Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Romance Interests are Awful!

Rumor has it (and also unlocked game files) that there will be 4 more companions, so these may not be the only choices for romance.

I may avoid romance altogether in BG3 because it's handled so poorly in most games like this. It's usually a predictable arc from "You're really not my type" to a drawn-out melting phase if you choose just the right scripted dialog. And then you're suddenly in bed with them after passing some trigger. You can see it a mile away, it seems forced and not natural. Romance by the numbers.

I dunno, I'll wait to see what the other companions are like. Maybe one will interest me.

[quote=Sigi98]We're talking about a fantasy world in which exists magic and hundreds of different gods, planes, and even going to literal hell seems not that far from everyday life. And people are saying its unrealistic that everyone is bisexual....../quote]

*adjusts glasses*

Well, being technical with how odds works, it would be unrealistic.

Side notes:
- There are also only 30 gods in the Forgotten Realms
- There aren't THAT many planes , especially if you exclude transitive, the never used "quasi-transitive" and Sigi - which, btw, I would rather DIE than pronounce SIG-il.
- The Hells are frequented by many across spheres and planes, but those are individuals who typically have the means to and want more power than they currently have - mages and the like. More often people beseech devils and summon them from where they are and make their bargains that way. This just happened to feel like it because a city that is about 1 day away from you just returned from it and its leaving some ripples.

:p

Heh, mine are mostly female Drow, because that seems to be the default, and I'm lazy.

Those two things are.. completely different subjects, what does magic have to do ANYTHING with this?

Its the classic "Godzilla is out there destroying the city and me kicking you in the balls is all you can think of right now?! Priorities man, priorities, you're losing sight of the forest by looking at the trees!"

That said, I find myself agreeing with OP, 3 of the current followers seem to be absolutely terrible people, leaving Wyll, who thinks he's some sort of superhero, and Gale, who's in love with a Goddess, and thus I've no time to try with.
Also, my character is male, and would prefer a female character.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who leaves it at default...just like all my characters are named Tav.

It fits though. He was a noblemans son, useless, shipped off to the fist to grow some hair on chest, got in a fight and they ripped his eye out and he woke up in piss having shit himself from terror and asked a power for help to make him stronger so that would never happen again. Now that he has sold his soul to a devil for power to be able to fight for those who are as weak as he used to be he better take good use of it and feel like hes doing the right thing or that is a hefty price to pay.

There's more than 30 gods in Toril....just a lot of them aren't listed in the 5e stuff because there are TONS of them. There is literally an entire sourcebook's worth of Forgotten Realms dieties.

While, for obvious reasons, I'm in general in favor of not turning these discussions into communal mockery(don't think its going to happen though), the OPs wording, that's sprinkled with deriding right wing gender trolling terminology and thirsting after the look of a fictional war criminal responsible for setting of weapons of mass destruction on elves, makes me assume the exclusion of others (different subjects) is a central part of the inclusivity the OP seeks. It's the presences/inclusions they passionately object to, not the absences/exclusions.

I know it right? xD

I don't like any of the companions or their romance options for two major reasons.

The first reason is that all of the companions felt to me that we where treading the same ground and rehashing the same tropes from Larians previous games. The old its not plagiarism if I word it differently meme. This is more predominant with some companions(I'm looking at you shadowheart) than others. It even feels like some Dragon Age was sprinkled in here and there and I'm genuinely disheartened that they didn't set out to write characters after making a list of common game companion tropes and removing them from the pool of ideas. There was no reason for them not to push forward in this department when they have dedicated writers and there are some notable figureheads in the modern high fantasy literature department that would have been abundantly happy to offer advise and expertise pro bono had they asked for it.

The second reason is that the companions are... off. I understand they are all being written so that they can be main characters but this not only makes them all feel inauthentic and artificial but also detracts from my experience with my own character just like it did in DivOS2. My MC feels lesser, like he is a side character and just along for the ride. I was not a fan of this mechanic in DivOS2 but it didn't bother me so much on account of it being Larians IP but this time it isn't and I don't feel it should have made a comeback. I am hesitant to actually dole out criticism for them individually as my reading on these forums so far has given me the impression that it will be met with hostility rather than earnest debate but when it comes to the romances I feel as though they are unnecessary and when coupled with sex scenes very tasteless.

I feel exactly the opposite, companions being build like this makes them more realistic, everyone is the MC of their on lives, companions in most games are build as Just followers, here they are build as actual independent characters ready to Go their own way If need be. That doesn't make you MC Lesser, just more equal, which is exactly the feeling an adventurer should have on a DnD party.
And I'd argue that saying companions are like those on DOS is very much a stretch, for instance this post was started because someone was frustrantes because they didn't have a companion like those on DOS. And I also don't see that many similarities without doing that thing where you put so little datail in a description that any character ever fits it

Yeah, I'm also 99% sure OP isn't a woman, and just some steam teenager boy troll.

Here i don't think that your problem is the companions being special as much as our 'custom character' being extra generic (and lovingly nicknamed Tav McBlanderson by some folk on a thread dedicated to this particular issue.)
The romances could for sure use some more content, because yes, rn, they feel too superficial and could hardly be called romances, but it's EA.... who knows what the romances are actually going to look like in the long run.

I understand where you are coming from but them being the MC of their own lives does not mean they have to be the MC of the game. There are many ways to give companions agency outside of giving them the identical plot hook across the board and their realism is something that will be reflected by their overall design and actions throughout the game. This is the reason why I said it cheapens them because it feels shoehorned in unnecessarily. Would you find the companion realistic if they had the same plot hook and MC status but constantly acted in an unrealistic way or broke character? Similarly if they didn't break character and acted realistically and their quest revolved around their own goals and issues but they didn't have the MC checkbox ticked would you find them less believable?


This is not a D&D party, and this is not a D&D game in the tabletop sense. That necessity for absolute equality in a tabletop setting is because there are other humans creating and controlling the characters. It is a single player videogame and a bunch of artificial companions suffering the same plot hook as my MC doesn't make them any more or less equal than me and it didn't affect my assessment of them in older BG games either. I never felt that Valygar was not my MC's equal because he wasn't a Bhaalspawn and the status of being a Bhaalspawn didn't affect my opinion of anyone else because it's not a personality and while it may influence their decisions it does not reflect their actions. This is in fact one of the bigger themes of the game. This is why I said it made my MC feel lesser and it made them all feel lesser because the game is boiling down the importance of in universe characters to a checkbox with MC labelled next to it. Think of this in reverse and what the implication is for everyone that doesn't have the MC plot hook. Are they now automatically less equal than the party members?


I didn't say the companions where like the DivOS companions, I said they where treading the same ground and same themes such as Shadowheart and Sebille. I'm not willing to go into detail as again so far my impression of this board has led me to believe that it will be a poor experience with little merit.

That's current year for ya... Although, it could also be because he's... you know... a sparkle sparkle.

On topic... even if probably tall, leather skinned and only killable with fire... I dunno. As far as evil-ish companions go, they are more or less fine. Could there be manlier guys? Sure! How about young, handsome dwarven Paladin, or a tall, dark and handsome barbarian? Some more variety, please... same goes for the girls. We are definitely missing a more homely, kind, shy girl and/or an ara ara, man eating "big sister"... preferably a ginger.

Yeah this is pretty sus. Can we vote them off the ship? WAIT WRONG GAME

If we could just stop derailing from the subject because of some politics and namecalling, that would be great.

As a Gay(tm), I have to say I am very very happy with the male romance choices. For once I feel spoiled for choice... and I'd hardly say Gale is 'girly'.