Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Why scaring off from Dark Urge?

Now that i finished the game. I really don't understand why Larian tried to scare off pl to tr of to play as Dark Urge on first plathrough?
There is no origin more stringly connected to main plot tha DU.
larian really should recommend it as default Origin. Hell, they've should completely remove complete custom character, declaring DU both as custom and most recommended Origin.
Not only DU (again) has strongest ties to main plot of BG3, but also would make most sense to play as DU as a

I think it's mostly because Dark Urge can prematurely end stories which people may be interested in exploring, due to the urges. And they weren't wrong

I initially was excited to play Dark Urge and resist the urges, but once I came across that one specific camp scene which cannot be avoided in a legitimate way I deleted my entire playthrough. Didn't like that all choices in that scene are fake and forcing me into it. So I started a pure custom character after that, but eventually deleted that one too and went back to Dark Urge again because I wasn't going to allow that one scene to ruin my enjoyment of the character. This time I metagamed to get a different outcome from that camp scene and been loving it ever since.

For me that's most likely the reason why they warned people not to play it. I personally really do love Dark Urge and its lore, it feels fantastic having a customizable Origin player character. But that camp scene is just terribly designed. Locking 2 of its desirable outcomes behind metagaming is a terrible design decision, so it's not surprising to see a lot of people delete their playthroughs once they come across it when they don't have a legitimate choice in it.

On the contrary, I would like to see Larian make more origin characters they could include as DLC. Make them like the Dark Urge, so not companions, but just backgrounds that your character can have that have additional events and change the way others respond to you. This would add a lot of deployability to the game at only minor development cost.

Because then it would expose how barren and lacking the normal TAV is. NO ONE will want to play TAV after playing Urge.

I mean, you have to commit to play serial killer, maybe unwilling, but still. While I'm not against that, I played a serial killer in one of our Cthulhu campaigns, I have to be in the mood for it. I started a Durge as a second playthrough along side my main one, but I couldn't go through with it for now. I didn't delete her but she is currently sitting there, until I'm in the mood for it.
I'm honestly glad, that we can have the blank slate Tav and the Durge, for either a bit of a more carefree experience or a more involved, but dark one.

I completely agree. In fact I have been contemplating making a similar thread myself. I have no idea why Swen said what he said. If anything Larian should have been encouraging people to play the Dark Urge. This origin should be *the* way to play imo. Just objectively better than Tav.

I think that is the reason. Otherwise nobody would play TAV in the first place.

I'm not sure if you've seen it, but there were people disappointed that Durge has to be a serial killer.

I personally am not a fan of the "what if the intrusive thoughts won" simulator. I say that unironically because I have them. I am tired of them, though they're of course not nearly as bad nor omnipresent. It's a red flag for when my mental health is sneakily spiraling. Encountering my "get it together" Pavlovian Bell in a video game sure is something.

Oh, it's funny. Yet, if it was the only game mode, I probably wouldn't have bought the game. Nor been able to play it whenever I want.

That's the thing though, you don't have to let the intrusive thoughts win pretty much ever. You can limit the damage of the intrusive thoughts to one minor NPC...and can extend to two total if you want all Dark Urge exclusive rewards.

And... you are still a serial killer. SOme people don't want that as a background for their character.

Whether they win or not makes no difference to me. It's that they're present at all. (Perhaps unsurprising because rl intrusive thoughts are not compelling by definition.)

Think of Pavlov's dog. It doesn't matter if he rings the bell and serves it steak or kibble. It's that the bell was rung at all. The sum has become greater than the parts of the action. Call it a trigger.

I almost finished the game on my second playthrough, that camp scene you mention its the only scene where you have no control

Durge for me is more fun and makes more sense storywise. If I knew I would've played it the first time. Not sure why it is advertised as "avoidable" considering everything it's the same except Same storypath you have as Tav you can have as Durge.IMO as OP suggested this should be recommended to play.

Folks, mind your spoilers!

Please add tags when mentioning plot elements as follows …

I feel if I played the dark urge the first time and had never played the EA, I would never find out gale is a companion? it's just so tempting.

but seriously just look at how much of this forum is people being upset/complaining about 'being made to do bad things', if DU was the encouraged first play through those players would be put off.
this is a proven record across RPGs, some people see their characters as them not as the character whos story they are telling, and take being made to act against their morals as an attack. I don't get it but I'm not going to pretend it isn't very common and doesn't need to be considered in designing an RPG

Not true. Unless you always wanted to play the character the same way over and over again, always giving in to every instance of the dark urge, never being curious about who the dude in the rock is...but that's not really how people work. We get curious, explore alternatives, etc. Plus there is no real reason or benefit for giving in to the dark urge on most occasions. As far as I am aware there is no real reason or reward for going all in on the Dark Urge and give in every time or for never giving in. It provides some extra fancy story and animations to take out some people that the game would otherwise not give you much reason to kill, and the same for others you'll likely always end up fighting anyway...now you have some more fun alternative ways to pick fights.

But even this is far too much for some of us. Even my character background, as something that has no consequence on the game, matters to me in terms of my character NOT being a serial killer/evil/psycho.

Almost every day there is a new thread of someone saying they stopped playing DU because of the camp character's triggered event. It's weird to take from that, oh everyone would love this game and play it the exact way I do if DU was pushed as the first play through character. anyone saying they don't like it is wrong.
Also it ignores all the good of Tav as first play through character.
Just different people play the game differently and that's not a bad thing..

All the DU triggered events are confirmed avoidable though ? either through savescum or creative use of game mechanics

Forced events feels like I'm being railroaded by a bad DM, I hope they change that stuff in a future patch. Make the rolls DC30s for all I care but at least give me the option

Bad DM?
You mean DM with actual backbone to do shit?
Player: "I like to play character, who experiencing nightmares, and have awful urges to kill. BUt i also prefer not to kill anyone!"
Bad DM: "Yeah sure, absolutely! Here also inspiration point for absolutely no reason!!"
Good DM: "Eh, so you asking to play maniac... who never kills anyone?.. Nnnnooo. You pick a role - you stay with the role. This is a roleplaying game after all"