Originally Posted by Warlocke
Originally Posted by nation
Originally Posted by kanisatha
If I as the player find her to be evil, then she is evil.

lol, sry this just reminded me of the anakin quote from episode three

i actually dont think i disagree with your overall sentiment - i just think that alignment should be a working function of a bg3 game based on 5e. if larian includes/improves it where it impacts the gameplay in a meaningful way that, as you said doesnt set up biased roadblocks within the game preventing you from treating SH as evil, i think it will be real successful - i just want to see it first.


Alignment has virtually no rules in 5th edition. It is barely a thing at all. There are no spells or abilities that have anything to do with alignment, and there are a tiny handful of legendary items that can change your alignment. Outside of those, alignment has been functionally removed from D&D.

Now it is more a feature of the lore than anything else.

Yes I agree. It is no longer a feature in the rules because it is left up to DMs and players to determine them. But in D&D/FR lore it is very much still a thing, and justifiably so. And a video game like BG3 is not just about the rules and mechanics but also about the lore. And Swen has repeatedly said BG3 will be faithful to FR lore.
Originally Posted by Zarna
What do you consider biased roadblocks? Characters shouldn't act only of their alignment. If Shadowheart does good things and likes if you are nice in some situations, this to me makes her have more depth. Same thing with a good character, they should have moments where they aren't so nice. None of this should prevent you from forming an opinion about any character and treating them accordingly but it should make you think a bit.

Actually I agree with this. But at the same time the game should also honor FR lore, and specifically in this case lore about Shar. Choosing to be a priestess of a god and faithfully following that god's dictates is not some casual thing a person takes on for themselves. It says something fundamental about a person. It's not in the same category as behaviors like choosing to pet a puppy or kick a beggar.
Originally Posted by Abits
a player who is lawful good will never take shadowheart simply because she is a priestess of Shar. It doesn't matter to him what she says and does, from his lawful good perspective she is evil period

In SH's case, yes. Because being a priestess of an evil god is not something casually done. Becoming a priestess is the result of some deepseated commitment you have made to that god, which includes fully accepting that god's ways, and you have spent years building yourself up in that role. So yes, someone says they are a priestess of Shar, I would absolutely write them off. If someone kicks a beggar, however, I would not write them off as evil and will instead look for ways to get them to behave differently. There are clear qualitative differences.
Originally Posted by Nicottia
People who don't take characters into their group cause 'oh no, Astarion is a vamp spawn/tried to knife me, therefore he is evil' or 'Shadowheart follows Shar, therefore she must be evil' are either ignorant, or choose to role play their characters in a shallow way

Way to kill your credibility. Anyone who doesn't do things your way is ignorant and shallow. What a load of bull.