Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Halsin Romance, Expectations and Obligatory Poly

Yes, considering it seems like he's done the same thing before too and not cared enough about the critique to do anything about it, it feels safe to say he won't be making any changes this time around either.

Unfortunately, it might be one of those cases where a writer is determined to prove their point and decide they are right and that everyone who interprets their writing in any negative way is wrong. There's plenty of them around unfortunately, and many are immune to any sort of feedback because they already feel like they are right (which I know because writers pay me to voice my opinion on their manuscripts and some still come after me with insults and threats when I don't return with all praise and eager bows at their excellence).

Of course there is a possibility that I just happened to have a very stable playthrough and that's why can't recall any gringy dissonance. I'll write down my playthrough briefly and if someone wants to add how other paths lead to something weird, feel free! I'm truly trying to check my own thinking here.

That sounds like a conspiracy theory until you hear about the Red Prince, doesn't it?

Yes, but this argument is really thin in my opnion. That would suggest that your culture has more impact than your personal agency, and that life does not affect your choices and some preferences. And wood elves might not be monogamous, but no where does it say that they do not do relationships.

And the concept of thiramin (soulmate) also applies to them, which means that it is not a universal truth among wood elves either.

Yes, sadly so

I don't want to insult the writer, but at the same time... it's not like they're possibly unaware this is sneaking in? I can't imagine someone would not notice that

Yes, I made all those same arguments to myself. I had a lot of intrapersonal debates in the months I was waiting to see what Halsin's romance would be like. At least I can say I was right all along - parts of me.


Is this still a thing? It certainly used to be, but I'm not up to date with developments in the lore. The game never mentions it (or Communion, which maybe also isn't a thing anymore).

The thing is, they're possibly *not even wrong* if they set out to write something that does not appeal to the majority on purpose. Mission accomplished. It just feels horribly tone deaf to do this to a player requested romance. It's extra hurtful if someone hears you out... and then does something like this, you know?

Basically, this is how it went for me (using some of your lines because I'm lazy and don't have the energy to write my own):

Oh damn, I've been laughing my ass off for the past 30 min and Cowoline you're the one responsible, thank you for reminding me of that trash fire that is the Red Prince romance. I went back and read some posts and holy déjà vu Batman! It's the same thing.

From the Red Prince voyeurisms (you start his romance by watching him have intercourse with another) and him leaving you, to Halsin being the way he is and the obsessions with zoophilia (I still don't think this is funny) to Shadowhearts surprisingly sweet romance being ruined by the unnecessary addition of her flirting with others (I have a whole thread about this so I wont go into it) I'm really starting to dislike this dudes writing lol.

I don't like it at all, and even more so if I think that he does work for companies that sell a product, he is not writing a book to further elevate his ego. I don't think Larian is thinking: well, the 1% agree, rather the 99% hate it. When you do a project like Baldur's Gate you are not thinking about a niche, you are thinking big because there is a lot of money invested here. So if you think about it coldly, they have to be thinking about serious reforms of Act 3 and Halsin, and even more so when more and more people are reaching that point and the criticism is increasing very seriously. And there are things with this character that I don't know how it occurred to someone that it was a good idea for them to be in the first place:

1- Zoophilia, it doesn't seem like a good starting plan except for the commotion of the initial scandal, then it will bite you in the ass


2-Treatment of Halsin's trauma and his response to abuse.
This point is very worrying and no matter how much the writer cries and kicks "I'm right" if they hadn't done everything at the last minute someone would have had to put a stop to it here

3- Inconsistencies in the script, it's just that it's poorly written

4- That On a last-minute whim of a writer, you add lines that create inconsistencies in the stories of the rest of the characters.

In my job I do that and they cut off my head publicly so that no one can think of something like that again.

Larian reforms Halsin without putting strange perversions and unspeakable fetishes in there, we are not your confessor. First notification

You're joking, romances on DOS2 were like that? I'm glad that when I played I didn't romance anyone. lol. Well, What I've learned by reading you all are two things:

1 -) Not to buy launched games from these people (when I bought DOS2 was the DE) and probably wait for the DE.

2 -) I'll (probably) have a better experience in my roleplay without romance. I mean, I was doing basically a Lone Wolf (how I missed Lone Wolf perk) with Tav and SH, and somehow I got stuck with a bear, that if the right circumstances aligned, will make my poor Tav suffer. lol

@chiquidmaster I love your 'first notifications'.

Well, all the articles praises Halsin so much and talks about how loved his kinkyness is by fans. I find it rather heartbreaking to be honest

It's not all bad. There's just somewhat of a history of some players getting the short stick (probably why we have playersexuality now). Also the existence of a niche seeming romance, which most studios would probably not do. Larian is committed to having things in their games that are meant to be seen by 1% of players only. I'm not kidding. This is not an insult. It's their official policy. Just doesn't mix well when you have only a handful of romances in the game.

Astarion already had that ground covered. There didn't need to be another companion who offers a route that makes people feel vaguely used. Nor, did they need to make that route the only one left after the merge.

Don't let it bother you, its just how news/gaming sites work. 'A tryst with a bear' and writing about sex will just lead to more clicks than writing something along the lines of post that you can find in this thread.



Well if they like catering to the 1% I cant wait for the peanut butter jar romance in their next game. Now that's kinky and the marketing around it is going to be wild.

To be honest, what many of those articles highlight most is not that it is wonderful, but rather how crazy it is to have the possibility of doing this (and it is very crazy). There are many people in photos saying that they are not capable of taking that path (myself).

@NeedaUserName I hope Larian also finds it funny and listens to us. Or that he pays attention to us because he shuts me up. Either option is valid.

@Rotsen jajajaja hemos pensado lo mismo, es terrible

Fix Halsin Larian and I know, the idea of adding the idea of a bear and jar of honey to make us happy is in your heads. No. First notice

That approach has not worked before. The best we can hope for are small changes, in which case constructive feedback is needed. Very specific and instructive feedback.

There are unfinished endings for Halsin (the one in the game is the friendship route, NO romance flag!). Players obviously want that changed. His past enslavement treated with more care. A few scenes to improve the cohesiveness of the romance.

More on consensual nonmonogamy, remembered this awesome set of definitions from a book I love, Polysecure!

...

CNM is unquestionably having its cultural moment, and it’s not just a passing trend. Distinct from cheating, where sexual or romantic relations with more than one person are deceitful, consensual nonmonogamy is an umbrella term for the practice of simultaneously having multiple sexual or romantic partners where everyone involved is aware of and consents to the relationship structure. People practicing CNM value transparency, consent, open and honest communication, personal responsibility, autonomy, compassion, sex positivity and freedom for themselves and others. Moreover, people practicing CNM typically embrace the following ideas and principles: love is not possessive or a finite resource; it is normal to be attracted to more than one person at the same time; there are multiple ways to practice love, sexual and intimate relationships; and jealousy is not something to be avoided or feared, but something that can be informative and worked through.

Fern, Jessica. Polysecure: Attachment, Trauma and Consensual Nonmonogamy (pp. 103-104). Thornapple Press. Kindle Edition.

...

It’s not uncommon to hear someone who is trying to describe nonmonogamy to their family or friends, or speak about it in a professional or public setting, emphasize that CNM not just about the sex, but rather about the increased love, support and connection that come from having multiple partners. While this may very well be true, for many people, nonmonogamy is at least partly about the sex. And there’s nothing wrong with that! I think that it’s both well-intended and understandable that people say it isn’t about sex, since research has shown that people tend to be significantly more uncomfortable with the idea of CNM relationships that emphasize sex over love than they are with CNM relationships that are based more on romantic and emotional connections. We also intuitively know that telling our friends, parents or colleagues that we are in it for the love will probably fare better than telling them that we are in it for the sex. To me, this is an unfortunate symptomatic expression of our sex-negative culture that shames us for our basic human needs, desires and sexuality. There are people who genuinely need and want sexual diversity and it is not because they are sexually deviant, avoidantly attached, addicted to sex or noncommittal. Instead, they are people who embrace their sexuality and the diverse desires and expressions that it may encompass and require. There are also many couples who love each other deeply and have a wonderful partnership, but may have very different sexual needs. Perhaps they have different sexual styles, one partner being kinkier or more into BDSM than the other, or divergent sex drives or anatomical incompatibility. Some people find themselves in one of these situations and conclude that there is no reason to dismantle their entire life and give up their meaningful relationship because they want or need different things than their partner in the bedroom.

Fern, Jessica. Polysecure: Attachment, Trauma and Consensual Nonmonogamy (pp. 107-108). Thornapple Press. Kindle Edition.

...

My note: My perspective is, I have no problem with people needing and wanting sexual diversity because they're sexually deviant, a very loaded term in our culture of cure (I'm reading Eli Clare atm also, can you tell? lol!). And I do not ascribe to the psychological model of sex addiction or addiction period. Not a big fan of psychiatry :3 That's too off-topic for here, but the main complaint of Halsin being noncommittal has a big moment for me when I read this passage. His communication is just so solid, compared to abandoning player character without explanation or care or cheating.

...

Each different style of CNM or CNM relationship structure will have different degrees of openness to sexual and/ or emotional engagement with others, as well as different types of relationship agreements or rules. In Figure 4.1, I plot some of the main relationship structures or styles within CNM based on the two dimensions of emotional exclusivity and sexual exclusivity. On the horizontal axis, we find high emotional exclusivity on the left and low emotional exclusivity on the right. The vertical axis has high sexual exclusivity at the top and low sexual exclusivity at the bottom. Please note that these two dimensions are not the only way to comprehend the different types of CNM, so please take what helps and dismiss the rest. Additionally, although I place certain types of CNM in specific regions on this graph, there will always be exceptions to where someone else would plot their own version of that same type of CNM.

Fern, Jessica. Polysecure: Attachment, Trauma and Consensual Nonmonogamy (pp. 109-110). Thornapple Press. Kindle Edition.

...

What follows is a rad graph, if you can check out the book it's nice and could bring a lot of nuance to the conversation about what is good vs bad, accurate vs inaccurate, health vs unhealthy CNM! (CNM/poly are things I use interchangeably when speaking with a predominantly mono crowd; more people have heard the term poly and think of it before CNM.)

...

Upper Left Quadrant
Monogamy: Monogamy is found in the upper left quadrant because it is traditionally high in both sexual and emotional exclusivity. Some couples that consider themselves monogamous do vary on how emotionally open or closed they are to people outside of the relationship, but it is common for monogamous couples to consider each other as their only sexual partner and emotional primary. In monogamous couples, a partner is usually considered to be cheating if they engage sexually with another and/ or if they share deep or romantic emotions with others.

Monogamish: Coined by sex columnist Dan Savage, this term refers to couples who are mostly sexually and emotionally exclusive, but periodically engage in extramarital or extra-relational sex or sexual play. These exceptions might include occasional one-time hookups, sex with others while traveling apart, or even kissing other people at certain types of events.

Polyfidelity: A romantic or sexual relationship that involves more than two people, but these people are exclusive with each other. This could include a group relationship of three or more people that is closed to any additional outside partners, or it could be a person who has more than one partner and their partners are not dating each other, but they are also closed to additional relationships.

Lower Left Quadrant
Swinging: The practice of couples engaging in sexual activity with other couples, individuals or groups. The focus of those encounters is primarily sexual rather than romantic or emotionally intimate and couples who consider themselves as swingers typically sexually play with others while they are together in the same room or at the same event, rather than completely separately from each other. In my practice, I’ve encountered many swingers who do want to feel some level of connection with the people they are swinging with, but often prefer to keep emotional involvement to a minimum in order to maintain the emotional primacy of their marriage or primary relationship.

Open Marriage/Relationship: A relationship where one or both partners in a relationship have sexual or romantic relationships outside of their primary partnership. Open relationships tend to be more focused on having sex and limiting the degree of emotional involvement with others in order to keep the primary, dyadic relationship as the first priority.

Lower Right Quadrant
Polyamory: The practice of having many (poly) loves (amory), where everyone involved is aware and consenting of partners simultaneously having multiple romantic and sexual relationships. People who identify as polyamorous tend to focus on the falling in love part of being nonmonogamous, where the intention of having multiple partners is to be in love and have multiple emotionally invested relationships. People practicing polyamory can differ in the degree to which they implement hierarchy in their different relationships.

Hierarchical Polyamory: A subset of polyamory where there is a ranking system among romantic/sexual relationships and some relationships are considered more important than others. A person’s primary partner(s) would be at the top of this ranking system since primaries usually cohabitate, share resources, make decisions together and organize their schedules so that they are spending the most amount of time together. Hierarchical relationships tend to use the terms primary, secondary, and sometimes tertiary, describing various levels of importance, commitment and who has the rights to create relationship agreements. Typically, the people in a primary relationship with each other set the rules for all subsequent relationships, which might include restrictions on certain recreational or social activities, limits on certain sex acts or on how strong, deep or invested other relationships can become. Many polyamory experts caution against hierarchical relationship structures that create asymmetrical balances of power in which people in secondary or tertiary positions have little or no say about how their relationship unfolds, or are subject to vetoes or rules from their metamours.

In More Than Two, Franklin Veaux and Eve Rickert make the distinction between prescriptive and descriptive hierarchy. Prescriptive hierarchy occurs when a couple predetermines that their status as primaries will not change and all future relationships will be subordinate to theirs. All of the relationship styles in the lower left side of this chart could be described as being hierarchical forms of consensual nonmonogamy and in the upper left quadrant, hierarchy would be assumed. Descriptive hierarchy is less about a given relationship prescription for the future. The term describes a hierarchy that might include several primaries that have emerged more organically and have become more domestically, financially or emotionally entangled than other relationships, but there is still an openness to things changing or new people entering the hierarchy.

Nonhierarchical Polyamory: The practice of having multiple simultaneous relationships without imposing hierarchies. This means that there is no ranking system of primary and secondary. It means that no one person has extra influence over a person’s relationships, including veto power or more privilege because they live together or have been together longer. All important people get a seat at the table and everyone gets to have a voice. Each relationship is allowed to grow into what it naturally wants to be. In some cases, nonhierarchical polyamory may include prioritization of certain relationships in instances where people have children together or live together, but the nonhierarchical structure does not endorse power differentials and allows for more flexibility in how relationships can change and evolve over time.

Solo Polyamory: An approach to polyamory that emphasizes personal agency. Individuals do not seek to engage in relationships that are tightly couple-centric or financially and/or domestically entwined. People who identify as solo poly emphasize autonomy, the freedom to choose their own relationships without seeking permission from others, and flexibility in the form their relationships take. It is a common misconception that people practicing solo polyamory are either more casual or less committed in their relationships, but this is not necessarily the case. Solo poly folks can be deeply emotionally involved and committed in their relationships, but they typically choose not to take on the traditional roles that some partners assume like living together, having shared bank accounts or doing each other’s laundry (at least not as a relationship obligation). One principle of solo poly that I think everyone can benefit from is the notion of being your own primary partner and prioritizing your relationship with yourself first and foremost.

Relationship Anarchy: This type of CNM falls at the very end or even off this chart completely. The term was first coined in 2006 by Andie Nordgren, who applied political anarchist principles to interpersonal relationships. Relationship anarchists seek to dismantle the social hierarchies dictating how sexual and romantic relationships are prioritized over all other forms of love, and so people who identify as relationship anarchists make less distinction between the importance or value of their lovers over their friends or other people in their life, and they do not only reserve intimacy or romance for the people they have sex with.

Upper Right Quadrant
Poly Intimates: I’ve started to use this term for people who are sexually exclusive with one partner, but who are not emotionally exclusive with that partner in ways that a traditional monogamous relationship would typically disallow, be suspicious of or characterize as emotional cheating. Poly intimates might share varying degrees of romance and emotional intimacy with more than just the person they are sexually exclusive with. Poly intimates might be nonsexual partners who live together, travel together, raise children together or share other aspects of life, where the level of investment and involvement does not fit the conventional notion of friendship.

Polyamorous and Asexual: People who identify as asexual (or Aces) experience little to no sexual attraction to others. Aces may or may not experience romantic attraction, and Aces may or may not choose to engage in sex or romance. Placement in this quadrant is specifically referring to people who identify as nonsexual asexual and romantically polyamorous. Since asexuality can vary greatly in how attraction, sexuality, arousal and romance are experienced, Aces may find that other placements on this chart are better suited to them.

Fern, Jessica. Polysecure: Attachment, Trauma and Consensual Nonmonogamy (pp. 115-116). Thornapple Press. Kindle Edition.

...

I hope these terms and definitions have a place in the discussion, and of course as with all sources about something as complex as the way people relate to one another, this is not the end of a conversation on these offered definitions, but a beginning point. I don't fully agree with all of them, and would reference them more as guidelines than prescriptions, as the author predicts.

I'm looking forward to many years of Halsin fandom content to come. However the character changes throughout patches, I am grateful to have been on the same wavelength as a character in a video game like this! All this nuance about poly would be a tall order to put in a video game, but at least we have fic for those conversations if they aren't something that gets patched in as thoroughly as irl poly convos are held. I thought Halsin's dialogues were a fair summary of his position as regards romance, and I didn't get the impression of "mono-coding" from any of his declarations of affection and love and desire. I can see how monogamous players whose only experiences have been with monogamy could expect nothing else when hearing these intimate expressions, of course. And it does seem players who do not like what he likes, who have other expectations for CNM/poly, were not flagged sufficiently to jump ship and choose to end the path of his romance when he explained how he is. That's a bummer for those players who continued with expectations that were not fulfilled. I just really hope that when we click on him in the field his voiced lines will trigger soon.

Spouting the same flawed logic over and over is not going to make his romance non toxic.

You are still not looking at the character as a whole, but simply the parts that you identify with. No one here has attacked relationship anarchy or polygamy. We have pointed out that there is inconsistent writing that makes it not fit and given that he was added because of request by the fanbase, he was a wrong choice to represent a radical minority in such a toxic and destructive way.

But you're the lucky one. You got the romance you wanted and there is nearly a 0% chance of them changing it. I am happy for you, but I sincerely hope that no one treats people like Halsin does in real life.

Oh no, wait, that's Minsc. I mean, that's... oh, I'm very confused now.