I can even provide examples. From Dragon Age Inquisition we have Cassandra, whose story arc centres around her belief in the organisation she's a part of. She remains Righteous throughout but her big conflict is in reconciling the ideals she swore herself to with the fact of the corruption within the order she's part of, and deciding if organisation is even worth trying to salvage. She remains true to her ideals in the end but she still has to grapple with the morality of the system she's been a part of.

A version of that in BG3 could have Ben great. Imagine a paladin whose order has been infiltrated by the absolute, corrupted and twisted into a dark mirror of itself. The paladin has to grapple with whether her loyalty to the order trumps her loyalty to the ideals of the order, and what that means now that the two are separate. She could stay with the corrupted order and the dark beliefs they now stand for, become totally disillusioned and abandon any semblance of idealism or belief in anything, or she could choose to stand for her ideals even if means abandoning the people she has trusted and loved for years, possibly even her whole life. That's a level of nuance that I've yet to see in any of the companions frankly.

With regard to Wyll and Gale Nepro, I think calling Gale good but flawed is valid, but I think as soon as Wyll showed himself willing to torture an innocent man with frankly very little push, he moved from "Good but flawed" to "evil but wanting to be good." I think torture is one of those lines that once crossed really means something heavy. Not that I think it makes any sense for him to have done that, I hate the scene and what to does to his character, but it exists and we have to take it into account.

Last edited by Gray Ghost; 07/07/23 09:04 AM.