Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Patch 7 Ascended Astarion's kisses goes against his story as written

Personally, I like it this way. Once you have taken control of the brain, you are his equal again, so you can kiss as equals once more (Well, technically the player character holds the stronger leash, but both characters have given their autonomy to the other at one point if the pc went through the last-night-alive.) My interpretation of course.

You didn't understand me. FOR ME, these kind of kisses, when because he has never discussed with Tav if they are okay with such rough treatment.
My interpretation doesn't change because Tav is happy now. It's not about Tav expressions, it's about AA doing such things without asking their partner about them first.
Now I've never said that other people can't read it very differently.
I was always only speaking about how they look to me. And I like them only when my Tav thinks just like I think and when for my Tav such treatment is scary.

And since AA canonically will refuse to break up with Tav after tadpoles are gone, I said that I have the right to have such interpretation. Canon never contradicts my interpretation, it's just as valid as yours.
Especially after what Neil and Larian writers said about AA.

I agree with this.

Can we please stop with the "mine is the REAL author approved CANON and yours is just HC" accusations.

It feels belittling.

Can you please read my response before accusing me of this?
The only thing I really called "Canon" is an objective fact from the game.

I'm not sure who "individuals who want noncon" is referring to. That's not what I'm calling for and I didn't see anyone else saying they wanted that. My personal opinion is that this route ALREADY contains noncon, ever since Larian added these rough kisses in patch 6 without proper warning for players. I didn't like that in the first place, but I wasn't on these forums back then to say anything. Now the harsh kisses are already here, and Larian has already spent development time adding them and then changing facial expressions. So it's too late to speak against these harsh kisses existing. And I'm not even calling for that. Because some players like the new kisses. And I want those players to be happy too. I don't want to take away what they like. As for me personally, the old expressions didn't trigger me even though I didn't like the kisses. For whatever reason, the new expressions DO trigger me. And that is valid. I've had an extremely difficult past few days after seeing them and only just BEGINNING to get back to normal. I hope that Larian will care about this unintended effect and compromise, because it's clear they weren't trying to make anyone unhappy. I should be able to kiss my romance choice too.

Discussion of mental health and triggers in relation to this topic.

Do you see all the forum posts asking for this? No? Then clearly this is a non issue or people would be bringing it up.

Edit: And for anyone trying to use the “more time on AA argument”. These aren’t new kisses. These are old kisses. The amount of effort needed to offer a flag based animations for something that already exists and was in the game is SIGNIFICANTLY less than making more kisses or changing expressions.

Respectfully, why does it matter to you what someone else believes is canon?

That is fairly simple to answer: If you say "this is canon" you say "this is real", Astarion being a vampire is canon. If there are two lines of interpretation that are contradicting, saying one is canon not so subtly implies that the other is wrong, leading us back to the "I am right and you are not" front.

like i said, this is not the correct dialogue tree to include the flag. because the two options of gentle or not can be interpreted differently, like you just demonstrated. if you think gentle includes biting twice, okay, i do not, and that is also okay.


actually no idea what youre talking about. please enlighten me because i am not sure what bug you mean.

you are free to disagree with me / us on having both expressions in the game. but your opinion doesnt change the fact that a big group of people is alienated no matter what which ONE patch is kept. like i said, his actions can be interpreted in various different ways. why are people here getting dragged for interpreting them differently? when you dont let astarion ascend he is also grateful. i dont understand what that has to do with what the right choice is or not. thats your interpretation and you own game canon, since you cant have both. so in your game ascending astarion is correct, thats all. AA is no more game canon than UA and no more right or wrong. so making one reaction to AA kisses canon for everyone, especially since they are both no subtle in any way, is wrong. even more especially since both expressions trigger different people for different reasons. and no, mods do not fix this. you should not have to resort to mods to not be triggered. it is an 18+ game, so difficult topics can be in the game, and the player is responsible for engaging with the content in whatever way they see fit. if you dont want to do the harleep scene because it is triggering, dont. you have the option. so having the option with AA should also be there.

literally nobody is trying to take smiling kisses away from you. i dont understand whats so hard to understand about this. but you cannot argue that some faces are triggering when people literally tell you they are. nobody is arguing that patch 6 faces arent triggering, because people said they were. same with patch 7. one is not more valid than the other. we want both options since they are both already completed and were / are in the game. i dont understand how you cannot see the hypocrisy here. if you want to use one option over the other, use it. but give other players the same choice.

the fact that other companions dont have this option is a problem, but a different problem. (not for me personally, i dont see why wyll would need different reactions from tav)
and using this card is strawmanning to a huge degree just to justify not making changes now that one group is happy when both could be. it does not compute in my brain how you can clearly see how upsetting it is for people and not want to help them enjoy the game. i can see how patch 6 triggers people, so i am all for patch 7 being *ADDED*. but its the same the other way around as well. what is so difficult to understand about this? do you want people to not romance AA as to not get triggered just so you can have what you want? this goes both ways hence the suggestion to have both in the game, making both canon to the respective game of the individual player.

edit to add: i really honestly thought by showing both sides in a neutral light in my long post before, there could be SOME understanding between the two. patch 7 supporters want patch 7, patch 6 supporters dont want to take that away. they just want patch 6 as well. i dont understand, this is literally so beyond me, how does having the option for BOTH take away anything from anyone?

This game do has non-con scenes in it:


So everything will be the same with the game's rating after giving an option to choose scared faces. No one is complaing about that option in the E!Durge evil ending.

Thank you, Anska. You said it much better than me! We're all just operating off of our own interpretation of the text. Tone, meaning, body language, motivation, are things that are interpretation when it comes to text and static/written characters.

"It's fine if you want to headcanon that but what I think is canon" isn't helpful in discussion. It's akin to, "you can make believe whatever you want, but it's wrong. Only my read is legitimate." We're all just here sharing our interpretation!

Okay folks, I'm seeing people on all sides of this argument complaining that others are saying that their view is the only correct or ethical one (and they're right that this is not helpful or constructive) whilst at the same time implying that their own view is the only correct or ethical one (which is not helpful or constructive). But I'd also ask that we recognise that of course people arguing for a point are likely to think it's better supported by the evidence, and arguing that in and of itself is not disrespectful of other opinions, as long as we don't try to shout those other opinions down by repetitive posting, belittle or mock others for having different views, or try to imply that others don't have the right to hold or express different preferences.

I would encourage everyone to take a step back and, while we all know it's easier to recognise problematic behaviour in those with whom we disagree than those with whom we agree, try to rise above factionalism and accept that there have been posts here from all sides that haven't helped the cause of constructive, friendly debate and do what they can to foster a more positive and less adversarial environment.

And to accept that it is both inevitable and absolutely fine that no matter how much we talk we will end up still disagreeing, and in the end we just need to recognise when we have made our points and stop going round in circles.

i also agree with that sentiment, i dont think i gave off the impression that i didnt. but since there are many ways to interpret the situations, which are canon in some games and not in others - what i mean is: the way you play and the choices you make, those become canon for your own game. like i said, there is no story-canon per se, so its all your decision combined that make that canon. - why can we not agree on having both options for tav? only the option you choose will be canon for your game. there is no need to play a narrative you dont like.

this is what i dont understand. in the end it is up to larian anyway, but if we agree between ourselves, it would make a convincing argument that larian might follow.
patch 7 expressions will be kept in the game no matter what, that is absolutely clear. but why cant we agree to have *additional* expressions with patch 6 (maybe less dramatic though)

edit: just to clarify, i am absolutely fine with patch 7, i might not like the overly enthusiastic expression but this is purely my view of the facial animation. i also think patch 6 was over the top just as much. i like that tav is smiling. but i also liked the distress on their face in patch 6. when i played my durge, it made sense for her to have that look. but there will be other characters that will fit patch 7 better. since when are we against having options? were we not all incredibly happy when options for different kisses were added? or when new options for classes or races were added?

Ok, but I do in fact think those who don’t see the abuse are wrong in their interpretation. So what? Why should it matter to them what I think? They aren't being forced to engage, they are choosing to despite knowing where I stand.

The only opinion I’m trying to change is Larian’s via my feedback and *ideally* the only thing I am interested in discussing is the best way to implement this change.

You didn't! I wasn't aiming my comment at anyone in particular. It's just a sentiment that I think hinders friendly and in-depth discussion in general. I'm not sure what else I'm allowed to say so I'll leave it there



I agree with most of this. Definitely! As for your question, as I've said since the beginning of all of this, my interest is in keeping non-con/dead dove things out of the game. There is no content warning for it. And players would have to metagame to avoid it. I do not see his kisses as him slapping or choking Tav. And I believe the faces for patch 7 accommodate for plenty of dark RP, as dark roleplayers themselves have also said.

Because it is a sensitive topic and, as you might have noticed, both sides (or at least some proponents of them) seem to feel somewhat threatened by such statements due to bad experiences. You can convey your sentiments to Larian just eloquently when voicing things as your opinion, preferably with giving reasons where you derived them from, instead of just framing them as canon. It's less offensive, conveys the same message and allows our dear Red Queen to maybe let the sceptre of moderation rest for an evening.

Please do not bring beefs from other forums to this one. Red Queen has made that clear.

With this logic we can find a lot of "there is no content warning" stuff in this game.

There is no content warning for when Tav tries to break up with AA before the epilogue and he won't let them.
There is no content warning that AA will bite/choke/put on their knees Tav during the kiss.
There is no content warning for E!Durge that you will
This stuff is already in the game without warning. Now, maybe it's not a non-con/dead dove stuff for you personally, but it certainly is for a lot of people.
This game is 18+. So what matters is not to avoid all the possible cases when people might get triggered, but to give them an option (if they are triggered) to play it differently.

Rephrased it, but the general sentiment holds, you can try to keep the sensitivities of your fellow forum members in the back of your mind when writing things. I think that should answer your question well enough. (I didn't even see there had been another moderation note inbetween - oops. ^^ This thread is too busy.)