Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Overall, Original EA Shadowheart felt better

Of course my memories have grown hazy over time; but there is simply too little of the Sharran cultist in her now. Her edge and barriers have become more informed characteristics than things you actually see in game owing to the extreme ease with which you get her to trust you. The only remnant of it is in how you gain approval for respecting her boundaries. I decried the way they 'nerfed' her unfriendliness back then, too. Overall it's just one sympton of very odd pacing in companion relationships - they are all simply far too easy to get to like you - in EA it felt like a true band of misfits, who only begrudgingly worked together. And the moments later on when the party comments on each other and you see the improvement of their relationships, that's still there, somewhat. But it's all weakened so much by how they just fall for Tav instantly. I miss sardonic, sassy Shadowheart! And I can't help but feel that in terms of narrative, the whole EA experience was a negative impact on the game.

The way you are forced to find her first also, isn't as good. The whole softening her so players can find her more appealing thing was gross. She was interesting, and she still is, but less of what she needs to be for her storyline and the whole approach to changing her and why they explained they did is offputting.

I agree. As I've closed in on the end game, I honestly think that the big changes they made due to fan outcry have all been actually rather negative to the overall texture of Baldur's Gate 3. It's far too easy to make the companions like you. It's far too easy to satisfy Gale's magical hunger. The Guardian is one-dimensional, Daisy was more interesting and very, very relevant as of the third act. Wyll, too, is a character who wasn't great but the new version of him is just bad. The way you get powers by putting more tadpoles in your brain (which no one comments on, it's only ever 'the tadpole) is also odd. I think Larian should've been willing to stick to their original vision and trust that people would appreciate it in full.

+1
So many EA players wanted a fawning and submissive sycophant waifu.
Early EA Shart had snark and sarcasm, and at least it was a personality. It made sense for a Cleric of SHAR with a memory wipe.

As a female player, the way they changed SH to appease those demands put me right off the EA. Can female characters be strong and independent, consistent to their alignment/backstory or must they appeal to teenage boy player fantasies & feelings? It was not a good message to send that Larian went with the latter and made that clear in the comms about the change, and atleast coming back to the game La'zael & Minthara haven't had the same treatment, but that change has made SH uninteresting to me and left a very bad taste for the game.

I agree with Starshine that the way they did it felt like they were trying overtly to appeal to a 'waifu' crowd. I think, ironically, she would have been even more popular in the end had they left her that way anyway, but the communication about their changes did leave a poor taste in my mouth. But the fact that Lae'zel wasn't compromised like that seems weird - like they wanted to make sure the human woman was appealing enough for a focus test, and only let the other writers go wild. Overall, the REAL brainwashing wasn't from her cult - it was from the devs, and the ideals they felt compelled to cater to.

She was never a great or original character, but I'm definitely not on board with the end result. Cleric is such a great and diverse class and we got this trickster bore.

She is worse than Anomen, really. Fish nor foul, sorta faux-evil but swoons at the first paladin that comes along. She is no match for Lae'zel, not even in the wit department. She just feels like a brooding punching bag. Minthara should have been in her spot as a cleric of Lolth.

Let me get this straight, she'd be MORE popular if she's nasty, but you're arguing that they changed her to be more popular? And sure enough, she ended up being..the most popular romance option? How does that work exactly?

She would be more popular if she was a more interesting, unique character. they changed to appease to one section of the fanbase over the rest. That didn't change her being the only conventionally attractive romance option or her current form, less interesting but still basically fine, it's not a great=terrible binary and no one is saying it is, well except from you in a lame attempt to misrepresent what people are saying to troll and flame.

edit: just discovered this forum has the ignore user button. Problem solved.

I'll ignore the childish attack and focus on what you actually said:


She's arguably tied for popularity with Karlach, she's extremly popular. What exactly would MORE popular look like?

edit: just to add some actual data from Larian. She's the most romanced origin companion, followed by Gale.

I completely missed EA and usually skip EA titles until release, because I tend to burn myself out and never do the full release. Can someone summarize what she was like in EA?

As someone completely new and coming in, I found her character had some really interesting potential, but her story takes some abrupt turns and her characterization early on is just kinda bland. It's not until much later that she starts to get more depth.

I think it would've given her more depth if
Part of me figured that was just the way she was, being a devout follower and all, but if she is such a devout follower then she wouldn't be getting involved in a romance either and .

The idea of her being sarcastic and snarky would have been a lot better IMO.

Also, did they ever address

I completely 100% agree. I still like her a lot overall, but I much preferred how she was initially.

I can't believe people complained about allies of circumstance being rather unfriendly towards one another in the first not even 30% of the game with an obviously implemented approval system and dedicated questlines. Are people so insecure that they need their "followers" to kiss their literal feet as of they aren't individuals with their own personal agendas and personality quirks?

In EA she was much slower to open up and more guarded and defensive, i.e. more in character for someone who serves an evil goddess (enough so that many would try to kill her on the spot) and for someone who had been subjected to a less than loving childhood as part of a cult.

The hand situation -

In the current version, she never felt like a Sharran? with the memory wipe and the flashbacks, none of that was a twist because she is neutral good pretending to be evil from the first time you talk to her. Also makes it a weird, she is so much a Selunite that even with being raised by sharrans it just comes through in every interaction she has, which has weird implications?

Idk if these lines are still in, but in EA, if you told her you wanted to get to know each other better, she’d make a sardonic expression and say, “So you’d like to pry? You look the type.” And then you could clarify and she’d still use snark and sarcasm to keep you from getting close to her.

Now she’s secretive, but without bite.

This is what I mostly missed. She was hilarious. I also agree with "some kind of good" pretending to be evil.

Still really annoyed they cut Shart’s sarcasm, cynicism, and sardonic wit. I know some EA players felt she was ungrateful and “bitchy” in EA, but I really want that Shart back at least for Act 1, so she gets some character development like Lae’zel.

For me a lot of the complaints in EA were not based around how the characters acted, but how and when they voiced their views, as it was always reactive and never pro-active, quite in contrast to Lae'zel's dogma of "action, not reaction". Like the companions accept you as leader and follow you without question, but whenever you make a choice they would loudly voice their opinion afterwards and it would always be a complaint. You would never or rarely get approval and especially never get someone's view before the choice. Hence most interactions with companions were negative and frequent and that just created friction.

As for Shadowheart herself, I like her more now, but I also feel like something is missing here and I can not quite put my finger on it.

I couldn't stand Shadowheart because her dialogue just sounded weak... "oh poor me, I have trust issues because dark mommy doesn't love me". Then I saw the cutscene where

Such a great character moment on so many levels. She instantly went from a helpless whiner to a vicious renegade. From a RP perspective, I would want someone like that as a close friend and definitely not an enemy.

I basically agree with this. I picked her as my romance option because I wanted to see at least one of them and she's the only conventionally attractive female companion in the game (despite the bangs) apart from Minthara who sadly doesn't have much to offer in terms of story. I also played a Paladin/Cleric of Selûne so I thought the dynamic might be somewhat intruiging. She's definitely not as interesting as Lae'zel but what can I say; people are shallow and I am no exception. Personality wise, she just veers too much into the "wounded bird" trope and overall comes across as incredibly docile. I'm almost inclined to see her go down her darker path on my next playthrough to see if she discovers a little bit of bite but I'm not counting on it.
It would have been fine had there been any attempts from her to actually deceive the group/the player character or make some nasty compromises to your detriment in pursuit of her mission. But the character as it exists now offers very little potential for tension or conflict and her grand epiphany never quite reaches the the same heights as the climax of Lae'zel's story.