Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Let's talk about that final constitution check (Patch 7)

(SPOILER ALERT - Evil ending patch 7)

Hello there,

After playing more than 470 hours of BG3 (GOG edition), I was pretty excited with the updated/enhanced evil endings coming with patch 7.

Patch 7 is great, make no mistake about it! Yet, there is something - I must -, very humbly, "complain" about.

The PROBLEM :

The "generic" (non Dark Urge, non full illithid) evil ending feels quite good except for one strange (very incoherent?) final constitution check.

In a nutshell, you have beaten the Netherbrain and taken control of the Netherstones for yourself. You can control the Netherbrain thru and thru, no question about it. All the citizens of Baldur's Gate bow before you!

Yet... If you used some illithid tadpoles or even became a partial illithid, the game wants you to make a choice : You give in and become a full illithid (Go Grand Design!) or you can resist the tadpoles influence (then you *must* succeed a *25*(!) constitution check) and have the pleasure to make your own - very evil choices (the reward, you know...).

Why is that a problem? Well, it is very clear in BG3 that the Netherbrain controls ceremorphosis and its activation. Now that *you control* the Netherbrain (yay, you won the game) and can do whatever you want with its godlike powers, somewhat, the tadpoles inside your head are beyond your own power or the Netherbrain's power? Sorry, but that feels quite out of place... I felt cheaply cheated of my "evil victory" by that very specific, very difficult - and even unfair - constitution roll (remember, you need *25* to succeed that check).

Patch 7 is near perfect, but that constitution roll felt and still feels unfair, out of place, and... unjustified.

The SOLUTION :

Keep the choice of becoming full illithid (you *want* the Grand design to happen) OR resist with all the might of the Netherstones/Netherbrain and make your own decisions (just remove the 25 constitution check, nothing more needed).

In a nutshell, the removal of that particular constitution check would feel very right. At least, if the not removed, that constitution check should not be 25, but much, much lower, reflecting the Netherbrain's/Tav power over ceremorphosis.

EDIT-1 : **All in all, and for simplicity's sake, removing the check would be the easiest and the best solution - The fun/coherency of an evil playthrough would be back with a small tweak.**

EDIT-2 : I don't have time to reply to all fellow Larian forum dwellers, but some seem to confuse "evil ending" with "bad ending". In my opinion, the new Dark Urge evil ending feels very right (tadpoles have no consequence there, it seems... even if the Netherbrain is still alive), yet the new "generic" evil ending feels like a bad ending. I am all for choices and consequences, but I thought "tadpole usage is obviously bad" was dropped a long time ago by the development team of BG3.

Thanks for your reading,

Cheers,

Trogundak

Larian, please keep actual consequences for obvious bad choices with obvious bad consequence down the line in the game.

I'm glad that tadpole use finally has more consequences than becoming ugly tbh. It should have more consequences tbh, if you consume tadpoles, you should become a mindflayer in the end without questions.

I think the check should be based on how many tadpoles you have consumed. I agree consequences for actions should be there, but having it basicly impossible to pass should only be when the player has thoroughly feasted on the worms.

Personally I agree that this check is unfair and completely out of place, especially because it is supposed to be presented as a consequence for using the tadpoles, but due to Larian's mindset towards the evil playthrough to always 'punish the player' rather than respect established lore and player's roleplay for not following their good intended path, this check against ceremorphosis is only present in the evil endings AFTER the player takes control of the Netherbrain and as such is in complete control over everyone's tadpoles.

It is completely nonexistent during the good playthrough's endgame no matter how many are consumed and as such this ultimately feels like intentional punishment to lecture the player, rather than having an interesting consequence with an interesting impact on the story and roleplay.

The solution to keep this consequence fair and appropriate would've been to move this steep check right before the player decides what to do with the Netherbrain. Thus even if the player on a good playthrough consumes so many of them, they would not be magically released from ceremorphosis but instead would have to pass the same check against ceremorphosis before the Netherbrain is destroyed and if they fail, end up living as a mindflayer.

This would actually make it a consequence that respects lore and player roleplay. As it is right now however, yes it's absolutely unfair and completely out of place and I agree the check should not be as steep, especially when the good playthrough doesn't even have a check of its own to pass.

I wouldn't mind it moved there, but I don't want to see some joke DC 5 pass. If you gobble every tadpole in sight and become half illithid, the max DC of 25 is only fair. Frankly even giving the player a chance at that point might be excessive lenience.

Oh absolutely, if they moved the consequence right before the endgame Netherbrain choice it should be 25DC to serve as an actual story consequence for 'fighting fire with fire'.

But as it is right now it only serves as a forcefully lore-contradictory punishing lecture to cheat the evil players out of their unique evil ending, therefore it is not fair at all to be so high when the good playthrough conveniently avoids ceremorphosis by destroying the Netherbrain 2 minutes earlier.

I was of the opinion, that you only have to make that check, if you took tadpoles, in f Not, I think without slurping up tadpoles,but should be easier, but with tadpoles, I would make it even harder tbh.

I stand by my point. That final 25 constitution check is unfair/incoherent.

The GOOD playthrough :

You are a goody-two-shoes, you may enjoy the best illithid powers the game can offer. Heck, you can have a partial illithid brain full of tadpoles and the game will never punish you for it...

Far from it, the tadpoles just magically disappear at the end of the game - even if you are partial illithid - no questions asked. You won, go home, enjoy the wine.

The EVIL playthrough :

You play an evil character, somehow, the price of using tadpoles or becoming partial illithid now weights heavily on your shoulders. You rightly think your total control over the Netherbrain/Netherstones protects you...

Nope my friend, you are suddenly punished, must roll a 25 constitution check or go full illithid/full Grand Design, you tadpole-using (evil) roleplayer. Sorry, no choices for you.

The BOTTOM LINE : That constitution check doesn't make any sense and steals away the fun of having a victorious evil playthrough in BG3.

It is only if you use the tadpoles. There is no check if the character has the only one tadpole they started with.

I agree with the idea that there should be consequences for choices, going back to EA, having consequences for consuming tadpoles was something I looked forward to seeing in the game. But, I also have to agree that going about it this way feels very bad. It feels like they shoehorned this into the evil ending so that they can now say there are consequences, rather than ever working it into the game in a way that at least felt interesting.

Larian loves to gush about how they restarted scenes because someone pointed out that their character wouldn't behave like that and how the game allows such freedom of choice (which, generally is quite good) - until it comes to evil decisions. I think what particularly makes this roll feel so bad is that it doesn't just force the player to become illithid if they don't pass, but that by not passing you completely lose out on choosing how you want your game to end.

If the good option was not to "Command the Absolute to destroy the tadpoles and then itself" then the roll here might feel slightly less bad. Given the feats you can witness of the various origins after they've dominated the Absolute, it feels especially ridiculous that the roll takes place after the player has been empowered.

If you're already a mindflayer, you have to make the 25 DC con check as well in order to enact your own will, otherwise you will succumb and enact the Grand Design. If the game didn't force you to need a mindflayer to complete, maybe this wouldn't feel quite so bad either, but as it stands it ultimately just feels like you're being punished for playing the game but not quite following what Larian had in mind. While I agree that if Larian wanted this to occur, moving it to a spot where it could at least affect good endings would make it feel more thematic and less as a punishment for players choosing the evil ending, I would assume it was going to create too much work to do so. Additionally, it would then come into conflict with Larian's "will you become a monster to save the city?" question the game apparently was always meant to ask. Obviously, they could just make it not work on a player that is already a mindflayer, but then that would feel odd for other reasons.

So, I just don't see this particular roll fitting in with what is already in the game. Perhaps some rewording of the dialogue could make it work, but I'm not sure I ever see it not feeling like yet another thing Larian tacked on without regard to how it interacted with prior gameplay. Otherwise, it does feel like a case where not doing anything would have felt better than doing something poorly.

I mean, that was s fair imo.

My thoughts, exactly. It is the only ending with such a punishing/unwarranted check.

I would add this cannot be compared with the Emperor's "astral-touched" tadpole resistance check (which felt right as a consequence, as it is present in all playthroughs, good or evil).

Anyway, so much hype for the all-new evil endings in patch 7... but, guess what BG3 fans, they are **soft-locked** behind a 25 constitution check if you ever used any tadpoles... and that is supposed to happen when you fully control the godlike powers of the Netherbrain... I love choices and consequences, but please Larian, that is obviously not coherent nor fun.

Let's pray to Mystra that a hotfix will soon get rid of that awful, unjustified, 25 constitution check

I agree with this. It feels so cheap otherwise. I was actually disappointed that you could get around it with a dice roll at all. I feel like they put that in as a compromise for people who would rather not have any inescapable consequences in a game.

I don't understand this mindset of consequences that make sense for the world and story being a way to "lecture" the player. The reason the brain doesn't take you over if you don't try to wield it's power for yourself is because... it's dead. You chose to kill it and it was not an easy task. While it remains alive it can always reassert control. The more you use the power throughout the game, the more illithid you become and the easier it is for the brain to control you at the end.

There plenty of good or compassionate choices that have negative consequences as well. It just makes the game and story feel authentic.

I would argue that the brain is incredibly weakened the moment before you have the chance to kill it. The game makes it clear that even after all the damage you've done and with the help of Orpheus's power, you only have a moment to kill it. I wouldn't be opposed to more consequences for using the tadpole throughout the game though. But I don't know if Larian is going to make changes like that moving forward.

I think making it a check is fair, but it should occur earlier, for example during the fight at the morphic pool. This is the moment where I'd expect the brain to use evrything it has against the party. As they are now, the tadpoles are just a powergaming mechnics, and adding the check late in the evil path feels a bit 'too little, too late' to be a real consequence of giving into temptation.

Tbh, after playing through it once (from an old save), I have the impression these evil endings are in part leftovers from the original EA story. My guess is the illithid transformation was planned if you gave into the dream lover's temptation, but in EA this came with the bonus content of dream interactions. Now you get the dream interactions regardless, and the endings feel disconnected from the story; it would make more sense to me if using the tadpoles had the character roll against becoming illithid, while not using the tadpoles would make it harder to dominate the brain.

I agree, that it should happen sooner and in both endings, good and evil. I would make a transformation very likely or even mandatory, depending on how many tadpoles you consumed. Or if you gave them to a companion, let that companion be forced to transform, after a failed check. I really think, there should be consequences with the tadpole use. It is an easy way out with all the powerful abilities, but it should come with a cost.

The good ending is not the only one with no consequence over tadpole usage...

The *Dark Urge evil ending* can also swallow all tadpoles to be found and suffer absolutely *zero consequence*. That's why it feels so cheap that only "generic" evil ending has any consequence at all of having used tadpoles.

I consider the "generic" evil ending with tadpoles, compared to all other endings, good or not, to be soft-locked with a hefty constitution check and not a just or thoughtful consequence.

It breaks the equilibrium and feels arbitrary.

I'm still on patch 6 (waiting for the native camera tweak to upgrade) But i' m pretty sure that the good ending invoked the netherbrain to kill all the tadpoles first and then itself.
Maybe it has changed in patch 7, but if the tadpoles are dead then transforming is obviouslly no issue anymore.

Patch 7 changes nothing to the good ending.

But, as I pointed out earlier, the Dark Urge evil ending - where the Netherbrain is also still alive (and the tadpoles in your head) - suffers no constitution check.

Only the generic evil ending (taking control) now must roll such an "anti-ceremorphosis" 25 check.

So, to be very clear, its not good ending vs evil ending, its just *one type of evil ending with the Netherbrain alive* that forces a check upon you.

For an old timer like me that played the hell out of both BG1 and BG2, and happens to be a 20 years + D&D gamemaster, that final constitution check feels awkward and rips the fun out of the game.

Simply put, Its not a consequence.

Its a softlock that shouldn't be.

EDIT - Case study :

1- I play custom evil Dark Urge, my brain its overloaded by tadpoles (24 tadpoles absorbed/partial illitthid) and the Netherbrain still lives... Guess what? No 25 constitution check is needed, I can enjoy the new devilish ending.

2- I play darkside evil Gale, my brain has absorbed only 3 tadpoles and the Netherbrain still lives... Now, the game tells me I must succeed a 25 constitution check, and if not successful, I am barred from seeing the new juicy evil-Gale ending.

I love Larian, but... well, I guess I made my point.