Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Lae'zel's Personality is just.... too much.

Ok, I know not everybody feels this way, but hear me out.

I think we all love a good antihero or conflicted "kind of an asshole" party member.... but the "kind of" and "-hero" parts are kind of important there, and I can't be the only one who feels like Lae'zel is kind of JUST a hostile, racist, abusive, psycho and wonders why anybody would party up with her, can I?

For the life of me I can't think of a single positive thing I've heard her say to another party member. She feels so one-dimensional, and that one dimension is basically being a horrid space-nazi who's constantly 2 seconds away from murdering her own party.... and honestly, it's exausting. I've played through the first half or so of Act 1 probably 30 times now, and not once have I kept her in my party, because I just get so tired of every time she opens her mouth (which seems like it's more often than almost anyone else) it's to insult, belittle, or threaten her own teammates.

It's even more frustrating in early access, since she's really the only front-line warrior type we have access to, so people like me who just find her grating and unbearable essentially have our PC class choices significantly narrowed, or else have to deal with playing an incredibly squishy party with few protections, which makes the whole thing much more difficult. I assume (and hope) this will be corrected with more companion options in full release, but oh my god has it been a slog barely getting to play with other options because I have to always be the Lae'zel of the group in order to create any sort of party balance.

PLEASE give us some sort of update to her similar to what you guys did with Shadowheart. Don't get me wrong, I get the value of (and thematic appropriateness of) the broad sweeps of her personality, but if we could dial down that meter down from a 10 to maybe a 7 or 8 and maybe give her a single redeeming quality at some point (hopefully early on before people like me give up on her) that would improve the experience SOOOO much.

There are few things as frustrating as a one-dimensional character.... but when that one dimension is "arrogant, abusive, space nazi who's going to kill you in your sleep" .... ugh, I just get so burnt out on her bullshit that it actively hurts my enjoyment of the game.

Being a racist, abusive psycho is what redeems Lae'zel. If she was a peaceful lovey dovey githyanki I would just kill her on the spot, like I kill all the tieflings in the grove.
I honestly really disliked her until we arrived at the tiefling camp and she humiliated Zorru, like he deserved.

Honestly I think she's a breath of fresh air. Most games can't handle evil companions. In fact I think I'm kinda disappointed with Larian, because they told us that we will ge the evil companions in Early Access, but let's face it, only Lae'zel and Astarion are (kinda) evil, the rest of them are good people with a chip on their shoulder. (Shadowheart is definitely not an evil companion, and that's a total disappointment.)

Now I certainly agree that we need more companions with a high STR score, because someone has to carry the loot, and playing a caster MC is fun, but complaining that Lae'zel is a bad person even though that's exactly what her appeal is, is just a bad idea. I honestly wish that when the full game comes out, Shadowheart, Astarion, Gale and Wyll will all become these really fucked up evil people who are actually interesting to have around. I also hope that we get 4-5 more companions who are actually good guys.

No ...
Just no!

Lae'zel is perfect as she is, and if someone dont like her, there is enough other companions to pick ...
Dont just make everyone sweet and fuzzy as all other games. -_-
There is finaly some real character and people want to ruin it.

I agree with Rag that her personality is good as is, she's currently my favorite character I think. But there is one issue I do have with her, and that she's so rigid and so focused and arrogant that it really does strain credulity that she sticks around with us if we do anything other than go straight to the gith. She can say repeatedly that she thinks we're weak and soft and generally talk down to us, so the fact ahe sticks with us feels out of character. You can say that she recognizes strength in numbers, but I don't think that's true to her character either. She's an arrogant racist zealot, they're not given to that sort of logic or self awareness.

BUT!

Just so im not so negative ...
If you really want Lae'zel to be nicer to you, i suggest to make Githyanki ... she is still harsh, but didnt seem even nearly as harsh to me.

I can see both sides: I agree that Lae’zel’s abrasiveness is a large part of her charm, but also that the degree to which she’s rude doesn’t actually make much practical sense given she does want allies, and teaming up with her does involve roleplaying either a certain amount of eye-rolling tolerance or teeth-gritted acceptance that the githyanki are a good lead for dealing with the tadpole.

I’m not a big fan of Shadowheart’s change of personality from the early patches when taken at face value, and hope it turns out she’s every bit as contemptuous as ever but has learnt to hide it better, which would actually make more sense for a manipulative Sharran than alienating people she wants to use for her own ends. And while that level of deviousness wouldn’t make sense for Lae’zel, I do think there are places where it would make more sense for her to compromise or keep her mouth shut. But as a player I’d miss her snark, so I’d prefer she’s left as is than that she’s toned down too far.

Or, picking up on Gray Ghost’s point, perhaps she should just dump the party and head off to the creche if we don’t follow her lead within an acceptable timescale.

For the full game, I think we can expect more strength based characters, like Karlach and Minsc, so we won’t be as reliant on Lae’zel if we want a warrior type in our party, giving Larian more flexibility to take her out of our party if that makes narrative sense.

I remember that there used to be a scene where Shadowheart sneaks upon Lae'zel and murders her in cold blood. I really want to get that back into the final game.

Really?! I don’t recall ever coming across that, though admittedly I only did quick run throughs of the first few patches and only tried to be more completionist from around patch 6 onwards.

The Githyanki are a militaristic and highly organized society of warriors who are often depicted as antagonistic towards other races, particularly humans and elves. In terms of alignment, the Githyanki are typically portrayed as Lawful Evil. This means that they adhere to a strict code of conduct and hierarchy, but they are primarily motivated by self-interest and personal gain. They are willing to use violence and aggression to achieve their goals, and they do not shy away from using deception or manipulation to further their own ends. The Githyanki code of honor emphasizes strength, courage, and loyalty to one's own people above all else. They believe that only the strong have the right to rule, and that all other races are inferior to them. As a result, they often engage in raids and battles against other races, seeking to conquer and subjugate them. Overall, the Lawful Evil alignment of the Githyanki reflects their strict adherence to a code of conduct, as well as their ruthless pursuit of power and domination. While they may have some redeeming qualities or individual members who are more complex, as a society, they are generally depicted as antagonistic and dangerous to those who do not share their beliefs.

As a Githyanki warrior, Lae'zel adheres to a strict code of conduct that values strength, honor, and loyalty to one's own people above all else. She is a fierce and formidable warrior who is not afraid to use violence and aggression to achieve her goals, which can sometimes put her at odds with other characters in the game. Lae'zel's Lawful Evil alignment can be seen in her actions and motivations throughout the beta. While she may betray her own people for personal gain, she does so in a way that is consistent with the Githyanki code of honor. She is also willing to use violence and intimidation to achieve her goals, which can make her seem ruthless and calculating at times. However, her adherence to the Githyanki code of honor also means that she can be trusted to keep her word and remain loyal to those who have earned her respect. Overall, Lae'zel is a well-written character who is perfectly suited to her Lawful Evil alignment. Her motivations and actions are consistent with the values of her society, and her interactions with other characters in the game are always interesting and dynamic. Whether you love her or hate her, there's no denying that Lae'zel is a compelling and complex character who adds a lot to the world of Baldur's Gate 3.

Having recently done a little research on the Githyanki, they're typically considered "Chaotic Evil", an inverse to the Lawful Githzerai. But of course their society is highly militaristic too, so you have an interesting juxtaposition, that I don't think the source material tries too hard to reconcile. The best I can make of them, they're more like a Mongol Horde but with an eternal and undying Genghis Khan unifying them. Actually I guess Genghis disappeared a millennia ago, and everybody is waiting for her to return while stuck doing the last thing she told them to.

I think Lae'zel is clearly acting Lawful Evil, considering she's pretty low on the totem pole she probably never had enough clout to be given any autonomy. In 5e, Githyanki aren't considered 'graduated' to Gith society until they're taken on a successful Mind-Flayer raid. I enjoy her brusque attitude, and am especially curious to see how it develops after we go to the creche. Also giving Tav and Lae'zel a few more opportunities to challenge each other would be a good thing for both.

Does she tho?
I would say she see us more like servants, tools, or means to an end ... but allies is a bit strong word, that would imply she sees us as equals ... while, using her own words, she is a Wyvern, and we are Worms.

Im pretty sure this was datamined by Chubblot, and it was never live in Early Acess ...
Especialy since there is only one recording on youtube (as far as i know) ... wich is happening between Gale and Gale, since "that was the only way he made it work" as Chubblot said.

Not that I care much about the companions, since I'm a custom party fan, but here's my impression to Lae'zel:

For me she is almost the same as Viconia DeVir was back then. There is only one big difference here, which probably offends many. While Vicci lost her connection to Lolth and found comfort with Shar, and over time found trust in our party by showing her weaknesses sometimes, and this is not the case with Lae'zel at all, because she wants to please Vlaakith. I am very curious to see if there is a twist to this in BG 3 and Lae'zel is also cast out by Vlaakith, is lost and confused, is picked up by our party and goes through a similar evolution as Vicci in terms of her experience and relationship with others. Of course, it would then be a kind of Vicci copy, but something like that has stood the test of time.

And yes there are still front fighter companions missing. It is possible that we will get a Kensai: https://scryfall.com/card/clb/290/oji-the-exquisite-blade

Some players says they hate companion X and the next players loves them.

Laezel has been my most taken origin in my party and made a great contribution. Plus I enjoy her voice barks talking with SH and Astarion.

But one more "good" companion, say little and furry would be fantastic.

Uh. Enough companions to pick?! Is this joke of the year? Out of a <Baldur's gate> 3 roster of 7 whooping companions. The RPG choices we have are just outstanding.
Right.
Boy how have standards dropped. Quality over quantity I guess is the excuse. Apart from a character or two, I am not seeing nor the quality or quantity.

It's worth noting that the number of companions in a game is not necessarily an indicator of its overall quality. While Baldur's Gate 1 had only 6 companions, it was still widely regarded as a classic RPG, and the success of that game led to the development of Baldur's Gate 2.

Similarly, while Baldur's Gate 2 had a much larger roster of companions, it did not necessarily lead to the immediate creation of Baldur's Gate 3. Game development is a complex process that involves many factors beyond just the number of available companions.

That being said, it's important to note that the quality of the companions is often more important than the quantity. It's possible that Baldur's Gate 3 will have fewer companions than Baldur's Gate 2, but if they are well-written, well-developed characters, then the game could still be a success.

Ultimately, the success of a game depends on a variety of factors, including gameplay mechanics, story, world-building, and character development. While the number of companions is one aspect of a game, it is not necessarily the most important or the only factor that contributes to its overall quality.

I think making Lae'zel more agreeable would be dishonest. Fans who are steeped in the lore of the Githyanki would be disappointed (including me). She is a product of her experiences and a brutal childhood of martial discipline and constant training. You would be the same as her if you survived that.


Yeah pretty much - She refers to the PC as "Istik" - which is the Githyanki word for 'meat' or 'meatbag' - oddly the word for Plant in Estonian though. Also not the first companion to refer to the PC as Meatbag as I recall.

Yup ...
If you dont like Lae'zel, you have 4 more to pick ...
If you do, there is only she ...

Seems clear to me wich side would need some filling. :-/

Statement: Ideed, master.

It would be nice if Lae was more precise and pragmatic in her hostility. Especially in the sense that she'd be more conscious of the fact that she's not among her own people, and that she has to rely on foreigners, even if she regards them as tools.

Her unwillingness to let you handle things when it's prudent (like letting you ask about the gith patrol from the tiefling before resorting to threats of violence) imo just seems careless and undisciplined even when taking into account theviolent gith culture. But this type of reckless behavior, that doesn't take into account where you are and with who, is rather commonplace in the game, and something we see also in interactions with non-evil NPCs. So it's probably more of an overall problem with the writing and not just a character spesific problem. Devs also seem keen on constructing some sort of detailed traumatic background/present for most of the evil characters to account for their misdeeds, which means there's no short supply of volatile/foolish evil types like Kagha, Shadowheart, Lae, Kethric etc. It would be nice, if we had other alignments than reactive stupid evil.

Given that the gith culture is essentially a racist and genocidal religious warrior cult, that devours even its own top dogs, I think she'd be more interesting if she didn't so fanatically(and cluelessly?) align with the sacrificial ideals of gith society. I suppose this wouldn't matter so much in interactions with her, if you could have antagonistic, rock bottom approval relationships with party members, like in Dragon age 2, especially since mocking her beliefs is kind of fun. Still, even if you're obliged to let her run amok, at least Lae has a personality, is possibly easier to "cure" from her origin backstory, than say Shadowheart, and she doesn't approve of the idiotic brainworm farming plotline.

As a romance option she's passable from a D/s perspective, but she doesn't differ that much from the standard skewed/retrograde way kink is depicted in games: yet another self-destructive evil dominant woman in a game that mostly equates kink with the insane and the (oft. non-consensually)hierarchical evil.

I agree with you that Lae'zel's hostility could be more precise and pragmatic, especially given that she is among foreigners whom she needs to rely on. It would be interesting to see her character develop in a way that acknowledges this and perhaps shows her becoming more strategic in her interactions with the party. I also think your point about her unwillingness to let the player handle things in a more diplomatic way is a valid critique. It would be nice to see her show more trust in the player's abilities to negotiate and avoid violence when it's appropriate. Overall, while I find Lae'zel to be an interesting character, I think there's definitely room for her to be more nuanced and less one-dimensional in her interactions with the rest of the party.

Here's hoping that the final version delivers.

It is pragmatic .... in Githyanki way ...

They dont ask for things, they state what they want and you either give it imediately, or they take it by force.
Anything else is waste of time for them ...

This is common, but pure, misstake. O_o
I wonder where people get that idea ... but as far as i know, Lae'zel dont rely on anyone, except her own people (Creche) ...

After all, if you dont recruit her she finds that Githyanki patrol on her own ... even if you knock her out and steal her equipment!

You are just making her another Human. :-/

I wonder where this weird urge came from ... that everyone else should "see the error of his way and become better person". :-/

There is no error ... Lae'zel acts just as Githyanki would ...
And Githyanki acts just as anyone with fanatically loayal army of dragonriding elite warriors would.