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

Honestly, I don't think that this is the kind of thing I can ignore now that I know about it. I'll try to explain how I came across all of this. I played the game with Shadowheart as the only companion I actively tried romancing. I thought it was great, the slow build up was nice and I thought it felt rewarding. I was randomly scrolling through the feedback threads on Discord and found out that people weren't satisfied with Halsin. Then I found this on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/173s56w/act_3_halsins_behaviourheavy_spoilers/

Not long after that I found the orgy scene on Youtube. Basically implied that you and the drow twins watched Shadowheart and Halsin go at it. Again, I can't forget that kind of thing. Her romance dialogue points towards her being interested in you and only you and not being okay with an open/poly relationship. The fact she's suddenly turning 180 degrees for Halsin or becomes interested in a foursome is jarring and the fact that this thread exists at all with it probably being at least top 5 in terms of popularity here speaks for itself.

"Not tonight" suggest openness to the idea in the future. Think about it would you say "not tonight" to something you were dead set against? "excuse me, would you like to drink some sewer water"? "oh, not tonight" (said no one ever)



Which I read to mean - I want the lion's share of attention. Which she does get in a poly relationship with Tav.

I agree with what @papercut_ninja and @Auric have said here

It also can be interpreted as "Tonight I want to have a drink only with you, because I want to be more intimate, only between us. We might share friendly drinks with others some other time."

Why is your interpretation more accurate than mine?

Her saying she'd always want more than you'd have to spare means it would never be enough for her. She would always want more, including more than the lions share. She would want everything.

I agree with Frog. I've always interpreted it as Tav being oblivious to Shadowheart's clear invitation for a romantice date. It's like if a person who secretly likes you invites you to a bar and your reply is "That sounds fun, mind if I bring a few friends along?" and they're gonna be like, "Uhm, maybe another time, I want to drink with you and you alone."

It isn't. Both are equally valid because both are a result of an individual's own thoughts on the matter. But a few people continue being vocal about how they want interactions that support a non-monogamous interpretation removed wholesale, while the people who interpret it that way are kinda just here to be like no reading it the other way is fine and valid please don't simply remove it entirely, it'd be cooler to improve on it.

The thread is so active because of the constant argument caused by the premise, not necessarily the premise itself. We all got invested in one aspect of the character/romance or another and are arguing from a place of that enjoyment. And the one point we (mostly) all agree on is what you just emphasized: the problems with Halsin.

Oh, my bad then. I must have misread it as implying that was a canon set in stone. My apologies.

I think it likely comes down to some people understanding proper writing procedure better than some others. I mean simply typing in "writing inconsistent characters" in Google you get:

"One of the fastest ways to lose your readers and credibility as a writer is to create a story in which the characters are inconsistent."


I recommend learning more about writing practice, even readers have a lot to gain from the knowledge.

Anyway, I'm only reacting to SH's inconsistency the way it's as expected as an audience member in this situation. I have lost my "suspension of disbelief" because the writers did a poor job on act 3. This thread is here because others have also lost this suspension of disbelief. Had they foreshadowed better and done the work to convey her in a consistent manner then this thread wouldn't exist.

I don't think it's particularly productive to say people just don't know enough about what good writing is to agree with you.

I don't know, it has a ton of views and replies. So I have at least a slight bit of hope that this topic would be addressed. But still, this whole thing kind of makes me feel like dirt if Im gonna be honest. I know it's a game, but I still hate this feeling.

She doesn't do anything in game though and it is not implied.
Again, she denies any poly proposal from player with Karlach(she's attracted to her at least) or Astarion. But she is ok with an idea of having casual sex without any hard feelings(or relationship).
Doesn't that mean that she is ok with an open relationship, but not poly(she wants Tav for herself)?

This conclusion comes from absolutely nothing more than your mind, and is instantly refuted because the only person she seems okay with to have such a relationship is with Halsin, while shutting down all 5 other companions in the exact same scenario, for absolutely no explained reason at all.

It is considered "Bold to ask" here because it completely and utterly ignores the fact that it has been asked 5 times prior already, where it was apparently not bold to ask. This means it ignored 5 counts of headcanon character progression. The very definition of an inconsistency.

and
Lets assume she indeed seemed more open to sharing in act 1 based on this conversation, because it's up to interpretation. You did not yet have an active romance with her at this point, so she is not in love with you yet, just attracted to you. Throughout act 1, she starts falling in love with you. Her character starts changing based on this. This changes entirely in act 2, where you get the opportunity to take the relationship to the next level. In act 2, the dialogue makes it clear she went through the needed character development that turns her into mono, because while during the act 1 dialogue she says "not tonight", in act 2 she will shut down any such attempt instead, because she's no longer just attracted to you but in love with you. After act 2, she is no longer open to sharing. You can't ignore character development, which is what you are doing.

If a character is written to slap people in act 1, and they lose their arm in act 2, you can't write that they slap people again in act 3 without explaining how they got their arm back, but instead with the argument that they did it in act 1. That's not how these things work, and that's exactly what happened here.

I mean why would you even argue... She just DENIES any poly proposal attempt in act 2. I just don't get it, it's not headcannon or anything, it's what she does. And no, it's not because she "cares" about others being mono, she denies Karlach AND Astarion aswell.
Again AT BEST you can argue that she is ok with an open relationship(and treat Halsin no more than a fling). Or it's just inconsistency to let Halsin be the way he is right now in the game.

Precisely. And if the Halsin thing is to be considered as no more than a fling, then three things need to happen:
1. Allow you to ask for the same regarding other companions
2. Make it clear as day that this is what it is intended to be seen as
3. Explain why she is okay with it in the first place, so that she can develop past her dialogue in act 2 where she makes it clear she wouldn't be up for that

They did none of the above. Instead, they wrote that it is "bold to ask", something that was not the case in all 5 scenarios regarding the same question in act 2.

Until rewrites, it's nothing more than an inconsistency that ignores the rest of her dialogues ever happened.

I'm the person who considered her being okay with it. I continue being that person. The only thing she doesn't seem okay with is you not asking prior. And I think her implication that she isn't surprised that you would cheat 'because she didn't bed a swan' comes completely out of left field. She abandoned Shar for you and devotes herself entirely to you at that point. It just doesn't make sense she isn't surprised you'd not return that devotion. Especially considering that when you break up with her, her reaction is a lot more emotionally charged than that of at least Wyll and Karlach. Because of that, I was expecting a similarly emotionally charged reply to her finding out you cheated, instead of the beyond-forgiving nature of the reply you get right now, where you can basically say you'll do it again, and she simply says "just don't forget about my needs yeah?".

No, I do not actually plan on going through that dialogue ever again (well, I will, F5 -> F8 when romancing other companions to see their replies, I know most of those do stay in character). I don't roleplay those type of characters, but I just dislike inconsistent writing regardless. If I were to give her over to Viconia just to see what her reply would be, I would be annoyed if she said "Haha, this was my master plan all along together with Viconia!" and then fights you with her. No, I will not choose this dialogue option canonically in my playthrough, but the lingering idea that this is what could have happened is still there.

Edits below:
Very late edit, but I have a better example of what I mean. Lets say you break up with her and instead of the emotionally charged reply you get now, she'll say "I was kind of planning on doing that anyway". We know she doesn't ever do this. But the IDEA that she was supposedly planning on doing so would still be there. That will kill immersion, because it's completely out of character. I see the Mizora chat as a less severe version of this.

That doesn't mean I'm not okay with "bad outcomes" or anything like that. It's not like I don't know what happens if you let her kill the Nightsong, for example. But that doesn't give a similar bad lingering feeling, because it's a perfectly logical outcome. It's completely in character for her to halt the romance at that point.

Either way, it's not even remotely as bad as the Halsin situation, and if they don't change that or the drows (foursome version) at all, but do change Halsin's scenario, I would be more than content regardless. But it is in my fields of expertise to point out all the potential problems, with the hope that at least one gets acknowledged.

If you can't shake that thought, you can always just get rid of Halsin entirely (thus making it impossible to happen, even "off screen"), and remember that during the orgy, she seems quite displeased with the performances, considering she actively pushes you to join in. Your Tav is apparently better than the 350 year old heavily experienced fuckboy. Might have something to do with all the necrophilia you went through as Dark Urge...

But most importantly, just remember nothing actually happens, because even in these optional moments it's not implied to happen (except the fivesome itself, of course). It's just in your mind because of some inconsistent writing.

As things get longer more people take a look. But - to put this as kindly as possible - that isn't a measure of quality. I came here because of the length of thread and was shocked to find a small number of people who post very often have somehow convinced themselves the poly romance partner is - deep in her heart - a monogamist. But the argument just doesn't hold up.



Here's a good article that lists was people think of primary partners / nesting paryners / anchor partners. As Tav likes to say "first in my heart". SH wants to be first in Tav's heart:

https://www.bustle.com/wellness/poly-relationship-terms-metamour-nesting-partner

And using the terms in that list she feels hurt and jealousy with Mizora but compersion when Tav asks about being with Halsin. To me this seems a very consistent poly principle - ask first, not asking is cheating.

Now you are on to something that SH's desire to "first in Tav's heart" is so strong she might qualify as monogomish*. She only wants Tav to be with people who won't threaten her primary relationship. Karlach is a threat, Halsin is not. Note that she also says no to the twins if she and Tav haven't had sex by themselves first. She wants to establish base camp and then go exploring.


* (and if you start doing some research your will *hundreds* other terms

Hold up, she straight up says no to every proposal, how the hell do you know who she sees "threatening"? Sounds like headcannon.
She just says no and thats it, even no to those who she finds attractive or to those who you would describe "poly" or "open". She even knows that Karlach is doomed and attracted to her, but she still says no.
Not to mention what she says if you propose Wyll("In fact I don't want to be your spare lover"). And what the hell is that drow convo argument? You can sleep early with Laezel while being in "starting" relationship with SH and she won't say a word.

Lets summarize what we have about poly/mono things in act 1-2:
1.)She shows NO interest in poly relationship if asked directly. Thats just it, stop trying to headcanon anything.
2.)She is flirty but won't sleep with others if not romanced/shows no interest at others.
3.)The only indication that you can classify as "poly" - at tiefling party where she says "not today" if you ask her about sharing a bottle with all friends. But, I may be dumb, how the hell you came into this conclussion. I even rewatched this scene and it's just blatant that she wants you 1v1 and it's funny dialogue choice to play dumb? It doesn't even end with sex or anything.

That's not true or only true in the way that we are both interpreting the same material. And the evidence is on my side. SH is happy to have more than one partner. For some reason you think that's the anomaly despite it being hinted at in chapter 1 and confirmed in chapter 3. You have one camp conversation - that you misinterpret - and I have most of chapter 3. So if you want place our evidence on each on side of the scale . . .

Would I like it be changed to make it clearer that SH wants to be the primary partner -- the pattern she shows in Chapter 3 -- yes. Do I think this is a more urgent ask than changing the end game? Absolutely not. Again, I'm suprised that a small handful of highly vocal people feel so strongly about this issue.

I just remembered this - in EA she flirts with Wyll. This was changed in the final release. Wyll talks about a fight with a minotaur in EA she expresses an interest in seeing the scars, in the final she says she doesn't want to see them.



This is really key. And I think it is at the heart of your misunderstanding of poly relationships. Poly relationships are loving relationships. Reread that last sentence.

You are working on the implicit assumption that a move from attraction to love is a desire for exclusivity, that love expresses itself as a desire for monogamy. Now I do think you are correct that SH is changing but I think she is discovering that she wants a nesting partner - house in country, parents nearby - but also some fun at the local druid grove from time to time.

She says to no multiple partners at the very start of the loving relationship but then opens to it when Tav suggests it. Note that she says no to hiring sex workers if she and Tav haven't had sex by themselves yes. Again, establish base camp before exploring.



This made me giggle a little bit, thanks It's the forgotten realms, rings of regeneration exist, she grew her arm back. But seriously it's a nesting story once she has built her nest she feels free to fly. Or, to use the metaphor in the game, she needs Tav to teach her how to swim before he is ready to go to party at the swimming hole.

https://www.bustle.com/wellness/poly-relationship-terms-metamour-nesting-partner

Why do you keep ignoring every instance of her rejecting poly and being mono herself, and pushing your own headcanon based on ONE instance at the start of the game? All while linking some obscure articles irrelevant to the conversation.