolutely did not want to sacrifice her, and I was too eager to destroy Cazador, I was terribly reluctant to dismiss that and go after Lae'zel, anyway, Orin decided to get into kidnapping at the wrong time. But when I found out that I could offer her Halsin, I couldn't resist. Maybe it's also the fact that in BG3 there are fewer companions and they are all tied to the camp, so it's hard to get rid of someone you don't like, except to kill him, which, in general, breaks the roleplay, and makes Tav some kind of inadequate. There's no option to kick Halsin out, which is odd, he doesn't have a larva, he's in no danger of turning into an illithid, so kicking him out would presumably be safe, without the whole "sending him to his death" thing. In BG2 we've been tailoring the group to ourselves over time one way or another, I think kidnapping any companion from those I've chosen myself would give me a sense of urgency and even without the romance. Admittedly, there was no such urge to get rid of someone as there was to get rid of Halsin, either.

Agree with the above regarding BG2's handling of a kidnapping story beat. It was powerfully done both for the player and the player character, who at that point had been through Spellhold and the Underdark and back, and yet it still finds a way to hit them where it hurts.

About the only similar moment that came close from another RPG was...


D&D games had beautifully handled love stories for a long time, with BG2, Planescape: Torment, MotB as the shining pillars. They worked because they actually appealed to the emotional side of the player instead of the groin most of the time, and BG2 even punished you trying to "force" the romance plot (like when you don't deny Aerie's attempts to throw herself at the male Bhaalspawn, or being a mewling weakling in Viconia's eyes). BG3 touting itself like it reinvented romances when it's as simple as "grind approval - go to bed - maintain approval" is just one of so many fronts it failed to deliver on contrary to the inflated expectations, but I guess the Tumblr and r34 artists are having a field day to this day - though maybe they've switched to Hades II at this point.

That they did, cause they were actual romances; you had to be patient, converse with the love interests, hit the right spots and spend lots of significant moments with them, for the relationship to properly consolidate... i feel most recent games don't have the same charm. Rare exceptions in Wrath of the Righteous with Daeran and Arueshelae(Also Wenduag for chaotic evil characters. Arue is an attempt to recapture Fall-From-Grace, but even tho the romance is more fleshed out, i still find Grace's to land better and that last dialogue always sends shivers down my spine), cause their relationships are actually modeled similarly to the good ones of the old days and they also have failed/romance/true romance variations.

I once had an Unfair Lich run, pretty peculiar starting concept "Sarenrae worshipping Lich"; in short, the character eventually fell in love with Daeran, seeing him as a safe harbour in the storm of the events during chapter 3 end and chapter 4. She was a smart person, so when she got a certain call from Zacharius, she realized what would happen to her beloved if she were to continue on her pursuit for Lichdom.


By comparison in bg3 they throw themselves at you like Wenduag does... but way earlier compared to the "Powersexual" spoodercat.

In my opinion, this is a sign of our times. "Relationships" are seldom more than superficial and are so very easy to get.

I didn't get too far into WotR since I wanted to wait until all the DLC was out, but it's good to know that there is at least one studio still making games like this.

Eh... while this is a "mileage may vary" kind of situation, I do find that Owlcat's writing and especially romances are very awkward and too verbose for their own good. Comparing Arueshalae to Grace is very generous, in my opinion, as the former, while possibly inspired by the latter, feels like she went through at least two "generic anime girl" filters first. The scenes (especially in Kingmaker) are a trope after a trope (helping your to-be-queen to fasten her armor while awkwardly blushing is painful to read...), and their tendency to blurt out huge paragprahps with little to no formatting and clear Russian roots in their composition and sentence structure also make reading them somewhat harder.

I am yet to get to Rogue Trader because it's Owlcat and it's safe to wait at least a year, better two, before their games can be played and finished without running into softlocks and bad bugs, but, while their writing is still, erm, trademark, it at least seems like the setting contributed to its quality. I cannot take Golarion seriously, but am a huge WH40k fan (at least, of its less-modern incarnations), and the few bits I've seen make me somewhat hopeful. They held back from making your Sister of Battle companion romanceable, so that's already a great sign.

That's why i mentioned they tried to recapture Grace with Arue, the concept is basically the same about the succubus not being evil cause of circumstances(but English isn't my first language, so i can end up missing the mark when it comes to sentence structure/explaining), didn't say they succeeded ^^"; Besides, i would define Arue a sort of disney princess, more than a anime girl... especially for the last mission in her quest chain.

On the Kingmaker part, i omitted any mention cause i don't want to be reminded.

Pretty sure 'evil is supposed to be evil and unrewarding' line from the interview begs to differ pretty hard. Offering perspectives is 'what is evil or good,' eg game assumes x character in the story is justified in their actions or not but the player might disagree personally. BG3 takes it further in punish/reward the player in gameplay for being 'right' or 'wrong' and often pre-supposes why an option was chosen instead of letting the player define it. It's what puts far more linear RPGs like Witcher 3 over it in terms of choice and consequence for me, because BG3 and the writers of it come across as very preachy.

Didn't stop them from going full-on guro/torture porn with a few instances of, well, torture, and a lot of the Dark Urge's interactions.

However, the game's separate bits do feel like they have been written by people with very different vision of what the writing should be like, and they seem to have gone through no normalization of any kind, resulting in a tonal/quality rollercoaster. Like how the githyanki at the creche are written to be as bland and unlikeable as possible despite them being a potential ally against the illithid threat, meanwhile the Thorm/Gortash/Orin trio... or, rather, just the latter two - are all so quirky and "charming" (and somehow attact shippers!) and go out of their way to offer you an alliance even if you make your intentions to destroy them clear as day on several occassions. If anything, I would have liked Thorm to be more than an old man reduced to an arbitrary obstacle no matter whether you sided with the cult before or not, killing any and all semblance of alternative routes through the game.

It didn't, because no one was interested in making an 'evil' playthrough actually be a cohesive experience. It's there to have it. The vast majority of it focuses on being gross or transgressive, because it's intended to be something people choose and then reload to play the 'right' way or to be like 'wow, BG3 even lets you do X!' like the bear sex for shock value. It's marketing, which sums up my impressions on the BG tie ins. The game is a sequel to the WOTC novels, but it's paying lip service. Which is why 90% of it is jank, clunk and pointless.