Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Patch 6 Destroyed Player Agency with Astarion

Everything has its weight and even things that were removed and changed with the release of patch 6. You see, right now the character is getting broken with a bunch of plot holes in the story and his behavior. If filling those gaps can only be accomplished by deduction and deleted material, then it's only right to use that material to get the full picture. First of all, we could even ask him a very interesting question on the release: "So Cazador was in the right place at the right time when you were attacked? How convenient. " But has he been telling us the truth all along?

Now there will be a minute of fan theories and how I playing from early access and having all the pieces of information that are already outdated or they were removed after release, which is a very questionable decision, I see the concept of that Astarion that was probably intended.

Let's start with the last name Zarr, Strahd von Zarovich is literally an anagram of Szarr. Strahd made a pact with the devil and then gained his immortality, however his soul became forever damned. From Veliot's diary we learn that Cazador was his apprentice, not a spawn, because before Veliot also ruled the Zarr family and among the Zarr family there were also ordinary mortals. From the rules of DnD we know that vampires do not take just anyone into the coven, but carefully choose the most talented and a coven of one vampire is not a coven, but there are no other vampires in the game, which is obviously a problem in the story. Again, we learn from Veliot's diary that Cazador wasn't originally that terrible, in fact Veliot had him staked precisely because Cazador was empathic and soft. Cazador hates Astarion, but when they meet he's not even surprised, he doesn't try to control him with his mind, he controls him with magic. Why? Why doesn't he resent it, why does he talk about how I've put up with your whining for so many years? And could he even control it in the original idea? In the Champions of the Forgotten Realms cards, his age was listed as 350, but then it was changed to 263. Cazador became coven manager in 1276, but if Astarion was 350 years old when he was turned in 1268, Cazador couldn't be the host because at the time Astarion became spawn, Veliot was running the coven at that time. Which means that only Veliot could be Astarion's host and it's no surprise then that Cazador was "in the right place at the right time". Astarion the judge of the dream of power would absolutely wish for vampire immortality himself. Why didn't Cazador replace Astarion with any other spawn in the ritual? We still have a scrap of the old concept and Astarion still says - they're all connected to me. Remember, a pact with the devils can only be made by mortals and it has to be voluntary. I think the original plan was for Astarion himself to make the pact and he knew Veliot and Cazador very well. And it was for this reason that he seduced the victims into voluntarily signing themselves into the devil's pact by giving up their souls. And that's why you can't replace Astarion with any other spawn. It's a dark picture, in which Astarion really could be a sadist during his lifetime, and who knows, he may have told Veliot how to punish Cazador, hence Cazador's hatred for Astarion. And given the old datamine data, we could have teamed up with Cazador. Which means we may well have learned something so horrible it would make us doubt Astarion. And from all of this, the Ascension is a natural choice for Astarion. The path he's always desired. On the other hand, it is in such a branch of events that the "redemption" could be inserted, because only in such events he really has something to redeem. And I think that would be cool. Of course, this is just a theory and I'm by no means basing my conclusions on it, but such a character would definitely seem too cruel for a modern audience.

Early Release is called "early release" for a reason. It's subject to change, often a lot of change. This is not unusual in early access games. What's in game now is official Larian canon. Doesn't mean that you can't have your own headcanons/theories. But Astarion's character in ea was just that, the ea version of his character and not the full release version of his character.

EA was also solely comprised of act 1 (I've had the game since EA), and not even the full release version of Act 1. There was no way to know exactly how any character was going to progress through the story, unless you work for Larian or something similar.

@Anska

The Madeline storyline is interesting. I always wondered how much of himself he saw in the scenario--condeming others just to stay alive. And if wanting to see her punished was a reflection of his self loathing.

Appreciate the write up. Might try spawn with a drow resist durge. Still love AA, but an Underdark drow might make the spawn end scenario a little less bitter sweet.

oh, the release was long ago and the characters change with each new patch, so unfortunately we have no specific "canon" at all. And as for my theory, I just need to understand for myself, fill in the gaps in the story, somehow connect those elements that are not connected in any way now and there are only some scraps of history. Inside the game as of patch 6 there are no answers to all the questions.
For example:
1. Why didn't Cazador replace Astarion with any other spawn if he has the ritual knife and nothing prevented him from making a new spawn and carving the same symbols?
2. Why isn't Cazador surprised that Astarion is sassing him and Cazador doesn't try to control him mentally in any way?
3. Why did Astarion even get intimate with the future spawn if it is much easier to gather a crowd of beggars for a couple of coins and no one will even look for them?
4. Why was Astarion attacked by the Gurts, what kind of judgment did he pass that they decided to kill him?
5. Why does his age keep changing?
6. How do Larian's homebrews even work? Any good DM who introduces his rules familiarizes the player with them in a separate file. And there are many more questions.

Once again, I agree with Shyshyn4ik.

My opinions also include:

1. Evil does not equal BAD.
2. Restore player AGENCY
3. Do not change the Original Story MONTHS into the Release
4. Explain what an Ascendant Vampire is and the differences from a True Vampire. (I do not care about the current dev notes...they do not reflect the original story either which is changed, so obviously they are changing something to fit a different narrative, but who's? Astarion is NOT a True Vampire but an Ascended One, Larian: explain what is the original vision & then leave the story alone instead of changing it)
5. If we believe that Astarion wanted one person in the world to trust (that is what it states in the game) and he only shares with his true love (this is also in the game) then why would he beat her/him/they? Doesn't look good as of right now, which is also a complaint registered by the people who actually play this route with AA (romance). Astarion also doesn't want to be like Cazador and abhors him.
6. If he moves into the Lawful Evil category of DnD rules, this whole change in the story still doesn't make any sense.
7. The creator of Astarion also stated that balance needs to be maintained or the character turns into a one-dimensional type of character.....where is the balance, I would like to know.

I can confirm that these devnotes have been there since Patch 1, and wouldn't be changed either as they are instructions for Neil's acting (unless you're talking about something else)

Another partial reply. More soon.

On whether fear is at the heart of Astarian's lust for power. I can't find the dialogue on youtube but in one of the dialogues he says "I need not fear anything anymore"

Does anyone have that on hand? Can I get a copy of those note some of you have?

On alignment and the ritual. Like I said I used to play 2e on the tabletop and my group spent 3 years in Ravenloft so I absolutely agree with those who are pointing out that Astarian's story violates DnD lore. It just does. Larian has a thing about undead that doesn't follow DnD lore. I don't think any of the companions in DoS2 were good but Fane, the undead immortal, might come closest.

If chapter 3 were consistent with DnD lore the church of Lathander would be invading the circus to destroy the undead and stop the necromancer who runs it. I've not played a cleric of Lathander or Kelemvor but if they don't have an option to smite the ghoul who is guarding the gate, something is wrong. Long story short: Larian just doesn't like DnD lore on the undead.

And because I believe that the 7k died when Cazador bit them, because I believe there is zero chance that all 7k will learn to resist the urge to kill and because I've read my Anne Rice and I know that life as a vampire child is a terrible fate I chose to kill them all *after* the ritual.

But that's I also know that violates the Oath of Devotion so Larian clearly considers that a lack of compassion and, because the oath of devotion is coded as good, as an evil act. Astarian also looks gutted when you do it so you are not putting his feelings first and foremost.

BUT this is the story we have. In Larian's mind killing the 7k makes a "good" paladin fall.

AND even if killing all the evil spawn is a good act doing in a way that seals a pact with an arch devil is not. This ritual is part of a diabolic deal. On that Astarian hasn't read! He doesn't even know what the words on his back mean much less the words on the backs of the other spawn.

Something tells me there is still a devil in those details . . .

But even evil lovers have a reason to prevent him from completing the ritual: they want Astarian to conquer his fear by means of a loving relationship between equal partners.



Unfortunately I play on honor mode and no longer have multiple saves so if anyone has a save before the circus dryad talk to her and take the serious answers and the charlatan answers. In many ways that's the relationship in a nutshell for me. You get full points by giving the Astarian facade answers - you know he's full of it but you like being the one person who can see behind the mask. The serious answers - Astarian lives in constant fear - pisses him off so much he may end the relationship. You've just revealed his secret shame to a stranger.

On Cazador 2.0. You get one of the longest discussions with Cazador if you go to the ritual without Astarian. Note the similarities between Cazador and AA. "He is mine", the parallels between Astarian not wanting to wander far and Astarian's threat to spawn Tav: don't wander too far. Of course note how Cazador repeatedly emphasizes that fear is Astarian's cardinal trait.

I believe you're talking about a line after he turns Tav into a spawn, he tells them "You need not fear anything". This comes with no devnotes attached (most lines don't come with devnotes)

There are similar lines to what you're talking about as well, right after the ritual he's like "Whatever he damn well pleases!" when you ask him what an ascendant can do. Right before the ritual he also says to Cazador "but if I finish the ritual, I'll never have to fear anyone, ever"

Man, I just wanted to leave my feedback on patch 6 in a place Larian might see it.

How did we get here? But alright. Here you go:

Astarion feared Cazador, and only him, his power over him. When he is not there, naturally he has nothing to fear. Astarion's worst fear is spending a whole year underground.
And look, being a spawn, Astarion could resist Cazador, but after such punishment he gave up trying.
By the way, there is another interesting moment in this dialogue: Astarion remembers turning into a vampire, how painful it was. And when they turn our character into a spawn, we lose consciousness, and in the morning we can ask what happened to us. That is, we don’t remember or know anything. This leads to the idea that Astarion did not make us a spawn, we became a bride. And just all of Astarion’s control is ordinary, verbal, no magic or mind control. A vampire can manipulate words to control the bride and mislead her. But there is no magical control. The bride can be of any gender, I note.
I think you may have already read these notes. I think Larin could very well use thisfor the game.

Cazador is a big bad vampire blob. No plot. Just a cartoonish villain. Comparing Astarion, his story to him just completely destroys Astarion as a character and brings him down to the black\white caricature.
"You're mine".
I think Gale can say that phrase too, just because it's uttered by Astarion's mouth doesn't make it a parallel to Cazador.
It's a standard phrase for possessive romance. Whether it's Astarion or anyone else.
Astarion has such power-dynamics before the ritual.
Astarion calls durage, his blood bag.
He's already possessive and weird enough, and probably holding back.
Even Tav can say "Yes, all mine" if Tav is in a romantic relationship with Astarion, specifically for romantic.

Although I agree with Shyn, Astarion as spawn is disoriented and cannot manifest his inner power.
His approvals don't change after the ritual, in some things AA quotes himself before the ritual, as was the case with his desire for hedonism and debauchery. In the things he wants and can get he doesn't hold back.
Considering he was a mortal with a desire for power as well it's no wonder he's showing it now in romance too. AA is bursting with new emotions and feelings of mortals.
It's like saying Spawn Astarion is Vellioth 3.0. as he thinks "impaled" is something effective to punish the spawn, how many hours, or years (11?)
I've seen parsings where Astarion in Early Access, however many of the parsed scenes are in the release - all of Astarion was compared to Cazador.
But it loses enough of its meaning while Cazador and his idea remains such a shallow amd simplistic.

Cazador tried. In Cazador's castle we may encounter a kind of Romeo and Juliet story. The diary of one of Cazador's former servants, whom Cazador wanted to use instead of Astarion, but the cunning man drank a "poison" that was supposed to help him fake death and escape, while his werewolf lover took the real poison. We find him in his coffin, he looks like a corpse, but it is unknown if this is really the case, or if later on this character does wake up and escape.


Cazador can't control Astarion because of the larvae.


I totally agree. This seems like violence on the part of the script. You don't want to play a dramatic-traumatic novel with redemptions, "circles of abuse" and all that, but you want an RPG with variants of different interpretations that leave possibilities for a happy ending - here's patch 6 for you. The developer is entitled to whatever vision they want, but they are not entitled to traumatize real people in order to shove that vision as the only possible vision for roleplay. Just because someone doesn't see "red flags" as such, sees them as green, or has their own interpretation, having a story in their headcanon where Astarion might have heard something different instead of "I want your body" and Tav isn't degrading himself, but just taking care of the person he loves, accepting him for who he is and helping him open up and behave completely freely - that doesn't mean the developer needs to shove sadistic content into the game in a rage in order to suppress opposition.


Is the Oath of Devotion also broken in the case of the ritual and Ascension of Astarion? Is it possible to get a roleplay variant of the paladin oathbreaker who broke their oath for love? It would be a beautiful story, assuming of course the patch 6 issues are fixed and the game is playable again.


This is a bit ridiculous. Having a BFG (Big F***in Gun) has always been a far more effective way of dealing with fear (fear is a natural and logical emotion necessary for survival in a dangerous environment, it's a natural indicator to ensure we don't "die a hero" too soon) than implementing the idea of " equal relations" as that idea is understood by the proponents of ritual abandonment. Plus:

1. Astarion - "spawn forever" is not in an equal relationship with Tav, he is dependent. If you come to Cazador without Astarion, Cazador in the dialog as if hints that "Astarion needs a master", Tav, who successfully "persuaded" Astarion to refuse the ritual by manipulation, tries to maintain their power over Astarion, to be "his protector", in fact they want to be the same "master", only kind.

2. "Unequal" in Tav's relationship with the Ascended is largely artificially enforced by plot and rail dialog. Knees are ultimative, Astarion a priori hears "I want your body" or "I want to become a vampire" from Tav, which should "logically" fit in with his "You're degrading yourself by staying with him". That said, until patch 6, the player still had the option of interpreting playing D/s with Astarion as an option to heal and help him. Domination helps the dominant feel more confident, feel the pleasure and peace of mind of being able to control the situation. And this voluntary play in no way prevents Tav from being a powerful, strong, and confident character. In contrast, a truly confident character has no problem with the knee-jerk game, as they are not interested in such nonsense as someone else's made up "rules" as to what is and is not humiliation. Astarion is perfectly able to heal his fear over time, gaining strength, freedom from the constraints of the spawn state, and a loved one by his side who fully understands and supports him always and in every situation.

Evil lovers, of course, have a reason to prevent him from performing the ritual - that reason is very simple - the desire to be a dominant and abuser themselves.


Serious answers - do you mean dumping your loved one's deep pain on anyone? Tav, who understands everything perfectly well, but wants to support their loved one and not turn him into a subject of discussion, deservedly gets approval points. It would really piss me off too if someone I trusted started blabbing to everyone everything they know about me and my character. How do you trust someone who is willing to tell a stranger everything about you just to show off, to show how smart and insightful they are, and to get credit from some dryad as if her opinion of your relationship actually matters?


Cazador is of course an unquestioned authority, and what he emphasizes (what he's been doing to Astarion for two hundred years, and anyone in Astarion's shoes would feel fear, no other way) is certainly important. Just like we can tell from this dialog that Tav, who wants to continue to control Astarion, is a gentle Cazador-lite. Plush pink handcuffs. And yes, my Tav doesn't stray far from Astarion as it is - she has no such desire. Astarion doesn't even have any motivation to become Cazador 2.0.


Yes, Cazador was breaking Astarion, as a maniac always does with his victim. If Astarion had stood up harder - there would be no Astarion, he'd just be dead. And Astarion damn well deserves to be powerful, empowered, and completely free after these two hundred years of "pure shit". And by the way, it's only when the ritual is performed that Cazador gets the retribution he deserves.


Yes, that's an important point. Astarion never in the story tries to control Tav, all the words about spawn and submission remain purely words. Tav is supposed to be Astarion's bride.

Bride based on what? Does that actually come up in the game? Are you saying that Larian are bad enough writers that they just expect players to know based on a scene that they are referencing a specific and esoteric lore fragment? Show don't tell and all, but unless the game actually references the idea of the vampire bride then no, that's not Larian's intention. Or they're just terrible writers. But honestly that could be true, I'd believe that. And Tav not remembering they were turned really isn't an indicator of anything. We have two data points; one remembers, one doesn't. We don't know which is normal or if it's just a case of both being viable depending on circumstances. Or Larian could just have thought both outcomes were cool and decided to include both, consistency be damned. That would be in character for Larian. Besides, people have said that if you try to break up with Astarion after the brain's destruction, you can't. So you must be a spawn, unable to disobey if you actually try to.

Furthermore, no one "deserves" power. Everyone deserves freedom, yes, but power isn't a thing anyone should be entitled to. Power should come with responsibility, with checks and balances. Nobody should be allowed to do whatever they want without limitations. Nobody. The fact that people in the world do essentially get that is a great injustice that should not be tolerated. Astarion deserves freedom, he deserves to heal, he deserves love, but he does not deserve power. Especially when he's made it quite clear that he intends to misuse it. Whether the victim of that misuse will be Tav or not is irrelevant. At the end of the day Spawn Astarion can still have freedom. He can't do everything he wants, but really, nobody can. We all have limitations. His are more onerous than most in many ways, but he's free to figure himself out, without another person's will forcing him down a particular path that he can't resist. Also, there absolutely areways for him to become mortal again. The most obvious is a Wish spell, which while not easy to get, is very much a thing they can seek out. Or I beleive someone said that a true resurection spell can do it too, maybe I'm wrong about that. Plus there's whatever other random magic that could be floating around the world, it's a wild place.

Also KillerRabbit brings up an excellent point; he hasn't read the deal. That alone is a good enough reason to stop him from doing the ritual; he's signing on the dotted line with an archdevil and he doesn't know the full extent of what is offered or expected. Setting aside morality, that is just wildly stupid. Maybe there's some fine print that says if he does a particular thing he'll go straight to hell. Or maybe he's unknowingly in the thrall of of the archdevil. You never sign a contract you haven't read, that should go double for a contract with an archdevil.


I'll be honest, I don't fully understand a lot of what you're here, especially since I've never gotten far enough to actually do the end of Astarion's quest so I'm assuming who Veliot is by context. But if I'm understandign what you're saying, then Astarion in your headcanon is actually far more evil than what I ever thought of him as. He's a straight up villain that absolutely should die. There's really nothing sympathetic or all that nuanced in this version of him, in this version becoming a spawn is actually justice.

It's a popular headcanon based on the coincidence that Tav is turned overnight, painlessly, with 3 bites and a drop of blood, but IMO there are a lot of caveats. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a nod since the writer who wrote that part is a Strahd fan, but everything else (also logically speaking given Astarion's reasoning for doing it in the first place) points to Tav being a spawn. The script considers them a spawn and never uses different terminology, the devnotes seem to acknowledge that this is the reason Astarion laughs when they ask to break up after the tadpole's gone... And also, from the requirements that this ritual describes, the first bite wasn't in the script at all and was instead part of the sex scene that was considered a surprise from the cinematics team (it wasn't intended to be shown), and can be skipped if you ask to be turned without sex involved.

I think a big part of why this scene looks the way it does is that it would've been a pain in the ass to animate Tav coming out of a grave a day later, and the drop of blood seems to be a way to handwave why Tav will be able to walk in the sun. The rules of the universe in Larian's writing are pretty lax (and, in that vein, an obscure tidbit from a 2.5e manual is probably not being that taken into consideration). My personal approach is that I prefer sticking by what BG3 establishes in the game rather than sticking to the manuals, as they contradict each other sometimes, and I think it's a good thing that they're not doing everything by the rules.

That being said I wouldn't be surprised if they proceeded to make it ambiguous after fan reception, but from what I can judge it doesn't seem to be the original intent.

It's just theory of course. Some things in the game indicate this. But of course there is no confirmation.
And in the end, if you leave Astarion, I believe that Astarion uses banal threats, manipulates and instills fear with words, but there is no mind control, due to the fact that the tadpole is missing. That is, again, how vampires control brides by misleading them.
This is also indicated by the fact that if you leave Astarion until the finale, the character is the spawn, but Astarion does not control him in any way.
This is just a theory. But it sounds good.

I think that's because the game places emphasis on that it's actions that count and no what you are, you are a monster if you behave like one. Omeluum and Blurg might be the most convenient examples for this, as both come from monster races but are both actively working on making the Underdark - and in Omeluum's case itself - less monstrous. The more nefarious version of this might be the githyanki egg quest. The researchers want to raise egg-boy against his nature to be peaceful but they do so in a cruel way, which marks themselves as evil and he kills them for it.

The undead seem to also add a spin of clinging of the past - or the past clinging to you - on this general characterisation of the monstrous. Balthazar has mixed feelings towards his family and so he keeps them around just like his childhood bully, who is now his slave. Mayrina's husband is a most obvious representation of not letting go and clinging to the past. The vampire spawn too are more than a moral dilemma, they are Astarion's shame. He'd rather not think about them, but here they are. He says himself that it would be easier if they had been ghosts, but they are not they are real people whom he has to deal with - who are at one point under his control, under his authority.

Killing the spawn post ritual denies them the chance to be anything but monsters, in the context of consent you decide what's best for them and exert dominion over them. Anne Rice said vampire children cannot be happy, so these vampire children can never be happy, they are not allowed to decide on their own. Since the game puts a lot of emphasis on free will (or consent) this cannot be a good thing. You think Astarion can be more than a monster and has a right to "live", so by extension all these spawn do to.

For Astarion they also are his way to redemption, learning to care for them is dealing with his past. On a tangent: I don't quite understand why all the UD conversations and the UD ending for companion S!Astarion are buried under so many loopholes. It is a very cool ending for him on the friendship route and makes thematically more sense than the hero-adventurer one - he even gets to burn down Cazador's palace. It's kind of weird that in his romance, it is described as way less appealing. Maybe because it is less fun than adventuring? I don't know.

In this light, A!Astarion isn't a monster because of anything in the pact, but because he does something monstrous. He condemns 7K people to hellish slavery and confirms what he says about Cazador in act 1, that what Cazador was not wrong on principle but because he did it to Astarion. Act 3 S!Astarion would disagree.

Another tangent: The circus is an interesting place. While it's all fun on the surface and it seems to be a haven for odd people - Stoney and Boney probably would have a hard time living anywhere else and the raptor is happy - it is also most definitely a shady place. Lucretious does not even try to hide that they are exploiting their workers (it gets worse if you look into their diary) and the displacer beast also has a sorry tale to tell.


For Astarion's past: From the current state of the game, I get the impression that magistrate Astarion was a overly harsh judge, based on his general view on mercy and especially his conversation with Wyll, if you take both of them to Ansur. But that is also only a guess.

For Chamberlain Dufay: He is dead dead. He messed up and drank the wrong potion too, the real "Mysterious Elixir" - a potion of Feign Death - can still be found in his office.

For the Love Test: It depends on the character. Gale approves of telling him what his worst flaw is during the test, he thinks it's cathartic, to hear it said out loud. - He gets mad though, when you call him out for being a people pleaser and vain because he doesn't consider either of these such bad flaws.

The bride theory fits in one other way.
Because no game developer is going to want to have the player character controlled by an NPC for more than a brief time. They would have a much more difficult story to write and no player agency.
What happens if they make a DLC or a follow up game with a choice of previous games romance partner as part of it?
Not completely out of the question - one example of this is Witcher 3 which you could either load your final save from Witcher 2 or tell a certain character exactly what you did if you hadn't hung onto the save. It did impact the Witcher 3 story in several ways.
Having the bride option is one way to maintain player agency in a follow up game and I could totally see Larian going that way simply to not close one route down completely when its unnecessary to do so.
Even if they didn't follow the Ravenloft things fully it does make sense to keep options open.
At the end of the day WoTC wrote the vampire lore in Ravenloft and although Larian does homebrew a bit in this game - to homebrew successfully they have to have known what they were homebrewing from. So its almost a certainty that Stephen Rooney knew the bride stuff even if he just made passing nods at it.

It's Welch who is a Strahd fan and the person we know wrote that scene (or most of that scene) as well, just clarifying since they usually get the short end of the stick from fans and I think credit should be due where credit should be due. From what I could gather, Rooney seems to not be super familiar with DND vampire lore or, rather, chooses not to stick close to it, I remember back in EA there were some incongruencies people were debating. He seems to be sticking more with what we could consider "archetypical vampire lore". I don't think this is a bad thing, mind you, I think DND vampires are kind of goofy in their lore. I do wonder if he assigned Astarion's age as well, since in one of Welch's scenes they correctly make Astarion make an elf joke about him not looking over a hundred but then his gravestone has him be 39.

(Before anyone thinks this is me being shady about Rooney, not at all: he has written my favorite content in the game, I think he's a marvellous writer! I don't think this is a "flaw" and in fact I think BG3 should "do it's own thing" as often as possible, I'm not fond of the Fantasy Kitchen Sink that is the Forgotten Realms from the manuals lol, I'm just noting some differences I've noticed in the writing styles)

I agree with you so much on this! Also the fact that "Yes, all mine." is romance specific makes me feel better for picking that option first time around. As a player I meant it as "stay away from my romance bi*ch", not that Astarion was Tavs personal vampire spawn to abuse as she pleased. Again, abuse has no place in a romance in this game. Possessiveness fine, abuse no.

Well, to be fair, not a single one of us was in those rooms when Astarion was being collaborated on. So, Larian stated and accredited Rooney as the main creative writer. That is honestly all we know at this point. That is why we say team when we discuss this topic.

Now, we move forward back on the topic.