Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Patch 7 Ascended Astarion's kisses goes against his story as written

It's very hard not to repeat myself as our moderators asked, when your opponents are constantly doing exactly that.
Like, this thread was made for people who are unhappy with Patch 7 changes. Of course, no one is gatekeeping other opinions, but right now you are not suggesting any compromise, while the other side tries to find a solution which would make everyone happy. You are not making any suggestions how to resolve this issue. You are not providing any constructive variants. Instead, you only repeat the same to every kind of suggestion: how you are againt ANY kind of compromise.
What it looks like you are basically saying is: "I'm against other fans to have an option to RP as they see fit for their Tav. Only my RP and my Tav's reaction should exist in this game". You repeat this over and over and over again about the game which is all about personal choice and RP.

AA is already the only divisive and polarizing romance in this game. Like it or not, this is objective truth - we just don't have similar threads about any other companion's romance. Other companion's fans don't have such extremely different opinions and RPs. Also, other companions don't have different existing animations for the same kisses. And even if Larian leave this scene with only Patch 7 happy expressions, it won't make AA romance suddenly not abusive for many people. It will only leave those people without an opportunity to RP their own Tav (not Astarion, only their own Tav!) as they want and this will even leave some people triggered. Like it does to me currently.

Of course, we don't need to find a compromise, like the moderators said, but I thought it would have made this issue far easier for Larian to decide and solve if all the fans agreed among each other for some kind of compromise. Instead, one side is just completely against it, basically telling other people that they don't have any right to their RP. That they suddenly should not have any right to decide how THEIR Tav should react. Patch 6 took your agency away from you, you were allowed to complain and ask Larian to bring your agency as a player back to you. But apparently, I should not be allowed to have my agency in MY game, just because my RP and my Tav is different from yours.

I specifically said "IMO" - "in my opinion". It was a perfect solution for me. You were welcome to suggest alternative solutions, but instead of it you just repeated your old point how you are against me having my RP back in an RPG game.

Yeah, if it's about rpg and how you can play a character. Maybe my character is afraid of touch. Or I play a half-drow who wants to integrate into the drow culture and find a home, but he's intimidated by all the brutalism, possessiveness that comes from Minthara.

In my opinion these suggestions option destroy more than they create.

Of course, how Astarion will react is another question. If on 1 and 3 he will react with enjoyment\doesn't care Larian can throw the entire character and story into the nearest Belgian trashcan near the office. 18 charisma, sweet talk reflexion and sex on the grave doesn't fix in personality enjoyment and the impulse to see when his partner is really uncomfortable in intimacy.

>Grimice in disgust. You gave him this power, you don't deserve to be treated like his slave.
With the first option.
As can be seen from the original script of the night of turning, when Tav kneels, it was all about consent and pleasure.
If the next morning Tav approaches Astarion and asks for a kiss, the same scene is repeated. No small matter added on Valentine's Day. Then what was associated with pleasure and consent is turned into a negative, associated and attached to it.
Word selection. This dictation that someone is a slave, considers themselves such because of kneeling, this mood that narratively about enjoyment in an intimate atmosphere will be destroyed - the same damage that was done on February 14.

When it comes to quarrels and breakups - it can be understood.
Kissing is not.

>Smile longingly, feeling safe in his cold embrace. You want this.
Second option.
Lord Astarion is warm. He has a beating heart. So, most likely he's warm.
If that's a metaphor, that's a moral, it's not the way "I can fix him" where the purest tender warm kisses – it feels like it. Which is not true Astarion on the path of evil kissed tenderly and gently if Tav wanted it. Animated and shown beautifully.
Astarion literally gives the usual tender kiss in the new evil endings.
The rest is personal interpretations.

>Try to hold back your fear for the control he has over you.
Third option. The same claim as with 1. All fear should be solved by pressing “break up”, not by intimating things and linking the conflict to intimacy.

Neutral faces for this character alone - bowand hinting that Tav is uncomfortable during intimacy, emotionally distancing themselves from what's going on and Astarion's 0 reaction afterwards as if everything is fine are also absolutely ruinous. None of this happened until 14. 02. 2024.

I think those who propose these options rather want some kind of conversation, clarification of something and subsequent conflict, not a kiss.
Especially since it will be a truly one-time event.
I was suggesting a more extended discussion about what happened back last year. After all, we have a tadpole, we can make Astarion eat an astral tadpole, to get inside his head. We can learn a lot more on both paths even if it destroys the trust built.

It was a bad idea to achieve that with a kiss.

A moral dilemma perhaps some might consider not enough in Astarion's journey. The cages with only "good" (deserving of redemption) spawns look pushy and unconvincing.
I always wanted more of the reveal of the moment where Astarion sold people to the vampire clan before.
That way we'd have complex morals, evil and the player wouldn't be victimized in romance.

I would never want intimate things, romance to be the source of some kind of compulsive morality. This generally works very poorly with Astarion from Act 1.
What can I say: abruptly playing the victim with a character when he was clearly immediately dangerous almost ruins the story. And an image of a character about evil and fun, to companion and play with.
It's been given a very limited number of lines and branches, on the level of how Astarion can be forced in Act 2, it's like writing that he can't break up with Tav that time and every kiss is uncomfortable for him after being forced.
That didn't happen with Astarion, or Tav with Astarion in the path of evil.
Adding that to one of the main romantic interactions has always been and will be a terrible idea.

Larian had an approach to kissing and sex, including with Astarion, so Tav enjoyed it. As extravagant as it was.

When Astarion towered over Tav there was no hint that they didn't like what was going on. Although it could have been as you described, after the "yes-no-hit".

There was only the setting: gentle and rough. Which is very telling.

Rather than trying to “improve” an inappropriate idea that contradicts the turn scene, the narrative there, an idea that has already been abandoned, it is better to make such an setting as on the night of the turning.

It will remove possible triggers for people. Won't be annoying with tired morals tied to intimacy (which has already been agreed to). Close to the phrase “ask everything and it will be yours”. Would be close to Larian's original approach in the intimacy scene on this path.

I think your solution just raises more issues and another wave of unhappy players. Lord Astarion is not cold, emotionally or physically. What if Tav starts with happy face, but the player wants them to change to fearful over time? Why would you ask for a kiss if Astarion disgusts you? Two extremely negative and one positive option make it seem very biased too. If they make new changes we'd be back here with new disagreements. Also, saying a solution is widely supported based on Reddit is like holding a fake election.

People who disagree with you do not owe you a solution which satisfies your personal needs either. I play for enjoyment and fun, not to work with my or anyone else's personal issues. The neutral faces are the compromise. If you want to play the toxic narrative, it's up to you how to make your headcanon work, just like how players do with the bride theory. I'd prefer if they focused on other things besides Astarion entirely from now on, as I'm very happy with the current Lord Astarion content and with the game in general. And putting time in one part is usually taken away from another.

This thread shouldn't be about "who gets the last word" either. It's turning very spiteful, with replies like "I'm not reading that" as answers to thoughtful comments. You can barely even call it a discussion at that point. If you feel like repeating yourself, you could just try to move on. Your suggestion is still there for everyone to see.

The issue has been resolved. Astarion is once again consistent with the characterisation of a possessive but not physically abusive Vampire Lord.

The suggested compromise in the patch 6 thread and other places was to stick to the original script that allowed Tav to choose a gentler or rougher approach. While I wish there was one more scene where Astarion's kinky side was explored better, Tav kneeling, especially after succeeding the insight check signals to Astarion that they are into sub/dom dynamics. If someone is still not happy with the outcome, there are multiple options to end the relationship, in which he never even retaliates. This is not a real life abuse simulator but a romance with a fictional vampire villain. The former is suited for obscure horror games and not a mainstream AAA game people play for fun.

Larian already made it clear they originally intended the ascension path to be an alternative romance route and not a tragedy. In the cut Withers epilogue Tav and Astarion are clearly harmonious and enjoy their life together. An unhappy Tav would not want to kiss Astarion, they would break up with him, kill him, enslave him as the Absolute, etc. Tav is the protagonist who is forced to fight against Gods and their Chosen, they are more than capable of taking care of themselves. As I previously said, Tav complaining about the lack of freedom seems to be more of a quarrel between spouses rather than a tormented slave and their cruel master.

The kisses were always criticised for taking away the agency AND contradicting Astarion's previous characterisation. You're free to see him as abusive no matter what he does, but this is clearly not the story Larian wants to tell us, instead they want to keep him morally questionable but not turn him into a complete psycho. They're carefully trying to present heavier situations in a more humourous or less serious manner, just like they did in the first act when Astarion drains Tav dry.

Potentially triggering content:


The current faces are fitting, fairly neutral and possible to interpret in multiple ways. The only open mouth smile is when Astarion grabs Tav's throat, the rest are smirks.

Asking for scared and disgusted faces is not only asking to roleplay Tav in a certain way but also for Astarion to harm Tav and not stop when he sees their discomfort. I and the majority of people don't play romances in games to end up being wronged, but to enjoy them. The countless threads with complaints about Halsin being creepy towards Tav speak volumes. I'm glad the patch 6 kisses have finally been reworked and now everyone can have a happy romance again.

You aren't gonna erase Patch 6 with scared faces, which totally suited our RPs, from our memory by repeating the same points. Unless Larian makes a statement where they say that your feedback had no influence on their decision to change scared faces, people have their right to assume that scared faces were changed only due to fans' feedback. Since making animations is a lot of work in the first place, it's very hard to believe that scared faces were merely 'a mistake'. It's not like you can slip and animate the wrong kind of faces by accident. This was clearly a discussed and intentional decision which perfectly suited AA's narrative about "repeating the cycle of abuse".

Yes, people don't. But this thread was made for people who aren't happy with Patch 7 changes and ask Larian to give us an option to choose. If your only feedback and response to this is that you are totally against ANY kind of compromise, if you can't suggest any kind of solution for people with other RP's to have an option to play as they see fit too, just like you already have, if you only reject all our suggestions without proposing any other way to handle this issue, then you are only repeating the same point over and over and over again: i.e. that you are against other people's RP NO MATTER WHAT. After this the other side just repeats the same old points how for them AA relationship is not abusive and why. We already discussed this multiple times. You aren't gonna change people's opinion that this is abusive relationship and they have total right to play it as abuse by repeating the same points.
And moderators clearly told us not to make repetitive posts.

So instead of making your point with one post that you are against any kind of compromise and moving on, your side is just trying to take over the thread which was not made for you, but for people who want to have an option to choose. You are trying to bury our feedback under repetitive posts about how there should be no compromise at all. We already know that you are totally against it and want no compromise. This is not a new suggestion. You are providing no new information. This is not arguing in good faith. This goes directly against what our moderators asked you to do.

I came up with a new suggestion how an option to choose can be implemented. In response I got all the same old posts about "we don't want to compromise, only our RP is valid".
It's your side who wants to say the last word in the thread made primarily for feedback from the other side of this argument. So yes, "moving on" suggestion applies to you in the first place.

Having threads where suggestions can't be challenged by the people who disagree just turn into echochambers. And if changes are made based on these echochambers, the results will only benefit a small group of people while others are left disappointed. If you don't want discussion, as it clearly seems so, maybe posting on a public forum is not the right way to deliver the feedback.

My response was totally on topic. You made a suggestion and I told you why it wouldn't work, in my opinion. Instead of answering to these points, you got offended and started accusing me of something I never claimed. I never said I'm against your abuse RP, on the contrary, go for it. I have no desire to change your mind about Astarion either. You can headcanon whatever you want. But it's your responsibility to make your headcanon work like everyone else does. Use the neutral faces or mods like everyone else, find a perspective how they fit in your toxic narrative.

The compromise was already made, it was Patch 7.

I didn't say these suggections can't be challenged. To leave your feedback how you don't want any kind of compromise and move on is very different than being unable to challenge this thread and its' proposals.
You already have your thread about being happy with Patch 7 changes. People are totally aware this thread is not the only one about this topic. Larian is very aware about your feedback. Let's not pretend that if they will make any changes again, this will happen because they don't know you are against it. You were listened to and changes were made according to your feedback. Now it looks like your side only wants to silence this thread made for the other side of this argument instead of providing constructive feedback. You said so yourself: you don't want to offer any solution at all. We all know it already. Your side doesn't need to repeat that under every new suggestion in this thread.



You said so yourself: people don't owe you a compromise.
I also don't see you suggesting any kind of solution, so yes, I have my right to assume you are against us having any option to choose. If you are against any kind of compromise no matter what, then it's obviously pointless to discuss your objections, since they aren't made in order to help this discussion to find a compromise.
If I'm wrong, then please, descibe your vision how this problem should be solved and how we can get our RPs back to us, just like you already have it.

It's not a compromise at all when it only favors one side and takes agency away from the other side. Again, it's not arguing in good faith. If you don't want to compromise at all and you mean that we should be denied of our RPs, then you are just repeating the same information we already know. It's not helping this discussion at all. After Patch 6 you could have also been satisfied with your headcanons and mods, but you were allowed to leave Larian a feedback.
But now you are actively against other people doing the same thing, which you were allowed to do, by repeating the same point how you are totally against the request of this very thread.

I also want to add that I have seen a lot of people on Reddit saying that they don't leave feedback on Larian's forum about AA, because they don't feel they will be welcomed here by other AA fans after reading those threads.
So it's very questionable how much of an echochamber this forum already is, if many people with different opinions don't feel like participating in these discussions in the first place.

I agree with you. I also find it upsetting to see other members jumping on you when you are new to the forum, perhaps writing your first post on here.

If anyone is repeating themselves it's other members in here, not you. Your opinion is valid.

Agreed. The faces are neutral enough to suit many RPs, even toxic ones. There are a mixture of expressions.

Plenty of us have offered suggestions. To then be told we're both "offering no suggestions" and "offering too many and in bad faith" is a bit dizzying. Again, Mugara has not posted before. To accuse them of spamming the thread makes no sense. Since suggestions for a compromise seem to be ignored and intentionally not read, I'll state some more clearly, so they are not missed, and add some new ones.

1.) Allow the devs to work on other, technical things. There are plenty of kiss mods if the ones you have done suit you at this point. Going back and forth like that is a bit much.

2.) add a toggle for disposition at the very start of the game (many games do this) such as timid/fearful, happy/prideful, stoic/mystic. So we're allowed to choose how we react to the game at large. Giving it to one small thing for something so niche as wanting to RP non-con isn't fair.

3.) No "compromise". No other companion fan base is asking for such a thing. The faces were not mocapped specifically for that scene. Stating your preferences as the one true narrative is not correct.

By and large, this topic is repetitive. But that is not one sides doing. At this point I think most of us are just ready to move on.

Idk why vitaminbear deleted their post, but I agreed with them. This is exactly it. The other thread is an absolute echo chamber because all disagreeing arguments were bullied off it. I personally provided a (in my opinion) good stance from BOTH sides to avoid this becoming an echo chamber as well. Believe me, my original wall of text was way way more fiery and calling out people way harsher, I edited it to be as neutral as can be.

Again, and I know I am repeating myself here, but tell me one good reason why having a choice in this matter would be bad? Don’t come with the arguments of all companions needing these choices, they do not. Astarion is the one companion who has the biggest change. His romance and dialogue changes completely, whether you see it as worse or not, it is different nonetheless. Shad stays the exact same whether she is DJ or not, Wyll stays the same whether he is BOA or BOF or duke. In terms of narrative and canon, AA and UA are way more different than selunite or DJ shad. You can still have the smiling animations, absolutely nobody is arguing against that. There are good valid RP reasons to go either path, smiling and not, and not all of them are as bad as you make it out to be with “you’re making AA a rapist”, nobody is saying that. And having your headcanon(!) made canon for everyone is just as unfair as having our headcanon(!) made canon for you with patch 6. We just want the same thing now as you did with patch 6, how can you not see the hypocrisy?


@ Natasy
1) it’s crazy to tell us to use mods when you could’ve done the same and kept quiet about it, but you didn’t. And nobody faulted you for wanting it changed, but now you come for everyone who challenges you. Adding two lines of dialogue that don’t even need new voice lines will not take anything away from fixing other problems.
2) this isn’t about the game as a whole, you have hundreds of choices throughout the game, and your character can change throughout. We don’t want to change the whole mechanic of the game. Like I’ve been saying, this isn’t about non-con. As far as the game is concerned, there is always consent. Don’t try to put words in our mouths. Edit to add: this is the exact same thing as when durge is revived and can either speak aloud or keep their thoughts to themselves. This would be just two lines of text of what is going on inside their heads.
3) where did anyone on our side state their narrative as being the one true narrative? We are arguing for DIFFERENT narratives, many of them. Not just ours. I also want one of my Tav’s to be into it, others I don’t. What’s so bad about it? You can happily choose the option you want, and I can happily choose what I want.

I apologize personally to Mugara for not making my point more clear, but this wasn't really directed personally to them, but to all the posts on the side which doesn't want any kind of compromise.
You all repeat the same point how we should be denied our agency to play as we see fit for our Tav. This was my point. Of course, every new user is welcome to voice their opinion. I missed the fact that they are a new user, my fault and, again, my apologies.
But my point about the other side as a whole still stands.


1. No one is asking devs to work on these animations again. We discussed it already. Making one toggle option won't take much time. I'm all for devs working on other things.

2. You know very well that Larian won't invent an entire new mechanic for the whole game at this point. You know it won't happen. Also, this option won't be more "niche" than the other options we already have in this game, where we are allowed to choose what our Durge is thinking and how they are reacting to things in their mind.

3. No one here is saying that other companions' fans can't ask for an option to choose if they are unhappy with something. This thread is really aren't about other companions. It's off topic. If fans of other companions want different options, they are free to ask this in other threads. No one here is saying they can't. And we literally DON'T state our preferences as the one true narrative, it's your side which is doing that, because your side is against any kind of option to choose.

I suggested a new solution for people who want to get an option to choose. And I was met with repetititve posts about how I should be denied this option without any suggestions to how to make both sides happy.
Okay, now you proposed an option to choose Tav's entire personality at the very start of the game, so at least it's something new, but I don't see it realistically getting implemented. It's too much work and it directly contradicts to your own point #1.

@blue I could not, and still cannot mod. But I will always stand by the point the non-con should be the work of modders. And a consensual romance path should be...the normal romance path.

The answer your last question, and to quote your friend Rote, stating scared faces were "clearly a discussed and intentional decision which perfectly suited AA's narrative about repeating the cycle of abuse" is supposition. No one knows what was discussed. Expressions are tagged with a number. The number was changed. Based off of audio dialogue. Nothing was mocapped. None of the devs or writers have ever stated that AA's narrative is about him being an abuser.

Interpretation is great. As long as we can recognize that what it is. Otherwise, it becomes veiled preaching.

(RE edit as not to give mods a migraine) I'm a bit confused over the no cross thread drama rule. Given it keeps getting brought up anyway. But to say anyone was bullied off of the patch 6 thread is *false*. And I encourage anyone who reads that to actually go and look for themselves. It was this exact discussion style. Approved by the mods.

People suggested a solution many times: choosing between rough and gentle kisses. Like it or not, that is the option that would make the most people playing this romance happy.

>>When you say your solution would make everyone happy, that's simply not true.<<< I dont want Larian getting the wrong idea. It wouldn't make me happy and most Ascended Astarion fans who prefer a happy romance with him wouldnt be happy about it either. It was a gentle kiss for 6 or 7 months before Patch 6 came as a valentines gift. No one was upset by gentle kisses with him then.
Someone else mentioned this before but its very triggering for some of us to hear about suggestions to bring the Patch 6 Tav face expressions back. Those need to stay gone for several very important reasons.

It's terribly problematic to have Astarion [who is the only male evil companion] be the only one with the negative implications that you're pushing onto him and the only one with negative expressions during kisses to make it look non- consensual. Larian aren't calling his story a story of the cycle of abuse. It's some fans who interpret it that way. This is a fantasy-story about a vampire, Not an IRL abusive partner. Let's keep it that way.

You (you as in generally spaking) are spreading misinformation by saying the facial animations of Tav were hard to change.



This is a bad faith accusation and a moderator already asked people not to talk about this in a negative way because it sounds like you're assigning blame on certain fans.


Quite a malicious accusation to make and not true. Your post appears to also be bringing in beefs from other places or threads.

Non-con is already in the game. The fact that AA refuses Tav to let them to leave once tadpoles are gone is canon and it's in the game. Twice. No other companion has that narrative.
Personally, I don't see AA's kisses as non-con, but your argument doesn't hold water, because this narrative is already in the game.

Unless you have some clear evidence to your words, it's my right to believe otherwise. I heard Neil flew in to the other country just to record those kisses.
So unless you have any proof to your words, I agree to disagree.

Just like happy expressions are now very triggering for the other group of people including myself.
You are not the only one group which wants to play AA romance as you see fit. We are not asking to take happy faces away from you. Nobody would ever force you to choose scary faces if this option is provided.

I'm not putting any blame, because I've already said multiple times that fans of every companion have their right to ask for changes if canonical expressions don't suit their RPs.
Saying that I believe Larian listens to their fans is a very normal thing to say. I never said that happy expressions should be taken away from you, so I don't see how this can be taken as an accusation. You have your total right to provide feedback. No one is denying it.
But just because you have your right to ask for changes, doesn't mean that Larian made a mistake in their own opinion in the first place. It's all a matter of opinions. Everyone is allowed to have their own, including Larian.

So you’re clearly in favor of having a facial animation in game that works for you without the need to mod? Great! That’s all we want as well. Just because our preferred animation is different from yours doesn’t mean it’s less valid. I’m not playing non-con, not that it matters because I don’t have to explain my RP to you. But for my game one animation doesn’t fit while the other does, same for your game. So why should you have one that fits and nobody else?

Nobody was upset at the kisses before patch 6 because there weren’t any specific and additional ones. They were added later because fans wanted it. Believe it or not, adding gentle kisses would further the narrative of abuse. Which you (general, not you specifically) will take as “see he loves me” not as the emotional abuse narrative it will actually strengthen. Like I said, I don’t play non-con. Everything my Tav does is consensual, smiling or not. Just because it’s consensual doesn’t mean they have to smile through it.

That's your headcanon Not confirmed by Devs. It is actually problematic to say abusive partners do not show gentleness and affection to their partners during kissing They can and do all the time.

That’s actually exactly what I’m saying. Idk how you can misinterpret what said like that but I can make it clearer. Adding gentle kisses to AA will indeed mean that he is abusive AND still giving gentleness. Making him even more abusive. You can definitely look up some resources on this exact topic, maybe you’ll find an article or two written by myself as well.

Have to agree that paints a problematic view of what ab**e actually is. Depicting it in such a way would be a massive stereotype, and a caricature. I agree fully and have always said the game is not equipt nor prepared to deal with such a heavy topic appropriately. And that would be an inappropriate way to handle it. Also a very shallow picture of villains. And Astarion as a whole.

Being evil doesn't mean doing ever bad thing ever. That's a 1D, uninteresting, way to paint the character. It robs a villain of nuance.

Honestly, I also see it wildly, hm, belittling to the story to say Astarion and Cazador's relationship mirrored domestic violence. Which would be perpetuated onto Tav. Cazador was a slaver. A torturer. There was no cyclical pattern of abuse between them to mirror with Tav. It was enslavement and torture for 200 years of "pure shit", from the get go. That is not a parallel. The game puts purposeful detail into separating what happened with Cazador, even acknowledgment that he was uncharacteristically bad, with what Astarion gives to Tav. That's ignoring a lot of in game content to try and flatten a character and his story to fit a single, very one dimensional narrative. I do not agree with it.