Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General "New"? Daisy ... POTENTIAL MAJOR SPOILERS!

And after all the streetlights have been shot out

I agree with most of criticisms of og Daisy. Creating multiple "ideal partners" is especially inconvenient when you create multiple Tavs. With multiple Tavs also comes the realization that her advances can be perceived VERY differently.

Not to moralize, but this may not be relaxing gaming for victims of grooming or SA.

Nonetheless, I see potential. I wouldn't mind it as an option at all. I also believe the tadpole chosing different approaches with different people is very realistic as a "seducer", as the best bait is not always sex!

This my favourite theory on who Daisy is, she is Shar, it actually explains why the only origin character besides Tav to have a Daisy is Shadowheart.

Options are always nice. I do get the guradian thing, it can make local multiplayer less awkward

But I do agree with the others, I think both can be interesting and fitting depending on what kind of character you want to play as. And as long as we don't really know the whole story behind it I can't judge what would be better.

The presence of "Daisy" also never bothered me, but I can understand why some people may not like this approach. A guardian seems like the safer option but the seducer may fit the themes of influencing the mind better. In conjuction with the whole tadpole thing it's ambiguous and I find that interesting.

I like his theory,

Designing your own seducer made sense. Daisy takes the form of your Dream Girl and tries to seduce you to do whatever their goal was.

But designing a guardian? I... Don't know where to begin there. I don't have fantasies of someone coming to my rescue. Neither do my characters. If this entity is a protective figure designing it yourself seems completely pointless and a waste of time, as a guardian's appearance doesn't matter in terms of its goal the way a seducer's looks might.

I'm only halfway through the video, so I don't know if he addresses it, but if his theory is accurate, I would expect a different dream experience for a cleric of Shar.

That makes sense.

wasnt the point of the old dream person to be temptation?
how is an armored "guardian" type gonna tempt me to go for power? i dont need guardians or protectors.

Well, we barely scratched any story, so it seems quite prematurely to judge ...

We shall have to see. It's reasonable that they're going an entirely different direction now. Plus, temptation doesn't always have to be sexual. The characters I tend to play don't feel much draw to sexual temptation in particular. Plus maybe it's just me but daisy's temptation always felt too heavy handed to begin with.

The temptation is to use the power. Og Daisy wanted something more, perhaps quicker influence over you. The guardian, convinces you using the power is not a bad thing.

The guardian may also be a legitimate guardian. Using the tadpole gives you (probable) brain damage, so you see it only when it's fighting off the transformation. Shar's magic *is* all that's stopping you from transforming. Consequently, what you hallucinate may very well be a physical form of that magic.

I kinda like the idea that this tadpole, the Absolute, Shar, or whatever else Daisy actually is ...
Will be trying to gain your thrust by pretending to defend you, while in the end it comes out it was all just an act.

Where have i seen that thing before...

Having the Queen of Backstabbings' favor is not necessarily better than being her enemy

So from new Fextra video it seems like Dark Urge also gets Daisy... What is the point even of playing normal TAV? They basically have nothing unique. Once again, playing normal character you make is gimping yourself.

I'll still go for custom Tav in preference (though I'm sure I'll give in to the Urge at some point) as it lets me imagine my character is whoever I want them to be. The Dark Urge has clearly been introduced in response to demand from players who want the flexibility to define their race and class, but still want the game to tell them a strong story about their character. I can definitely understand people wanting that, but personally I'm more keen on flexibility (which isn't to say that I don't think that could be done better, as I've just mentioned in this post created by Gray Ghost).

TBF I will play TAV too alongside Dark Urge (a roleplay I also explained under another one of your posts), but I am going to voice my concern about how playing normal Tav is now objectively the worst way you can play this game because this path has by far the least amount of content for it. It's kind of disappointing.

We don't know if this is true. For all intents and purposes, the dark urge may have different ending options than Tav.

... I personally also am not fond of Harm OCD Simulation Mode. Not to an extend I want it in every playthrough.

Relevant examples

-- Vision: good alignment in iron man mode.

It can happen that you botch a roll, but the additional threat of the Dark Urge may be overkill.

-- Vision: a set, pro social backstory

Yeah, nope. No. Not happening.

-- The plothole: when -- between your past and losing your memory -- did you become a devotion paladin? Why do you remember your oath?!

Roleplay. Also going good is presumably going to suck as the urge. They way it's depicted id expect needing to roll charisma throws or something after a while to resist the murdering.

All the news since the PFH has just hyped me up more and more....until this. I really loved the idea of a seductress in our head and to discover it is being changed so drastically is disappointing. I really hope we get some control over how "Daisy" acts towards us. I think it's especially a bad idea for Larian to spring this on people on release day since Daisy has been such a big part of the game since the beggining