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

I said the below in this thread a few days ago. The same goes for suggesting that those with a different view condone or enjoy sexual abuse, and it goes for those on both sides of the debate.

1. I'm not your guy. Enough of that.
2. Mental gymnastics is thinking. It's thinking real hard.
3. Everything I'm hearing about it "not" being abusive is a classic example of what I hear about people who are "not" abusive.
4. Finding a perspective that makes me queasy isn't suggesting that Astarion can physically hurt someone in the real world. Let's try to keep the conversation out of left field nonsense.

JandK

Queasy - I think this post will help you understand the cause of your not feeling well.

On why women love fictional villains and maniacs, and why there's nothing wrong with it.
For women, fantasizing about criminals, villains, monsters, and anti-heroes is very often about the idea that someone strong, violent, driven, and possessing great power will love her, desire her, and always protect her.
The fantasy is that you have a powerful, aggressive, even violent man in front of you, and he wants you and needs you so badly that he would burn down the world for you.

Women who fantasize about "Lover is a mafia boss", "killer vampire spawn", "ascended possessive vampire" are well aware of the fact that:
1) such men don't really exist
2) the criminal world of their fantasies has almost nothing to do with reality
3) they actually dream of being loved, wanted, and feeling safe... just ACTUALLY intense and exaggerated. And, let's not soften the words, there is also often a more or less strong d/s dynamic in the scenario.
It's a version of the fantasy of a pet tiger that will never, ever attack you or hurt you.

If your life experience tells you that you have to do all the work of caring, minimize yourself, your needs, and be grateful for every crumb of attention, then you have an interest in such fantasies.

I think the disconnect occurs when people assume that a unicorn fantasy is actually a fantasy about a real horse. And that a woman who reads a novel with a mobster, stalker, or vampire wants to marry a real-life serial killer. This gives people a reason to shame these women for such fantasies, which harbor, as we've already discovered (above), very different desires. Certainly not the desire to enter into an abusive relationship with some violent man.

1 act, script. The Astarion scene.
Synopsis:
You find a contemplative Astarion thinking about the danger we pose if we turn into mind flayers. He asks - hypothetically - if he had to kill us, how would we like to go? As an experienced murderer, he considers it a professional courtesy, but we might be outraged. He'll be enthusiastic when describing the different ways people can die - a fan talking about his favourite subject.
From Act 1 all the way through Act 3, in every ending, he's a killer and there's romance.

By the way, the dynamics of such fantasies are not new at all, and if you read an old love novel, you will find something similar. And no woman who fantasizes about something like this needs a moral lecture on the subject.

So yeah. Less judgment and more responsibility for the quality of your online experience if seeing someone else's fantasies makes your mouth foam and screams come out about how "excusing", "queasy you are", "unhealthy" and "abusive" it is.

We need to stop shaming people for their romantic fantasies.

It IS really offensive labelling other players as abuse enjoyers just because they like the AA romance. Honestly it's really freaking hurtful and really reminds me of controlling people wanting to gaslight others opinions. A roleplaying game is very different for many different players as we all have our own mind and thoughts (not to mention past experience) on matters, lets respect that.
Someone coming in putting labels on other people is what makes me "queasy".

I don't care what kind of fantasy someone I don't know has. This isn't about what I think is good for society or healthy relationships.

What makes me queasy is the suggestion that he is *not* abusive and evil. Too often abuse goes unnoticed, and that's what I think is happening here.

I'm not saying anyone condones or enjoys sexual abuse. I'm saying the abuse isn't being noticed for all the usual reasons. And that comment only applies to posts saying that he isn't evil or abusive.

If someone came in and said they wanted that in a game, shrug. What they want is what they want.

But this conversation has reached the point of talking about *whether or not Astarion is abusive and evil*. I maintain that he is, and it's my suggestion that those flaws are being overlooked in some of the comments.

At no point in the story does Astarion coerce Tav into doing anything, in fact, at the same time he makes his somewhat abrupt heel turn, my own tav started acting like some kind of Manson family girl, really different from how I thought I’d been playing it. At no point do i get the impression that Tav isn’t aware of what’s going on with Astarion or the dynamic at play in their relationship.
Throwing around the term domestic abuse is a little harsh, but it also doesn’t help any kind of discussion around the matter. Is the relationship unhealthy, I think so, is it working for them…yes.

In fact I think they could have gone further with Svengali like way Astarion cozens Tav in the beginning. I was a little disappointed that there wasn’t much of that when I played as him. The Astarion storyline is a delightful trope filled trashy thing. I thought that was why people liked it.

It's basically a genre question. The romance novel type described above allows the reader to indulge in the fantasy of being powerful because that big bad boy is in love with them and would do anything for them which means that de facto they hold the leash. Contrapoints recently made a video about it on yt, it even has vampires in it.

What creates the dissonance is that some see the game as a dark romance story, which - by definition of the genre - should allow them to indulge in this kind of fantasy and it feels moralising when they are forbidden from it. While other see it as fantasy story with elements of cosmic horror that explores the topics of power, identity and fellowship, and has romance subplots, which means that your romantic fantasies are not necessarily indulged. Question of perspective.

Where it gets cute, is of course when the romantic power fantasy is praised for being more realistic, than the fantasy of hope for a better life for all. But that's probably a question of taste. Different cups of tea for different people.

(I mean all of this in the most neutral way possible, to preclude any outrage.)

I understand that this seems to be a sensitive topic for you. Please just consider it is also a sensitive topic for others. There have been multiple people on here giving their feedback that the new patch was triggering for them. Turning around and telling them they're excusing abuse isn't compassionate or productive.

Nowhere in my initial comment did I even mention abuse, or if AA was evil. I'd wager a lot of AA fans *also* believe he is evil. For plenty, that's even the draw. It is for me. On the topic of abuse, I'm not sure what comments you're referring to, but I can't argue someone else's point.

You're more than free to maintain he's an abusive monster. But you're also on a thread of mostly AA fans trying to provide their feedback. Who would not be his fans if they had felt abused by him pre patch 6.

If this topic is triggering to you as you'd mentioned, I hope you'll be kind to yourself. I understand how your feelings and opinions could make this thread upsetting to read. If it helps, players typically do not take their morals and logics they play with into real life.

A bit of a tangent, but related to the bride topic.

I find it fascinating that AA is adamant Tav kneel prior to being turned. To the point where refusing to do so ends the relationship on the spot. It’s not even something Tav can ask him about.

There are a lot of ways to interpret this. One way is to regard it as a test that AA forces Tav to undergo precisely because he knows he won’t be able to compel them as his consort/bride. If Tav is willing to kneel on his say so, for no better reason than that he demanded it than he may very well safe with proceeding. It also ties into his line about Tav being wonderfully obedient; at this point, Tav already knelt just for the privilege of being with him, so he’d have every right to be smug/confident.

I’d actually like if Larian leaned into the bride lore more than they already have. It’s interesting and preserves the ability to have a tumultuous/adversarial relationship or to be on the same page in blissful hedonism.

Oh, I really like this whole idea! That's very interesting and makes a lot of sense.

Do you have a source for this? I haven't seen anyone mention it and the earliest recording of it on youtube is from the 9th of August, and the narrator says nothing like this. Is this if you play as Astarion?
Could this be the scene you're talking about? (At 1:52)

Interesting, I didn't know they could be in the Necromancy of Thay. I'll need to look that up. They aren't on Cazador's scroll in any sense that Astarian can use them. The words to complete the ritual are on the scroll but they in infernal and Astarian doesn't speak infernal. Indeed he's saying words that he doesn't understand - just like Tav does when she utters the incantation that ends Wyll's contract. Which produces this result from Mizorra: "Hahahahaha . . . sheer idiocy . . . Bravo!"

Wizards, clerics and tieflings can recognize the words on his back as infernal but they can't read it. Raphael only offers a vague summary, not the details. And, as he reminds Yuigur, the devil is in the details.


The problem with that is that you can't have it both ways. If AA is not a tragic story of a character who let his fatal flaw lead him to a dark place then the cycle of abuse story suffers. Even if the majority wanted it to be changed I would argue against it. I think its a great story as is.

Astarian victory is realizing that he was strong enough to break the wheel and not become just one more spoke in it. I think the skull of Velioth, the list of names next to really bring the story to a head.

And, again, this is not unique to AA. All of the companions have bad endings if they lean into their fatal flaw.

Grey Ghost nailed with this comment:


Given a choice between that story and a story of a domino that refused to fall I'll take the latter.

Doesn't mean you shouldn't ask And you might consider asking someone in the modding community to change it. Indeed this might even help you make your case. If lots of people download the "happy facial expression while kneeling" mod Larian might be persuaded to change.



I think everything about that encounter is designed to make you see parallels between Cazador and AA. Even the sentence structure.

@jinetemoranco

Thank you! That's one of the ones I was looking for. I may be misremembering but I feel like that there was a similar one in Act 1 and this was a bookend to a discussion. I remember reading that line and thinking "oh, right, Astarian thinking that the powerful are fearless again.

@Natasy thanks for the video!


I've also chosen "make no choice" in another playthrough but was annoyed when Astarian broke the staff. I wanted to ask the relevant churches for advice . . .

Tangentally, that makes a Paladin of Vengence fall because the vengence paladin has vowed to make such decisions.

But by releasing them you are performing a grand experiment on the citizens of Baldur's Gate, one that is likely to have the same results as the one the Society of Brilliance is running. You are right that by denying them 7k constitution checks you are violating their free will. Even Minsc, who is a 2e character, feels trepidation about killing monsters in cages.

But you need to weigh the fate of the citizens of Baldur's gate who never agreed to participate in your experiment. You decided to fill the streets with beings that need to make 7,000 constitution checks every few days. What would I say to the parents who lost their kids to some vampire child they invited into their home? In either case someone's consent is being violated.

(and we have a foreshadowing of what might occur in the journals of Lady Aminita so there's good reason to believe the experiment will fail)

And, yep, I think Anne Rice is trash but she's the best sort trash. And her portrayal of the tragic fate of a vampire child was compelling. Imagine being a hundred years old but trapped in the body of 7 year old. Never able to form adult relationships . . .


Agreed. Nicely said. Did you ever read Geek Love? I felt like that influenced the writing of the circus scenes.



There's another Act 1 scene that I can't seem to find - perhaps someone else knows it - when you first ask about the other spawn. Astarian notes that the was one most often selected for abuse and Astarian assumes that in his absence Cazador is torturing them in his stead. Which makes this scene all the more compelling because you realize that he's trying to deny the compassion expressed earlier. Voice acting is in the ritual room is really great and really communicates how Astarian is drunk on denial.

Lol, I listened to that same contrapoints podcast. The producers must have had ball reading all the Ao3 Twilight erotica.

Haven't disagreed with anything @Sozz has said. As usual.

Before the 6th patch, there were no Tav's horror faces. There were ordinary kisses, satisfied ones. And for those who saw this story about control, the story was still perceived as about abuse, right? And most likely you don’t choose AAstarion for a romantic interest, and if you do, you break up with him because you feel how he has changed, controls Tav, and you don’t want to put up with it. Whatever way you play it, I respect it.
But what will change for you if Tav's neutral or satisfied face is returned, for those who play AAstarion and completely trust him, Tav is obedient of his own free will. And before the 6th patch, everyone could imagine their story, but because of the fear on their face, the scales swung towards Astarion the abuser. For you, these facial expressions mean nothing, because you already see him as toxic, and will continue to do so in any case, but for us, who chose AAstarion, who see Astarion in a different light, this is critically important. Our game is trampled.
We can control the Absolute together, but we can’t kiss Astarion with our enjoy face? This is an absurdity.
Let everyone be happy, your game and Astarion's character will not suffer if Tav's faces are replaced with happy or neutral ones. In the end, AAstrion is chosen for a kiss by those who have a relationship with him and want to continue. Who wants to continue dating a person who makes you terrified? You immediately brake up with him, and then what is the point of adding the romantic line of AAstarion at all? After all, the romance with the ascended Astarion was not worked out in this way in order to humiliate the player.
I still think that there was a mistake or misunderstanding with the animation of Tav's face, because Tav's sadness when kissing the spawn is also present, for example.
There is generally no point in arguing about how we perceive Astarion, everyone will remain to their own. Everyone sees him differently, and it’s wonderful that the authors gave us such a multifaceted character. No one is asking to change Astarion, you just need to tweak Tav’s face a little when kissing and everything will be fine. Everyone will remain to their own. For those who see Astarion as an abuser, nothing will change, they will continue to see him that way, and those who see Astarion as a leader who can destroy the world, but will never harm his consort, they will also be happy.
I really believe that Larian hears us and is already working on a fix, because role-playing should be fun, not pain and stress.

I would assume so. Would make for an interesting Strahd / Soth romance. And I think it would be good story because it would be a tragic one (as was the story of those two). And incidentally it would have the aspect I want to preserve in Astarian's story. A sense that a pursuit of power comes at a cost.


I grew up in the rural U.S. Gun racks in most pick ups. Guns for sale at swap meets . . .

People who are really into guns are terrified. They always have some fantasy about what they will do when that guy breaks into the house and does (terrible thing) to (insert: wife / kids / gold stashed under floorboards). Later I moved to another country were getting gun was very, very difficult. It was strange how less afraid people were. No stories about "what they were going to do when", fewer locked doors, more people mingling on streets after dark . . . BFG = Big Fear Guy IMO



Yes, he realizes that he needs to depend on others and that's not a bad thing. Not all relationships are based on power exchanges, some sorts of fellowships can empower all who join.


I don't it's fair to call this one railroaded. This is not like The Emperor story which is indeed a railroad. You have many options to change the story and many different possible outcome.

I think it's the completion of the story arc. Shadowheart's concludes in at the end of Act 3. And if she's a Dark Justiciar, she ask



I'm not contesting that view of an idealized D/s relationship but I don't think patch 6 changed things, it just made the themes of the story clearer. And yes it is a problem with cinematics that they make it harder to maintain head cannon. And I do have head cannon! I do truly believe that killing all the spawn is the best of the bad options and a good-aligned act. The authors of the story disagreed.

But, for all my dislike of Larian's mangling of DnD lore I really liked this story. It's one of the best in the game.



True. It could help a tav control Astarian. And there a few variants of "take the astral tadpole" along those lines.



Yes I do. I think anyone who doubts that Astarian is ruled by fear you should load a save, select those options and see Astarian's reaction. Then reload. Because that's not nice




He has a desire to create coven, shroud the lands in mist, and create house full of spawn. He's Vellioth 3.0 And the mention of mists makes me think the mists of Ravenloft will claim him soon . . .

Personally, I enjoy Spawn Astarion and Ascended Astarion both. I like the character in itself, and to navigate through alternate outcomes. It’s still a bit more difficult to me to understand exactly what they want to convey with Ascended Astarion sometimes, maybe because it is hard to achieve something that stays a bit open and tactful.

I don’t really have a problem with changes after release, or if it’s just about a very difficult and abusive relationship. There’s an attraction for being the special person with such a character. But there’s also the allure of a good villain, with a questioning about ethics and morality, most of all when it can feel chaotic and unfair in real life. When you think more of determinism than of free will. And if you suffer and perish even, to me in a well scripted bit of fantasy there’s some sort of catharsis too, because there was meaning, when it’s rarely the case in real life.

I’m mostly concerned about a sense of coherence and being given a valid warning, so to speak. I don’t think the character of Astarion has to be discussed at length for me to state my grip with the kissing scenes introduced in patch 6. It seemed somehow advertised as belonging in a bundle of nice romantic things to experience. And, if I can think that it might be loaded in the case of Ascended Astarion, I don’t expect a whole scene were my character is passive and submits, and shown as not into it, with no reactivity whatsoever. It strikes me as not great, and I’m not necessarily among those for whom it can be the most difficult.

Sure, you can rage quit, rage kill him, whatever. Yet, with such a new object, a bit more scripting might have been nice, to just even have the option to voice a no or any other kind of emotion.

I thought of the moment Johnny Silverhand first assaults you in Cyberpunk 2077. Playing has a female V there, even for me I thought it could be a very heavy scene for some. But the context was different, for one, and I could scream at him and take the meds.

I don’t know, I think there are the ones who receive the media, yes. And the media themselves. It’s difficult to decide to go somewhere, allow something, and do it in the best possible way. I also agree with the fact that maybe some few things should be made clearer, rather than remaining too ambiguous or vague.

Exactly. If TAV's face had remained normal in the new kisses, I doubt this whole discussion would have happened: everyone would have continued to think about AAstarion in the same way as before. You see that even now that these new animations have been introduced and there is the problem of TAV's face, no one has changed their mind about AAstarion, not even those who like him. If the TAV's face had remained like in the previous version of the kiss, everyone would have continued to enjoy the game as before.
As many have already pointed out, this is not a change that occurred shortly after the release of the game: a good 6/7 months have passed since launch so, if Larian's intent was actually to strengthen, make it clear that AAstarion is abusive, they should have done it a long time ago, not after months. Personally, I doubt that Larian's intent with AAstarion's new kisses was this: they presented the video of the kneeling kiss for Valentine's Day.
However again, if they wanted to make AAstarion more toxic, more abusive they should have already done so with the previous patch. The final party would have been a great opportunity to convey this image of AAstarion and his relationship with the TAV, as it occurs 6 months after the battle against the Nether Brain. But here too, freedom of interpretation was given and the player was given the freedom to make the TAV an accomplice of AAstarion, happy with their relationship or his victim.

Of course, different people find different things triggering. And in these scenes, it's just a minefield of triggers. With all due respect, let me ask you, what's your trigger? Is your trigger that people with a history of violence are confronted with traumatizing content in a game without warning, become outraged, and demand that it be fixed? Is your trigger a victim who is openly reporting it? Or your trigger is pointing out the many plot inconsistencies that make this content look exactly like a deliberately artificially added sadistic video in the game?

I feel a little sorry for you, to be honest. Some inexplicable necessity pushes you to keep coming to the threads that make you sick. I can't understand what that need is, and I'm not at liberty to advise you to take a break and visit those threads that make you feel good. That is your right and, of course, every forum member is welcome in any thread.

You wrote in the thread "What are you hoping to see in Patch 6?


Well, Larian spent a lot of budget (the animation of the kissing scenes is very high quality and detailed) doing the work to create content that you will never use, that will not improve your game in any way, and that did not enhance the third act in any way. I'm not even talking about the fact that patch 6 has nothing resembling the luxurious estates of uptown. What kind of people this content caters to, I won't say, for obvious reasons.

Ibid.



Should people only want what you want? Other people's desires are trivial nonsense? It's your right to think so.


I take storytelling seriously too. And in this case, what you are defending and what you are insisting is not " corrupt and rot" but genuinely traumatizing real people. If there is such a choice in the game - then they are allowed to. And people will choose it. And will be affected by the triggers going forward. Also new players who come there, not knowing anything about such content in the game, will be affected by it.

Have you not read the book Nineteen Eighty-Four (1984) by George Orwell? It's a very good book. "Freedom is slavery" is a quote from it (anyone who has read it will know what I mean).

I solely want "freedom, truly freedom" for Astarion in my game, freedom of choice for all players in BG3, and enforcement of consumer protection law. I hope consumer protection is not a defense of abusive behavior? A warning like the one in the article I cited earlier:



This is usually given if the content has already been peer-reviewed and must be accompanied by such a warning. GamePro magazine most likely has such an expert review.


Perhaps the word "deserves", as applied to the game character and my personal game choices, was a bit emotional. But I don't pretend to present this opinion of mine as some kind of truth in the last instance. But every player has the right to make their own game choices, a player has the right to love a companion character, to take their fate as the main quest in their game, and to try to give that character everything they want and everything that character deserves, in the player's opinion. Another player can decide the fate of characters based on some general principles of morality, try to find some kind of balance for themselves, make it so that everyone is free, no one died, there were no casualties, etc., as you described in your post. The third player may think that all companions deserve only severed arms, heads and in general nothing good, and they, the lonely evil son of Baal, will go to wreak death and chaos on their way. The game allows for this option as well. In the closed thread you mentioned such a game as Pillars of Eternity.

"My go-to example is Pillars of Eternity. You start as a blank slate there, but in those games the Watcher can be a dynamic character within the plot if you put some effort in and meet the game where it's at. I've made multiple characters in those games and given them personal character arcs that span both games. But in BG3 Tav never really gets to be dynamic, even if youput the effort in."

I really like this game too, and I agree that it's a great example of a good RPG. But tell me, if in any of your playthroughs for the multiple characters (perhaps there was an "evil" playthrough too?) you suddenly (and these things are exactly that, sudden and beyond human control) encountered the effects of a trigger and felt very bad about it, would you also call that a good game? I can also cite Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous (and the previous game in the series, Pathfinder: Kingmaker) as a great example of good RPGs where different paths are available, each with its own atmosphere.


And if someone doesn't want cosmic or any other dramatic/traumatic horror for themselves, but wants a role-playing game with a logical plot (personally, I just can't and won't choose to reject ritual, I'm not going to torture Astarion or myself, I don't need such a "dramatic" world where I don't want anything in it except to burn it to the ground), then these "fantasies" should be discouraged to the point of including traumatizing content in the game without warning?

In the thread Regarding certain changes to Astarion's romance scenes you wrote:


I think people have a right to say they are hurt by this game. But that's just my opinion.


Are you saying that the author you mentioned had nothing to do with creating the scenes we are discussing? Previously you wrote that you liked those scenes in the Astarion romance improvements thread:


Of course you have every right to have that opinion and express it. I'm just curious, at this point are you still of the same opinion or have you decided to soften it somewhat?

And of course, I can't help but admire your knowledge regarding plot nuances and the history of writing scenes. Thank you for the interesting information!

Well, friends, let's live amicably and respect each other's opinions! We can return to the main topic of the thread or continue the discussion on the topic:

At the time of the transformation, this also holds true for a normal I-don't-want-to-call-you-spawn situation though, because due to the tadpole he is not yet in charge.

No matter the bride-thing. I feel that they played with representations of rulership in Astarion's case. A!Astarion presents himself as an absolute ruler, a kind of sun king in black and red, he shows off, shows his consort off, hosts lavish parties, likes intrigues. It's all very theatrical and demonstrating power to the outside world. It's all about having, demonstrating and keeping power.

In the Underdark ending it is more about leadership, creating a life for and with others. Here he also has power over people, but it is rooted in trust - and this trust is rooted in him having been strong enough to kill Cazador. In the ending I got for Origin-Astarion and Gale I felt the whole imagery of the ruling couple was also very present. While it is implied that Astarion has the fighting prowess to keep the spawn safe (with the help of expertly timed counterspells!), Gale takes on the traditionally female role of bonding with the spawn and bringing knowledge and culture to the community. I don't think that's accidental.


When Astarion finishes reading the book, he comments that the ritual is in there as well. Which I took as the instructions to get the show over with are in there. From my interpretation, the Necromancy of Thay is a very obscure text, even obscurer because you need a second book to read it. From the way Raph talks, Cazador seems to have made a more personal deal with Mephisto to get the ritual rather than having just picked it up somewhere.

Also Latin is infernal? I took it as magic language in general. The scene with Mizora is also very funny because your fancy banishing incantation is basically only telling her to get lost, without understanding what you just said. It IS hilarious. ^^

Disagree. Still the phrase is standard and Astarion had power-play moments before the ritual.

If you still want to explore the parallels with Cazador, here is a good analysis. How different his actions are in reality from how Cazador acted.
To use such a standard possessive phrase for a parallel seems completely contrived.

Astarion spouts whatever he wants fully openly, all he wanted all along, but couldn't because he risked disappointing the heroic leader of the group he needed to protect. Now knowing that this is the only person he can trust, he talks about his inner desires.

Here
are some EA-era parsings that suggested similarities between Astarion and Cazador in Act 1, through his reactions. I don't remember which one specifically, but I think many. Also a great breakdown of the theme of power and that it is an intrinsic quality of Astarion
However, the author was disappointed in BG3 as Astarion's story is simplistic and Cazador is cartoonish.



Lord Astarion drinks wine, and chats with the nobles on the Sword Coast. That is roughly what he did when he was a noble in Baldur's Gate.
Wants Tav (even in the illogical Freedom-Tav line) to enjoy life of power and pleasure, themselves, with him.
Sharing power and everything he has.

Spawn Astarion thinks that a good method of showing power is impalement. 7k spawns is a big coven.

Who else is Vellioth? SpawnAstarion Vellioth 4.0 and Vellioth 5.0 - Tav who says "all is mine", we must be strong, ah no, Tav shares everything he has with Astarion too.

Analyzing such techniques, especially character numeration is quite superficial.

I'm unsure how those two statements contradict each other? Frankly I'm not sure what you're asking me here.
Welch did write the AA romance, for better or for worse depending on your opinion. What I was saying is that I doubt that they were involved with Tav's face here, I explained why a couple pages earlier on this thread, basically that seems more of a cinematics' department thing.


My reason for bringing them up is that it feels unfair that they get overlooked often in this part of the fandom because even if you dislike their casual, unprepared statement, they have undeniably contributed a lot of stuff that people love about AA's romance. And if you look at the rest of the content we know they wrote (or even their other public statements), the idea that they want to moralise or punish people doesn't really gel well with that.

As far as my opinion goes, I'm not sure what is supposed to have been softened, I still think the story is compelling for what's been presented. The older quote still reflects my thoughts.


I'm pretty sure that line was a joke. Don't get me wrong, he does say he punishes anyone who's tried to rebel against him, but the impaling line sounded like a joke. Especially because it involves a gnome.