Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Which companion(s) won't make it?

Larian website says he tried to usurp her power. He doesn’t tell you that, but that might imply he’s lying by omission.

So he wanted to become god in place of the goddess? Yes, one imagines she'd be somewhat pissed about that. It is of course unsurprising that he doesn't tell you that, I just wondered where that knowledge was coming from.

That’s why I say Gale has serious “Nice Guy” vibes:
-Constantly talking about himself.
-Obsessed with a woman who rejected him.
-Feels both entitled to her love and to her power.
-Constantly flexing how he’s smarter than everyone else.
-Isn’t straight up about who he is or what he wants.

Dudes an INT-cel

You could, especially if you desires for revenge were bitter and sullen. Shar asks that new initiates participate in human sacrifice so if you wanted to sacrifice your object of ire she could help with that.

Although Hoar (assuming he's alive) is the god of revenge. Fenmarel Mestarine (assuming) would respond to elves asking for revenge against drow.

To all of you who've been responding to my posts about SH being potentially brainwashed, I do want to say I have enjoyed reading your responses. This has been a great exchange, and I am very happy at the extent to which some of you have been engaging in discourse with me in a positive way and not just hating on me as some others have done in the past. So thank you for this.

I do concede (and have done so in the past) that having not played the game it is quite possible I am not seeing certain things about SH that some of you are seeing. Fair enough. But I disagree about simply dismissing any "evil" acts she may have committed in the past, even if brainwashed. Firstly, her story doesn't just begin when we run into her in the nautiloid. So it's not just about what she does or doesn't do while in our company. It's about what she may have done before getting tadpoled. We don't know. Secondly, whereas I can accept the argument that if you had no control, including literally no physical control over your body, then is it fair to assign blame to that person? But it's not about me or anyone else assigning blame. It's about the person themselves, in this case SH, and whether they choose to blame themselves, because for me a truly good person, even in the face of learning they did awful things while under someone else's control, would still feel severe anguish about it and surely blame themselves. I know I would IRL. If someone "forced" me to do something awful, the fact that I was forced would not be of much solace to me in the face of knowing I had done something awful. That to me is what makes a person a good person: their own feelings of guilt and remorse and their own inner torment. So it would matter to me how SH herself reacts to learning about her past.

Gale is undoubtedly the fishiest customer in BG3. Who betrays you in BG2? Monologing wannabe villain Edwin, or all round good egg Yoshimo?

It's not like were talking about tinfoil theories here. Showdowhearts mysterious light magic is explicitly brought up on the official website now.

No, if someone took control of me in the sense that I literally could not do anything to influence what "I" do, then it's not me who's acting, but the other person. I was just used as a tool. I would be very angry at that person, but I would feel no guilt. If I was blackmailed, that would be a different story, but I consider myself as being hard to blackmail, since I do not accept blame for things that might happen if I don't follow the blackmailer's orders. No, I am not to blame for their death if *you* kill that person because I refuse to follow your orders. It's in your hands, not in mine.

I have to ask though: does all this really matter? Isn't it all theoretical? The plain fact is we do not know Shadowheart's past, and in the absence of knowledge I will not judge anyone. I will not assume evil just because she's a cleric of Shar. She says about Shar "She took me in when no on else did" (echoing Viconia in BG2 who said more or less the same). That appears to be a perfectly valid and not particularly evil reason to follow a deity, as far as there is ever a valid reason to do so. And who's to say that her regard is unjustified? Is a goddess out to destroy all of existence incapable of caring about her followers? Is a goddess's evil all that there is to her? We would say "no" about almost any human, and Toril's deities are actually ascended mortals.

So, Shadowheart might not be brainwashed, but right. From her perspective, following Shar may appear right in a way we would recognize as valid could we adopt her perspective. With no need for any evil on her part.

Well, the silver lining therein would be that one of my other overall complaints about the game, that of not enough good companions relative to evil/suspicious ones, would be alleviated by SH being more explicitly brought over to the good side. Instead of 5 evil (incl. DU), 3 neutral, and 3 good companions, it would then be 4, 3, and 4, respectively, a much more balanced distribution.

Sorry, but all of this I very profoundly disagree with. And furthermore, based on longstanding FR lore about Shar, much of it is also simply not true.

While we're at it: did Shadowhearts voice actor change? I watched a video about her talking about her faith from about 9 months ago, but she looked different than in the games I've played, and she talked different in tone and content.

She has an approval scale. She can go from hating you to catty to really nice.

Many are ascended mortals -- AO has reasons for wanting mortals in certain positions and he changed the tablets of fate to ensure that Deities answer to their worshipers BUT Shar and Selune aren't ascended mortals. They were born as gods. They were the first two and haven't changed that much since their initial battle:

In order of appearance:

1) Shar
2) Selune
3) Chauntea

Chauntea has changed over years from a goddess of the wild places to a goddess of gardens and cultivation but is still born as a god and thinks like like a god. Of all the gods Shar has probably changed the least over the millenniums.

Oh and I think I already made my opinions about Gale clear in my exchange with the formidable Niara.

I will probably take him once but I don't fancy his chances of survival.

Demi humans tend not to turn to human gods. They have entire pantheism. Exceptions prive the rule.

Anyways, Astarion is evil. He's a psycho vampire who enjoys committing evil abd sadistic acts from the moment you meet him. He'll likely be the killed the moment he can be. The gith is also evil. She's clearly pro slavery. That's evil. Shadiwheaet worships an evil and dark goddess, but she doesnt threaten, harass, or attack you like the above two. The druid who enjoys animal sex us an abomination and us also reject. I'm not cool wuth adventuring with people who like bear sex. That's corrupted behaviour. The drow seems to be into wanton mass murder. Jaehira and Minsc if they are treated the sane seem to alright. Thiugh, I ended up killing Minsc in bg1 because he is a psycho who attacjs you fir no eeason. Thats evil. She dead so dead mega dead. The others I haven't seen much...

I think Jergal was also originally a god rather than an ascended mortal. And even though he decided to give up all of his positions of power out of boredom I don't believe he's mortal or a lesser deity either. He was the original god of death back when the responsibilities of the god of death encompassed all aspects of death unlike now when we have at least half a dozen gods messing with various aspects of death...Bhall deals with murder, Myrkul dabbles in necromancy and undeath right now, the Raven Queen oversees that the cycle of life and death isn't cheated and sending agents to take down liches and others who would seek to cheat death, and then there's some other dude who oversees the judgement of souls who are not claimed by any other god after death.

But Jergal is ancient, powerful, and still around...I very much suspect he'll make an appearance in BG3 now that the three he gave his office powers to have reunited and are up to trouble. Swen saying that the player character can become ruler of the forgotten realms in BG3 suggests that at least the power of the three if not some more as well might be reunited into one again. If the player is evil(at least for the Dark Urge) he can claim that power for himself...but if not then what? My guess is Jergal could be a candidate for obtaining some of his old powers back from the dead three as a more neutral holder of power should the player not take it. But if nothing else he created the dead three by giving them his powers, it is only fitting he is there at the end of the dead three as well.

About Halsin (channelling a BG3 character):

"Hm..impressive physique. Must be all that outdoor work. But no, I'll leave him to the other ladies. I guess he'll have no shortage of company. And...that bear shape...does he even like humanoids? Does he prefer other bears while in bear shape? Or is he...er...bi in those matters? Never thought about that aspect of shapeshifting. Don't want to ask him though. There must be a book about it somewhere."

Indeed. And Shar's view has always been that she was the first and she will be the last. This is why even the evil gods (grudgingly) cooperate with the good gods to thwart Shar's constant stream of schemes and plots and intrigues, because by Shar's own admission her end-goal being realized will mean the end of even all the gods which of course even the evil gods are not going to support or want.

And a reminder again for people that Shar's initiation of her faithful is for them to torture and murder an innocent, preferably a close family member, to signify their break from everything except for Shar. Shar's faithful are taught that they are nothing and their lives are insignificant and irrelevant, and their very existence is only for the purpose of Shar being able to use them to further her plans. This is why throughout the Realms Shar's church is considered more a cult than a church.

All right, that is signficant information, but how canonical is that? I did not find it when I looked up Shar. And....in light of this information Shadowheart does not appear nearly fanatical enough, and too much her own person.

I can't remember where that is - it's a 3.5 sourcebook but I can't remember which one. From my flawed memory it wasn't where you would expect but in the section describing specialty priests of Shar.