Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Killing Goblin Kids ok but not Tieflings

maybe a troll, maybe not, who knows

At least your honest.

I guess the border between trolling and satire is fluid

@onemanarmy
I see the parallel. Is speciesism the same as racism?
To quote Dawkins:
"The director of a zoo is entitled to "put down" a chimpanzee that is surplus to requirements, while any suggestion that he might "put down" a redundant keeper or ticket-seller would be greeted with howls of incredulous outrage. The chimpanzee is the property of the zoo. Humans are nowadays not supposed to be anybody's property, yet the rationale for discriminating against chimpanzees is seldom spelled out, and I doubt if there is a defensible rationale at all. Such is the breathtaking speciesism of our Christian-inspired attitudes, the abortion of a single human zygote (most of them are destined to be spontaneously aborted anyway) can arouse more moral solicitude and righteous indignation than the vivisection of any number of intelligent adult chimpanzees!"

I do not believe in the existence of universally true systems of morals. The vast majority of humans do and your point should provide food for thought for them

I lold at the hashtag.

I agree with that . People think about their culture and moral as an absolute value when often, it's relative. This often border to irrationnal, as people have a hard time understanding that what they were taught as kid / in family / in their culture isn't necessarily true.

I did too but sometimes I can't tell if someone is being serious or not as unfortunately there are people that take fictional scenes as if it were real life.

I can't believe this conversation exists. I can't believe that such obvious flame-bait is being discussed. Some people need to take a long hard look at the things they feel moral indignation over.

It is universal. We are mostly brought up in the Western World, which stretches from Europe to the Americas to Oceania, we share the same basic set of morals, which only changed slightly over the last couple of thousand years. Take the 10 commandments, for example, they are still mostly applicable, stealing, lying, murdering, cheating, jealousy and greed, honoring the family and so forth, even the one where you are supposed to have only one god or whatever belief you adhere to. Today, what has been added is the freedom of speech and the right to integrity of the human body, although this could be covered by not murdering. Basically every constitution is just a reinterpretation of these 10 commandments, although similar beliefs applied before that as well.

This does not mean other things can not be included, it is a constant change. 50 years ago, civil rights movement. 20 years ago, no gay romance option in BG2. Your example is great, because there has been a constant shift and debate over the treatment of animals and especially apes. Only four years ago there was this headline: "Monkey selfie case: judge rules animal cannot own his photo copyright A San Francisco court said that while the protection of law could be extended to animals, there was no indication that it was in the Copyright Act" 20 years ago this would have been mostly unthinkable.
There is also the indigenous people on the Sentinel Islands that attack anyone that comes close and killed the stupid missionary two years ago. From our POV they do seem "evil" and murderers, but that is not the whole story, otherwise we would be enraged and bring them our morals by force.
To swing back to this game and this incident, so what are Goblins? Are they closer to the Sentinelese people or are they Chimpanzees? In the first case they should clearly be awarded our morals, regardless if they keep their unknonwn set of rules. If the latter, when was the last time you guys killed an infant vertebrate, and why don't you do it?
The game is designed with our western morals in mind, that are the same almost worldwide, hence the implementation of this encounter is at least spicy. Plus of course, while the German law, and a big, big market for BG3 has been a little more lenient regarding those things, especially if they fill an educational or artistic purpose, you would be hard pressed to see that purpose in killing infants running away. Now, all it takes is one complaint to the BPjM and they have to discuss it, possibly leading to indexing, which in turn means Steam won't sell it and might not let you activate it either, so that market's gone. But I am sure Larian is aware.

I think a lot of the issue comes down to the way goblins are portrayed in this game in particular.

Historically in fantasy computer games, Goblins were often portrayed as largely mindless monsters. Cannon fodder. Mooks to be mowed down. Sometimes you got a bit more flavor than that, a tiny bit of (generally) hostile dialogue, but even then goblins were usually portrayed as warbands of able-bodied soldiers. You didn't really get to see non-combatants.

BG3 is different because the Goblins are fully rendered, usually have names, and dialogue options. They are not portrayed as monsters, they are portrayed as people. This makes it a bit squeamish to consider as a "good" character just slaughtering the lot of them.

Right? I rush ahead to collect the snails off the road every time someone has to drive out during the summer. I really don't need to feel guilt over killing a goblin

We are so dramatic as a society in general, we go from insensitive to oversensitive.

Even Gale complains if you kill the ogre and bugbear that were bonking in their shed as being unreasonable kills.

But killing goblin kids for throwing stones at a bear, yea ok sure that's totally fine /s.

I really don't understand why people virtue signal for races that were originally created to be fodder/evil.

You can have a society and culture and the majority of them be evil or bad compared to yours. People are so focused on "but the goblin I made is actually chaotic good so don't discriminate against goblins!"

Congrats, your goblin is an exception. The same goes for every "lower" race meant to be enemies for XP.

The thought process for killing the goblin children was that they were going to warn the rest of the camp. That's literally what they are trying to do if you don't kill them fast enough.

I like what PFK does. Lawful good goes hardcore in the eradication of ogres, orcs, and monster races in general for the sake of all the is "Good and Just" but it obviously seems like genocide. I remember there was a moment where I had the option to kill this monster dad's kids after I killed him. The lawful choice was to kill them, chaotic choice was to let them go. Both good if I remember correctly. It shows the hypocrisy that good is in relation to something. Law of your culture or freedom to live.

Cry about murdering goblin kids.

Then rasp in agony as that same goblin kid backstab you and eat the nape of your neck.

Maybe Larian could introduce a liberal arts college safespace in the underdark for the termally offended? I think a new difficulty called "safemode" would be a good idea so social studies majors don't get their mental trigger towards "wrong think" and start flapping around like Jim Carrey on cyrstal meth while trapped in a locked elevator with a maga hat.

I was not well pleased with some of Kingmaker's ideas of what "good" entailed. Especially since they basically force it on you.

I expected that the goblin kids (at bear druid scene) will run away when the fight starts, and they did. Those goblin kids are evil, but would be difficult for them to be anything else in that entourage.
Usually most games avoid the child killing. I remember killing demon kids in Nox (a Diablo like old RPG), but maybe they weren't kids, just smaller demons (they were red, attacked in groups and had funny sounds when exploded on death doing AoE damage, so was very different to BG3 goblins).

Child killing needs the option to be avoidable, which is in there so far. Rest is up to the players (some will do it, but most won't "enjoy" pointless kills)

Tryed ... killed ... i dont see your point. O_o

one of them is a player race and one of them isnt.
Also theres no negative stereotypes of goblins. Its not a stereotype, its a type. the type is caleld "goblin"

Tho i admit, you should definitly be able to kill tiefling children just as much
How else are you gonna roleplay that conquest paladin.

You're missing the point completely. The problem is the weak stomached "law" people FORCE games to be "Appropriate".

Personally I say have games get MORE dark. We have people dying on TV and it's considered entertainment. The life of someone young is implied to "matter more". Welp, not to me. Age is moot. How you AFFECT me determines if I run you through or care about you. Witcher 3 should really let you have the option of killing the "blue kids" and let you be as evil as you please. But the game forces you to be a goody two shoes. Normally I am. But damn, where's the CHOICE? It's a game of MONSTERS and how people FEAR them. Sure, you're a witcher and should know better. But we see countless times that even witches are flawed. So why can't OUR character be just as bloodthirsty and ruthless as that if we want them to be? Just as capable of giving in to bloodlust and anger and vengeance and killing little blue snots playing pranks at your expense as they laugh at you and mock you?

The only gripe I have with the goblin children is that the game seems to force you to either let the bear remain tortured or kill them. There should be a middle ground.

You can also let a godling die to a snake. You technically don't "kill" them yourself but you can let it happen and watch with a smirk on your face. Hell, outright running them through yourself might even be a mercy killing at that point. It would traumatise them less.