Guys. Come on. Based on established FR lore, a gith Kith'raki would not just fly away and leave a subordinate to claim his queen's ultimate prize.
And I don't care how much Halsin believes in balance of nature, if someone killed all of his friends and loved ones, I doubt he'd just casually accept it especially since he shows examples in other ways of being very passionate about the grove and his friends there.
Come on. The story doesn't line up with itself or established FR lore.
Oh yes. Just read a bit about extremists and fanatism. Easily explainable. I already told soul-scar a few posts back. And especially D&D, that had so much going for alingnments. For people that think "normally" that is not understandable. Go a bit into psychology and you will understand the explanations. That has nothing to do with rationality.
I cant help the feeling that this should not even be matter of debate ...
I dunno how about you, but i allways followed rule "DM has spoken". :-/ We might not agree with his conclusions, but once DM say that some NPC will react like this, or that ... it simply will.
And right here, DM is Larian.
But, in this particular situation, as in everything regarding BG3 until Larian says otherwise, the DM has asked for our opinions. Stating that things are like this because Larian decided it so and that it's therefor not up to debate, is like saying we can stop giving feedback all together and should just let Larian do their thing. Sure, we can do that but what will we then do with all our free time?
