Think about this. You can play as an evil character, but when leaving Dark Lands, narrator will still say that you are sorry you did not remove the curse. You can remain an evil durge by refusing to accept Bhaal and choosing the option "I'm still evil." But at the end of the game, the narrator will tell you that you are worried about Isabelle's death.
At the moment of the ritual, the emphasis is on how evil the ritual is, however, the narrator does not mention that releasing thousands of spawns puts thousands of people at risk. Living people. The narrator speaks negatively only about the ritual. Instead, they could show a neutral opinion, for example: "If you perform the ritual, then thousands of souls you have ruined will go to hell. But if you release them, thousands of people may suffer from their actions." The second is never mentioned, although later in the game it is shown that spawns do cause damage to living creatures. This dual position shows how the "negative" is shown only where it is convenient for them. And yes, I don't like it.
I'm saying this because that's why Ascended Astarion fans found themselves in such a position. Whoever wrote the game doesn't seem to consider the possibility that your character might be evil. Or they considers it, but from the position of "you feel guilty for this", "you should be unhappy", "we will teach you a lesson for this choice."
It's like we're not playing a game for the sake of a moral lesson. Why give a choice in this case. Like it doesn't even concern only Astarion, but the whole evil route. If you give people a path to choose from, you should please them equally on both paths, not punish them. No player wants to be punished during the game. Then who would even want to play for evil? Like you get nothing but a salty taste in your mouth and insults.
We need kiss animations at the party and the option to tell him we love him (I’d accept it at the party but I’d love to see an option for us to say it after he turns the MC too, if romanced).
Just because it’s his ‘evil’ ending doesn’t mean my MC doesn’t love AA any less than as a spawn. This whole trope of ‘you can’t love him now, he’s evil,’ is such bad quality writing, imo. You have the option to go through with the ritual and commit 100% to the outcome of it.
And I love AA’s new zest; his passion and possessiveness tick all the right boxes and our MC should have the option to be just as passionate and possessive too.
Think about this. You can play as an evil character, but when leaving Dark Lands, narrator will still say that you are sorry you did not remove the curse. You can remain an evil durge by refusing to accept Bhaal and choosing the option "I'm still evil." But at the end of the game, the narrator will tell you that you are worried about Isabelle's death.
At the moment of the ritual, the emphasis is on how evil the ritual is, however, the narrator does not mention that releasing thousands of spawns puts thousands of people at risk. Living people. The narrator speaks negatively only about the ritual. Instead, they could show a neutral opinion, for example: "If you perform the ritual, then thousands of souls you have ruined will go to hell. But if you release them, thousands of people may suffer from their actions." The second is never mentioned, although later in the game it is shown that spawns do cause damage to living creatures. This dual position shows how the "negative" is shown only where it is convenient for them. And yes, I don't like it.
I'm saying this because that's why Ascended Astarion fans found themselves in such a position. Whoever wrote the game doesn't seem to consider the possibility that your character might be evil. Or they considers it, but from the position of "you feel guilty for this", "you should be unhappy", "we will teach you a lesson for this choice."
It's like we're not playing a game for the sake of a moral lesson. Why give a choice in this case. Like it doesn't even concern only Astarion, but the whole evil route. If you give people a path to choose from, you should please them equally on both paths, not punish them. No player wants to be punished during the game. Then who would even want to play for evil? Like you get nothing but a salty taste in your mouth and insults.
You can choose to kill them even if you don't do the ritual. Or just leave them locked up.
But yeah, the evil route in this game is shit. The ending narration especially doesn't fit if you destroy the brain. Like, I didn't do it to save the city. I did it because I don't want a tentacle infestation in a city I'm planning to rule.
The game does a great job of providing dialogue paths for those who want to tell the story where their character has buyer's remorse and is essentially trapped in the relationship. I like these options, because it is definitely a valid narrative arc to pursue.
What's lacking is the content for anyone who decides they made a good bargain and are happy with the arrangement, conditions and all. Which I strongly believe is also a fair perspective to have on how matters play out. The conversation prior to be turned isn't particularly subtle. I think it's made clear what the main character is getting and what it will cost them, so if they choose it they're not necessarily being duped or manipulated.
I'd actually be happy with a scenario where they add a kiss, but it feels transactional. For example, as a reward for actually going out and gathering a juicy tidbit of gossip from one of your companions. A bit more dialogue wouldn't go amiss either, perhaps reminiscing about one of the parties you hosted together and how tame this one is in comparison.
I agree, somehow the writers seem to have decided for us that if you choose to Ascend Astarion than your character can't possibly love him. The question of whether an Ascended Astarion can return that love is an entirely separate issue. I think it's perfectly legitimate for Tav to have fallen in love with the darker side of Astarion's character from the start, and to prefer that aspect of him. This is roleplay. Characters should be able to have any number of motives driving them, pure and otherwise.
I really hate it they decided this for us. It's also unfair since apparently Durge can properly express their feelings for him during their own story, but not Tav. There are enough examples in the game that he does in fact return the love. It's just not the same puppy love like in Spawn Astarion path, but something darker. This is exactly how I roleplayed my Seldarine chaotic neutral drow who was trying to get away from the stereotypical evil drow character and create a new life on the surface for herself away from Lolth fanatics, but she still had that darkness inside her (life in the Underdark took a toll on her) that Astarion reignited and kept progressively stoking, until the ritual happened and there was no going back anymore. In fact, she was into him even more when he ascended. The confidence he gains is amazing and very appealing! From that moment on it's always 'we' and 'us' and I love that detail. In the end they both embraced their dark desires. And corrupted Gale in the process too, who even admitted he learned to enjoy the chaos, haha.
Originally Posted by melgreg
Yes, it's clear that Tav will never be an equal in Ascended Astarion's eyes, and they will never be free from him. Neither of those things suggest to me that the relationship would be passionless. To the contrary, a lot of his comments suggest that there's a great deal of attraction.
There's definitely a lot of attraction there. The game shows multiple times that he really enjoys being in the dominant position, so I'd say that the power dynamic actually adds to the passion.
Originally Posted by Nyloth
I think writers in this case do not like to write evil at all, because even in Durge preview, the introduction is "I have to get rid of dark impulses", and not "I have to figure this out" or "accept dark impulses". That is, the game automatically directs you to "fix" something. I have a lot of problems with any evil and morally questionable action in the game. The fact that evil players were deprived of content and were not given variably evil endings (for example rule with Gortash) shows.
Yeah, that is really crappy and shows they have a clear preference and want to steer the narrative according to it. I went for rule with Gortash option and was very disappointed how it panned out. I really wanted to see more of him, more political drama and how it affected the city.
Originally Posted by Nyloth
In early access, I expected Astarion to be some kind of villain who would burn down cities for you. But they did everything completely differently and presented it as "not freedom." (...) Like, I don't want to fix villains and turn them into the likeness of heroes. I want my characters to be evil couples! When they burn the world down for each other. Is it really that difficult?
I'm sad they almost completely cut his magistrate background. I also don't want to fix them, because I often prefer villains in fiction. Goody-two-shoes characters just bore me these days. I wish we saw more of the evil couple dynamics.
Originally Posted by t1mekill3r
Astarion has an unfair amount of content that you only get if you play as Karlach, which in my case is never. That kiss really should be available for Tav/Durge. It's beautiful.
I second that. It's just wasteful that the companion for who it makes no sense to end up with him actually has the hottest kiss. I wouldn't mind if they changed it and kept the newly added kiss for Spawnstarion and gave this one to the Ascendant.
Originally Posted by t1mekill3r
I imagine if the upper city had made it into the game, both versions of Astarion would've been better. And could cause some actual chaos.
At the moment of the ritual, the emphasis is on how evil the ritual is, however, the narrator does not mention that releasing thousands of spawns puts thousands of people at risk. Living people. The narrator speaks negatively only about the ritual. Instead, they could show a neutral opinion, for example: "If you perform the ritual, then thousands of souls you have ruined will go to hell. But if you release them, thousands of people may suffer from their actions." The second is never mentioned, although later in the game it is shown that spawns do cause damage to living creatures. This dual position shows how the "negative" is shown only where it is convenient for them. And yes, I don't like it. I'm saying this because that's why Ascended Astarion fans found themselves in such a position. Whoever wrote the game doesn't seem to consider the possibility that your character might be evil. Or they considers it, but from the position of "you feel guilty for this", "you should be unhappy", "we will teach you a lesson for this choice."
This would have been so much better than what we got! Totally agree with your comments about how the evil path is shafted. I keep the moralisers of the team at camp and hang out with the pragmatists capable of seeing shades of grey. I don't need the game itself trying to make me feel bad when I'm enjoying myself.
Originally Posted by Darkangel1211
Just because it’s his ‘evil’ ending doesn’t mean my MC doesn’t love AA any less than as a spawn. This whole trope of ‘you can’t love him now, he’s evil,’ is such bad quality writing, imo. You have the option to go through with the ritual and commit 100% to the outcome of it.
Exactly! If we can fully commit to it why can't we say nice things to back it up?
Originally Posted by t1mekill3r
Like, I didn't do it to save the city. I did it because I don't want a tentacle infestation in a city I'm planning to rule.
I did it because it seemed too risky to dominate it when that bugger already showed it had a lot of tricks up its sleeve, and I was SO tired of hearing its annoying, agitated voice. I just wanted to see it dead and to shut up forever. Same with the Emperor. Finally be free of the tentacle nonsense and have a nice, decadent life with Astarion.
Originally Posted by melgreg
A bit more dialogue wouldn't go amiss either, perhaps reminiscing about one of the parties you hosted together and how tame this one is in comparison.
He actually talks about it in banter. He says: 'This is nice. A little tame compared to one of my parties, but it has a quaint charm.' I think he could suggest a private afterparty in the clearing for old times' sake.
I'm not giving up hope for an epilogue kiss just yet. We know Larian is still working on kissing animations, and that Astarion's have been bugged previously. If they had one, but it wasn't working properly, I can imagine Larian just setting that content to the side for now in order to ship the epilogue out. Something like that would also explain why Astarion's epilogue content seems somewhat lacking in general (for both spawn and Ascendant) when compared to the other companions. They would have needed to snip any dialogue pathways leading up to a kiss.
Even Spawn doesn't have a kiss, just a hug whereas from what you've said other companions have BOTH kiss and hug options
Not all of them have both hug and kiss options, though Gale, Karlach, Shadowheart, Halsin and Minthara can also be hugged as friends. I edited my inital post listing all epilogue interactions because I just saw that romanced Lae'zel in projection form can still be snogged. Wyll's smooch doesn't involve physical contact, but it's still some form of this type of affection. Astarion is literally the ONLY LI that doesn't have any kiss at the party!
Recently, I was also talking about the act 1 bite night how there is no option to actually enjoy Astarion nibbling on us (despite being able to tell him later that we did) and the animation only shows Tav being in pain. There's a vid of the scene with new camera angles and it shows even better how Tav is clearly struggling and likely just waiting for it to be over. Like it's a visit at the dentist or something.
Again, according to Larian, this is supposed to be the starting point of the romance, but there is nothing remotely romantic about it. Since they just modified the act 1 sex scene I want them to revisit this one as well and add a more intimate variation that we can select.
That whole scene is stupid. As if the smartest way to feed a starving vampire you met a few days ago is to lie down completely defenseless and bare your neck for him. And then if you change your mind you literally pull a stake out of your ass. And successfully stab a dude while barely being able to stand.
Having a more intimate variation would also be hilarious when you don't stop him from drinking you dry. Imagine having to talk to him in the morning after you let him kill you because you...were distracted.
Since they just modified the act 1 sex scene I want them to revisit this one as well and add a more intimate variation that we can select.
As nice as this would be, I wouldn't hold my breath. Most cutscenes have one set of reaction, no matter what your character says or does. For example in the scene with the hyena birthing the gnoll when you are durge, the narrator explains how giddy you are about the smell of blood and offal, while the animation shows our character retching. Or in scenes where you can draw your weapon in dialogue but the character does not do it in the animation. At the end of the bite scene you can tell Astarion that you look forward to watching him fight while the character looks after him in a mixture of disgust and consternation.
Originally Posted by t1mekill3r
Having a more intimate variation would also be hilarious when you don't stop him from drinking you dry. Imagine having to talk to him in the morning after you let him kill you because you...were distracted.
That would indeed be hilarious (though I gotta admit unashamed that I do prefer to punch him for it)
Having a more intimate variation would also be hilarious when you don't stop him from drinking you dry. Imagine having to talk to him in the morning after you let him kill you because you...were distracted.
That would indeed be hilarious (though I gotta admit unashamed that I do prefer to punch him for it)
That punch would be a perfectly valid way to express your extreme embarrassment.
For the bite scene I honestly wonder which part, if any, was supposed to indicate that our character is kinda into this. The first "let him continue", because then you lean into him?
Having a more intimate variation would also be hilarious when you don't stop him from drinking you dry. Imagine having to talk to him in the morning after you let him kill you because you...were distracted.
That would indeed be hilarious (though I gotta admit unashamed that I do prefer to punch him for it)
That punch would be a perfectly valid way to express your extreme embarrassment.
For the bite scene I honestly wonder which part, if any, was supposed to indicate that our character is kinda into this. The first "let him continue", because then you lean into him?
That's how I always interpreted it and I think the narration reflects that with the "you lean into him losing yourself". And the first time I did that I of course rolled a critical failure on the following roll and died. So, I guess it indeed was a punch because of embarrassment after that.
I know you can die by failing rolls to stop Astarion from draining you. However, the game also provides two options that amount to “let him keep going” that also result in your character’s death.
I really do think the game could distinguish a bit between these two paths. Since in one you really are letting him kill you, so being indignant about it is a little hypocritical. “Really, darling? You seemed perfectly happy to die in my arms last night. Funny how I don’t remember you asking me to stop.”
That's how I always interpreted it and I think the narration reflects that with the "you lean into him losing yourself". And the first time I did that I of course rolled a critical failure on the following roll and died. So, I guess it indeed was a punch because of embarrassment after that.
Would make more sense if the option itself was "lean into him", not just do nothing. Because now you have no idea that this is what your character will do when you pick that the first time. (Especially with a Durge you can have other reasons)
Originally Posted by melgreg
I know you can die by failing rolls to stop Astarion from draining you. However, the game also provides two options that amount to “let him keep going” that also result in your character’s death.
I really do think the game could distinguish a bit between these two paths. Since in one you really are letting him kill you, so being indignant about it is a little hypocritical. “Really, darling? You seemed perfectly happy to die in my arms last night. Funny how I don’t remember you asking me to stop.”
Yeah if you just let him go on your death is just natural selection lol. But not many would admit that after being revived.
I know you can die by failing rolls to stop Astarion from draining you. However, the game also provides two options that amount to “let him keep going” that also result in your character’s death.
I really do think the game could distinguish a bit between these two paths. Since in one you really are letting him kill you, so being indignant about it is a little hypocritical. “Really, darling? You seemed perfectly happy to die in my arms last night. Funny how I don’t remember you asking me to stop.”
To be fair, not asking him to stop does not give him a carte blanche to kill you, so I don't think the game needs to distinguish between the two paths (though it'd be perfectly in character for him to cast the blame on you). He told you beforehand that it'd "only be a taste". The character was just stupid enough to trust the hungry vampire.
Originally Posted by t1mekill3r
Would make more sense if the option itself was "lean into him", not just do nothing. Because now you have no idea that this is what your character will do when you pick that the first time. (Especially with a Durge you can have other reasons)
Agree, that would make it much clearer. But then people would whine again about the sexual undertones in case they just want to be nice and feed him out of friendship reasons...
To be fair, not asking him to stop does not give him a carte blanche to kill you, so I don't think the game needs to distinguish between the two paths (though it'd be perfectly in character for him to cast the blame on you). He told you beforehand that it'd "only be a taste". The character was just stupid enough to trust the hungry vampire.
Never trust someone who is doing something they've never done before and tell you they've got this.
Originally Posted by Veranis
Agree, that would make it much clearer. But then people would whine again about the sexual undertones in case they just want to be nice and feed him out of friendship reasons...
It could be both "lean into him" and "let him continue".
It could be both "lean into him" and "let him continue".
That's exactly what I would like to have in the game. Let him continue would be a neutral/friendly option, while lean into him would be more intimate with Tav doing something extra like grabbing his hair or putting their hand on his back, and Astarion getting more comfortable in turn. Tav should also stop wriggling about so much, they look like a dying fish moving their legs like that.
Btw, he had some new lines for his kisses in Patch 4 ("if you must" and something else), but the dialogue was bugged and when they fixed it I never heard them again. Do they ever trigger for anyone?
These lines seem to be gone for good now. 'If you must' was a very strange and cold line to get in response if you ask for a kiss, so it's good that they fixed it.
