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

You seem to know a lot about the authors. Do you know, which AA scene was written by whom? Were there different people writing on it, or just one? Like, who wrote the pre-sex dialogue, who wrote the post-romance scene, who wrote the old epilogue, who wrote the new epilogue? One author, or different authors? And is the author still working on the Route, or is there a new writer?

Rooney was in that room, though! Source (he also brought them up on an interview) : https://twitter.com/nuckpang/status/1690281467761299457

Welch has also claimed to have written that scene, and I'm inclined to believe there's no conspiracy that they're lying, considering Rooney corroborates this. Plus them liking Strahd lines up really well with the nods to that 2.5e manual :P
In the spirit of crediting, Welch is also credited as supervising/designing the romances for all companions, and more specifically, the Dark Urge origin and, I quote, "many of Astarion’s romance and subsidiary scenes" specifically.

I have inklings. Generally, I'd say any scene that's not from his romance is written by Rooney, and that the romance scenes after act 1 are written or mostly written by Welch. Welch also wrote all or most of Astarion's interactions with Dark Urge (so, the line about sitting naked on his lap, or the line where he asks if Bhaal spanked Durge as a child, etc). I'm pretty sure the standard romance lines (Aeterna Amantes, until the world falls down etc) are Welch's as well, for example. I'm pretty sure they wrote Astarion's reaction to Tav being used by Haarlep. I'd also say it's most likely that they collaborated on a lot of stuff, and I'm sure Rooney did passes on the scenes written by Welch. I know Welch did some work in the pre-ritual scene where you can tell him that you could've been one of his victims.

Now, this is just me talking out of my ass, but I /think/ from the writing style that /maybe/ the AA Elfsong Tavern scene and the Epilogue Romance are written by Rooney, but I legitimately can't tell in this instance, it's just vibes, so I might be wrong about this one.

Fun thing I've noticed, if Astarion says "eh?" in a scene, that's one of Welch's writing quirks. Like that one line where you break up with him before the ritual and he says "Midnight chimes, eh?"

I don't know if the writers have changed but I'm inclined to say that no, they haven't been changed. I've only seen complaints about the new "You're my favorite line" and that was datamined months ago and likely older than that, and the rest of the script has legitimately had very few changes. Like I've explained before, it's very likely the kisses/Tav's face didn't have much to do with the writers.

Thank you for your insight It's very interesting. If someone is a native english speaker, it might be easier to see it in the writing style.
Yes, could be. Noone knows the exactly reason for the SA/DA in these scenes, but it's inconsistent and takes the agency away, so hopefully it will be fixed then, so that players can actually play this route again.

I did encounter a similiar line right before the big fight in Act 3 (in patch 5), I think Astarion said something like "What can I do for my favorite spawn?", which was totally out of character seeing as he preferred "consort", making me really remember it. It seemed like an old line that hadn't been removed. It might be the one that was datamined? The whole sequence before the brain fight did show some state of neglect in terms of wrapping things up so it wouldn't surprise me.

Even the same moment of conversion leaves open the interpritition about the "Spawn" or "bride". About whether the drop of blood is for "sun protection and control you" or "for conversion". Or about the AA control issue of "could, but I'm not gonna do it yet" or "can't".
The questions and nuances on An unholy ritual and even with The Bride's Ritual, can be explained by the scroll that players find in Veliot's skull (to avoid writing new scenes and dialog, the answer is-you found the scroll, it says it all).

I hope Larian doesn't change this or rewrite what exists in the game now.

1. It's undeniably good that new content is being added and the game is being fleshed out. It keeps you coming back to it again and doing a new playthrough. But new content should be introduced carefully and not at the expense of the story and people's feelings. So I think patch 6 for those who choose the AA route was introduced in a sloppy way. And I hope that if Larian doesn't fix it, it will at least be taken into account in the future.

2. I hope that the opinions of all players, including the few who take a particular route, will be taken into account, not just the opinions of the majority.
After all, imposing your opinion and vision of history on another player, when choosing a route you don't follow, is tactless at the very least.
It's like if I said I always choose the AA route, so I want those who choose Spawn to have him permanently sunburned at the end of the game, because that's how I see his redemption. No.

I don't want to inflate this topic, to go deep into interpretation of any scenes or routes, so, perhaps, in the future I will try to refrain from comments, but I will be glad to read others). As all are adults with their own opinions.

(This is not a reply to anyone in particular, just thoughts in general, thank you.)

I don't trust him when he says doesn't remember anything. When he says these lines it looks like he's hiding something inconvenient. All things point to him pretending to be nicer than he is in reality so Tav would help him. Somehow he remembers a delicious meal being served at a tavern when he was still mortal. If he remembers such a miniscule, unimportant detail, how can he not remember serious, every day stuff? I just don't buy it. Trauma often makes you forget the unpleasant things done to you, not what happened before the event.


The terms of the ritual are written in Cazador's scroll as well as in the Necromancy of Thay.

Yeah, they are so equal that he needs to depend on Tav for protection and he literally OWNS NOTHING. He doesn't have a home anymore, his siblings are gone to the UD, he doesn't have money and personal belongings. He only has Tav.


The video you linked shows perfectly fine how Spawn Astarion does in fact need a master, because he doesn't know how to live without one. Cazador knows him better than anyone else and he drops several insightful hints about him. The ritual gives Astarion the means to finally be his own master, otherwise Tav fills in the shoes of Cazador, just being nice to him instead.


This. I also said he was mine to Araj.


Well said!


The game shows the spawn didn't live the same way as Astarion did, they are called feral and they're essentially prisoners going insane in their cells. They have had no food at all, while Astarion at least had rats and Petras had cats. They therefore cannot be treated the same way. It's like freeing people from a mental asylum and hoping they behave well.


Why do people insist he needs redemption? He was completely controlled by Cazador, even Ulma admits he cannot be judged by the sins of his master. He says himself the only time he can make a choice is when we're doing his quest. He owes the caged spawn nothing.


Lol, that line is actually said by the act 3 Spawn Astarion.


You've brought up a very good point!

Yes! This is how a democracy should work, assuming Larian wants to do it fairly. The smaller groups should have more say when they are closest to the matter. The ones playing the AA route should have their opinions weigh heavier than others when it comes to AA romance changes.
And yeah, let's have Spawn Astarion get lobster red and swollen for the epilogue because as a AA fan I feel it would be a fit punishment for not letting Astarion Ascend... you (as in you out there reading this) would hate to see it no?

I had to look it up but it's true it's one of these Pre-Ritual things when he reverts back to his act 1 reasoning before the ritual.

"People" point out redemption, because he shows signs of wanting it himself. He feels guilty for what happened to the spawn and calls it his fault, he had no choice while under Cazador's command but after being given free will he has. While meeting the prisoners he feels guilty for what happened to them and calls them his shame that he does not wish the world to know, he says it would have been easier if they had been ghosts. Calling them feral and claiming they cannot be saved serves to dehumanise them and is Astarion's easy way out to do the ritual and not feel guilty about it. He is an unreliable narrator though and when you free the spawn it turns out mostly alright.

Disregarding that he does have a moral conflict in the situation shallows it considerably - but that of course makes it much easier to go through with the ritual.

Not an esoteric lore fragment. He directly calls Tav his spouse. And if Tav tries to call themselves a spawn, he doesn't like it and corrects them.

It wouldn't be a case of bad writing. It would be a case of good RPG writing. How most RPGs do. Keep things ambiguous, drop easter eggs, and allow players to build their own stories.

I'd say this is more a case of thinking of a number and then seeing it everywhere. Which is to say finding the desired outcome because it's the only outcome being searched for.

Feels less like an easter egg and more like mental gymnastics to avoid seeing what's happening.

Really, there's something about excusing away the abuse and thrall nature of the relationship that leaves me feeling a little queasy. I guess different people find different things triggering.

I like the vampire bride thing, and there's nothing in the game that contradicts it yet. Astarion even lets Tav go to Avernus without trying to compel them to come back. He gives an excuse for it, but it really makes you wonder if he actually can't compel Tav. The transformation more closely matches with the vampire bride lore too, imo. So there's no way to dismiss it until the day they patch the game to add a contradiction or Larian comes out and says no.

Him feeling crappy about it shows he's not a complete monster and that he has empathy, but the matter of fact still stands that their fate is not his fault and that he owes them nothing. Everything that happened leading up to the ritual is not something that requires his redemption. It would only fit if the cut (or simply not mentioned) past of him being a slaver was real.

The notion that everything is supposedly fine and all 7000 spawn are perfectly capable of controlling their hunger is utterly naive and outright idiotic. There is a real life example in history what happens to people who were caged, starved and finally had the chance to eat food - they jump at it in frenzy. Even Astarion, when finally being able to have a proper meal, kills Tav, unless he's stopped. Petras drools at the idea of sinking his teeth into a human. There is only an episodic mention of impaling unruly spawn. What is in the game is unrealistic and wishful thinking and railroading the narrative into some fairytale story that's supposed to pull at your heartstrings and give you a fuzzy feeling that you're a good little hero, while omitting and handwaving all problematic matters.

The narrative manipulates the player showing only Sebastian and children, and not other people who were not particularly nice. The narrator herself is biased:

And how else should he react after the protagonist forces Astarion against his will to refuse the ritual and subverts his will supposedly "for the good" to achieve obedience? 7k wild spawns and one broken Astarion with no way to defend himself, was he supposed to go alone against everyone shouting "you monsters I will destroy you"?
It's not just that the protagonist tells the spawn after forcing him to give up the ritual that
- "I will protect you now, with ME you don't need the power of the Ascended Vampire!".
To which the spawn Astarion rather despairingly and with obvious disdain says
- "it would be nice not to have to rely on you as my great protector... But.... Well."
And here we understand perfectly well who the spawn's new master and lord is, but Astarion has no more choice. However, even if you are in the novel, but just prevent the ritual by killing Cazador, what happens? That's right, we'll hear everything Astarion really thinks and he attacks Tav. If he could feel sympathy, or even if he could feel, because spawns are devoid of normal feelings, for spawns, or if he wanted to change, then even after interrupting the ritual like that, he could be stopped. But that was impossible. Only by subjugating his will is Astarion willing to bow to other people's desires again, abandoning his own.

AA players don't see him as a abusive. They're not excusing something they don't RP in the first place. Pre patch 6, there was nothing to point to that he was.

He isn't real. AA can't hurt anyone.

Telling players they're "excusing abuse" is insensitive to others who have their own triggers. It's a game, my guy.

Edit to say:
Noticing a thing you read being featured in a game isn't mental gymnastics. It's just called thinking.
The devs wrote him to call Tav his spouse. What happened to honoring what the writers wrote?

On August 11 with hotfix 3 a huge chunk of the Narrator's words were removed, when after refusing the ritual the camera went up we saw the whole circle and Astarion sobbing and the Narrator saying
"- you chose your fate to forever remain a pathetic spawn forced to hide in the shadows until the end of time, you gave up the only opportunity to become someone to change yourself, but was it worth it?".
And yes, that dialog was so contradictory to the spawn branch that it was brushed over very quickly, but I went through the entire game on August 10 and I remember those dialogs perfectly. If I had known the game was going to be changed AFTER release I would have videotaped everything.

That's what I started to do when I saw it happen in patch 4. Reverted back to patch 3 and recorded things for posterity.

The manipulation is obvious - the writer(s) intention is to force feed us the naive story of redeemed Astarion and demonise AA.

The remainder of the line you quoted is still in the game when you look at the journal entry when you don't do the ritual. "His fate is sealed". That sounds pretty negative. I guess they'll change it to "Astarion fought against his very nature and decided to show his humanity to the world. Nothing's stopping him from becoming a hero now."

Why bother with trifles, AA immediately after the Ritual hits Tav in the face, so that Tav falls to the floor and blood pours from a broken nose and lips, and instead of Absolute, we have a fight with the main boss of AA, who cannot be defeated. We lose and in the next scene Tav licks AA's boots. Cool. Stylish. It will greatly emphasize the "morality" and the "bad" choice of the player.

Firstly, calling Tav his spouse doesn't hint at some amazing ritual, it's just Astarion being flowery and dramatic in his language, like he almost always is normally is. Secondly, unless you know this obscure bit of lore then you're going to just assume you're a spawn, because that's the only thing you CAN assume. Thirdly, it would absolutely be a case of bad writing, in fact it would be a case of the kind of bad writing Larian has done several times before. The player NEEDS to know this kind of thing in order to roleplay properly and understand what choices they're making. Some things should be ambiguous, absolutely. But some things need to be clear. Because the difference in the relationship and outcome if Tav is a Spawn or this Bride thing is VASTLY different and changes the entire nature of the ending. By being a spawn Tav is submitting entirely to Astarion's whims, and has to simply hope that he never changes his feelinigs towards them and that they in turn never decide they want something different. If Tav is a spawn then it means serious things for them, such as what happens if they ever disagree with him on something, because a healthy couple has disagreements, even about major things. If Tav is a bride, then they're truly equals and Astarion will actually have someone to potentially push back against him, and Tav is a person in full and absolute agency over themselves. Those two options mean vastly different things for the end of the game.

And to the folks saying that the Ascended ending is morally uncomplicated, that just shows what poor writing Larian created in the firist place, that they tried to present a moral quandry and utterly failed. That reading of the game also makes Astarion a flat character. He never grows, his beliefs never have to be challenged or changed. He thinks he needs more power at the beginning and he's right, that's that. He believes he has to dominate everything around him to be safe and he's right, going so far as to dominate even the person who supports him to guarantee they can never do anything he doesn't allow them to. That's the story you're presenting.

I really respectfully have to disagree. I think it's entirely reasonable to see AA calling tav his spouse as a nod to a ritual that makes them his spouse. Especially with the thrice bite, and the giving of his blood.
I think it's reasonable to argue its not directly canon. Sure. But a fun little nod or an Easter egg for DnD players, I think that's also perfectly reasonable. Just another open avenue to RP. Not meant to be *the* only answer.



You might actually find the handbook description an interesting read. It does not state that a bride is an equal of the master vampire. The bride is still heavily influenced by verbal/emotional/physical manipulation and intimidation. A perfect fit for his "silk glove" approach imo. And if they fight, its extremely toxic, compared to a civil war, and the bride does not survive. The spawn write up is also really interesting, and would explain why Cazador had to use punishment to control Astarion, and not mind control.


I won't disagree with you. AA wouldn't be the only time the story fell, honestly, really flat. My list of things they should remove if they want to tell a story of Astarion become a domestic abuser was a legitimate request. If that's the story they want to tell, that's fully their right. But they did a poor job with it, if it whooshed the entire AA fan base. That's an objective failure. I would also wager less people would have played the game--given how triggering the topic can be. I stand by that not being the case. But if it is, Larian did it in really terrible form.