Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Shadowheart Romance and the Hidden Fetish - (Spoilers inside)

If they "fix" Halsin to have his poly make sense, it's not automatically "fixed" for other companions (Shadowheart/Astarion). They need their own justifications, which they do not have right now, in the slightest.

Honestly, the fact that there's so much stuff, that is apparently open to interpretation, shows they didn't do their job right. If they wanted to write SH as poly they should have foreshadowed, and they should have done so in a clear way that can't be confused as something else.

If you're very important information, that requires foreshadowing to be believed by everyone, is "open to interpretation" or is "shown offscreen" then it's blatantly shitty writing.

I just have enough faith in the writers' abilities to assume if they fix an entire characterization arc, they'd adjust what kinds of reactions there are to it (I expect a similar amount of work/change if they were to finish developing Karlach's quest in Act 3 instead of just leaving plot devices for it all over the floor with no way to use them). But maybe that's closer to the big ambitious hope.

Of course, I also have full faith in their ability to do it. They got more than enough feedback to explain what's wrong. I however do not have full faith in their ability to work more than a normal human being can, especially because they got it this wrong already which is likely due to time constraints, and any work that goes towards making these poly situations make sense is work that doesn't go toward other content that I would much rather have.

We probably are. Again I came to thread in state of confusion - "why has this thread gotten so long"

She's not threatened by the twins or Halsin. Others have mentioned Minthara but I've never had her in the party.

I guess it's my reading as someone who is poly. If a partner takes an interest in someone who is strictly monogamous that is a threat to the relationship. Halsin - who doesn't really do 'relationships' - isn't a threat. Neither are sex workers.

So the pattern seems pretty clear to me - no to sharing with people who don't like to share, yes to sharing with people who like to share. It makes much more sense than reading monogamy backwards into the previous conversations.

It would probably behoove you to read the entire thread.

I read the entire Halsin thread before I made my first post in it on page like, 47 or something, so I knew what was going on and what people were talking about.

It seems to me that you feel the need to defend the poly thing in game because you feel you need to defend yourself in real life as a poly person.

Poly is a type of relationship, first of all. You of all of us here should know. Which means Halsin, as a supposed representation of poly, isn't even actually poly. Secondly, it is not yet established that Halsin doesn't do relationships at the point of his proposal. The proposal is no different than the one you make regarding any other companion. No, off screen is not an argument, I think we've established that and as someone who asks for proof on the regular, I hope you acknowledge that too.

Additionally, you never even get the option to make a poly proposal regarding other companions. If Shadowheart would be up for poly, then she would accept your suggestion - after all, you ask for the exact same thing as you ask with Halsin, and we established above that he's no less a "threat". Then, you would return to the other party (Wyll, Karlach, Lae'zel, Astarion or Gale) and make the proposal to them too. But that is not how it happens. How it happens is that Shadowheart is not interested in poly whatsoever. Because she's mono. As is clear through the dialogue.

And yes, you do read things very differently, if you think "In truth, I don't think I'd want to be your spare lover. I'd always want more of you than you'd have to spare. Better perhaps to bow out with dignity." implies "clear interest in having others in the relationship."

How does she know Halsin isn't a threat? It's never discussed so how could she possibly know that?

I also wanna add: you can solo romance Halsin without him showing any interest in SH, nor her with him. But if you solo romance SH they suddenly show interest in one another. Can you explain that?

Good for you. I wouldn't do that.

But I announced that I hadn't read it in full which I think is good form. I'm leaving concluding that a few individuals are really invested in the topic and at least some of them believe that monogamy is the 'natural' assumption in any relationship and this attitude impacts the way they interpret the dialogues.

But you can romance Karlach and Halsin at the same time and Astarion and Halsin at the same time too, so that means they are poly too. How come SH doesn't agree on poly with Astarion or Karlach?
There is other explanation though - SH/Astarion/Karlach treat Halsin no more than a fling, casual sex source for Tav and they ok with open relationship if Tav is.

Most people are monogamous so they're likely to interpret it as monogamous as well. Maybe the writers should have taken that into consideration when attempting to write something that is supposed to be coherent.

They would have to be very clear on the polyamory aspect, and based on the existence of this thread, they weren't. So like maybe they should have written it better...

It was indeed good form to say you didn't read the rest of the thread. Even if it can sometimes be slightly annoying.

I never made clear what I think is a natural assumption. To me that is not very relevant in a videogame, because I think anything that isn't written down is an inconsistency anyway. If romance is an option, the preference should be implied in game, not in real life. Thankfully, in this game it is. And that is not why we interpreted dialogue differently. You are free to reply to my most recent post above, but you are also free to take a break from the thread. Either way, thank you for your contribution. Keeping this thread alive is one of the chances we have at having Larian acknowledge this situation, which is beneficial to both those that wish the interactions between Shadowheart and Halsin are changed, but also those who just wish a complete rehash of Halsin's romance.

That seems mostly right. SH is fine is she the primary. Apologies if this has already been posted but I just found this on youtube - she also forgives Mizora but asks that Tav consult with her first. She also mentions that she had many flings while being trained as a Sharran:

So yes, as I said, if you treat Halsin's thing not as proper romance , but fling or just casual sex - it makes much more sense with all her dialogue in act 2(her denying poly proposals). She is just ok with open relationship(just like Astarion/Karlach) if Tav is ok with that, but remains mono.

I think it comes down to understanding of poly - I've read all the attempt the classify poly relationships and think it comes down to this: it's poly if the partners think it's poly.

I consider "open relationships" a type of poly. Usually used by people who want to be poly but don't want to consider themselves part of a club or who just really, really hate mashing latin and greek roots together.

This other explanation falls flat because it's something the player has to assume. The second you have to assume that's just how it is, that's bad writing. Reality is that Halsin was added late as a romance option and they wanted him to be poly/open, thus they changed the other companions reactions to fit that. If they wanted us to think it was just a fling, they should have dialogue for that. They have not. And even then, them being okay with a fling is awkward, because then you should be able to ask for a fling with all companions, which leads to a can of worms they probably don't want opened.

The Mizora scene has also been talked about indeed. And it's also out of character, though less so, reasons I don't really feel like repeating right now because we'll just be juggling 5 different conversations at once that kind of already happened in this thread.

The dialogue about casual sex being encouraged as Sharran is unfortunately a complete contradiction, and thus not canon, because it is otherwise mentioned that Shar looked down on sex without purpose (aka sex that helps with doing her bidding), which makes sense because she is or at least was the goddess of, amongst other things, seduction. They therefore had to actually do it in secret or come up with excuses to do so, which means she obviously had action, but not to that extent. Also explains why her relationship with Nocturne is implied to be platonic. This is established during her entire Sharran path in act 3 amongst a few other scenarios and implications, where she will eventually break up with you despite still loving you because she has no time for you.

And even if they were to make this canon, it would not explain why she would still be like that in act 3. After all, she went through 2 acts of character progression and as we already established, she has changed into a mono person who wants Tav alone.

I'm not gigaexpert on this topic, but isn't this description pretty accurate?:
What is the difference between polyamory and open relationships? In an open relationship, you're free to have sex with other people but stay emotionally committed to only one primary partner. In a polyamorous relationship, you're committed to loving multiple partners equally.
I understand that its different for everyone, but it applies pretty well to SH and her general behaviour through earlier acts(again she denies any poly proposal even for Karlach and Astarion). I mean that she is just ok with open relationship, but shes not poly and not interested in it.

I think this pretty much answers my question from before. But we still don't know if devs/writers even aware of the problem and if they are, how they are planning to address it (if at all).

Best way (IMO) would be a rewrite that would fix issues with characterization and everything else discussed in the Shadowheart and Halsin threads and (hopefully) would make both players wanting open/poly and players wanting exclusive romance happy. But it is the hardest option therefore the least likely.
Second best (for SH issue at least) would be removing problematic interactions at least from monomancers playthrough and all the missing characterization then could be just headcanoned - easier, therefore more likely.
Doing nothing - easiest, but many people are left unhappy, because there are issues that can be immersion breaking at best or completely ruin the experience at worst.

Oh and there is still a chance that if they will go with a rewrite they will mess up something again and we'll be back at square 1.

This is why so many people argue for removing content that they don't like. Not because they are opposed to poly representation, but because it is most likely way to resolve writing inconsistencies, ambiguity and problematic interactions.

In what world does her general behavior in act 1 and act 2 imply she's open/poly, how is that the conclusion you've come to after all that's been said and done here? And why would you even use something that proves the exact opposite as an argument for that? I don't even have to prove you wrong anymore, you're doing it yourself.

I meant that she is ok with open relationship, but not interested in poly though? If that wasn't clear.