Larian Studios Forums Divinity General Discussion What races are planned for Divinity and party size? Expecting more or less?

I never said, I want options removed, I even gave examples, where the stereotypical white male fighter worked. I just don't think, that every game needs the same formula and that it is ok to sometimes do things differently. Like women being the fighters and men the healers, like a halfling bring a barbarian and a half orc being a bard - the first example we had in BG3 and I think it worked well. Now for going against race stereotypes, that would be another way to shake things up .
And no, I didn't say, we shouldn't have an elf or human companion, but that they shouldn't make the bulk of the group, with having all the other ( non ugly) races.

The ugly statement: I wrote a reply, but honestly, I'm not interested to discuss that.

If a game is to be truly successful, then the classic tropes need to be present and at the forefront. Those who enjoy niche tropes tend to be very vocal about their preferences, though it does not really translate into engagement.

Deliberate subversion has become very boring. I do not want the classic male knight in shining armour to be cast aside in favour of a character like Karlach. You can make a point that both could be available as companions as a compromise and I'd begrudgingly agree, though if such things come at the complete expense of the classic tropes? Then no, thank you.

I could be wrong, but I think, BG3 was mildly successful despite not having the male white knight in shining armor

And Karlach somewhat of a fan favourite, so I think this supposed 'niche' worked out quite well for Larian. Hopefully it makes them more comfortable in going different ways.

It seems this discussion has gone in a particularly strange direction.

In terms of tropes, Divinity already eschews tropes with their entire concept of elves. Rather than reusing the trope of elves just being "Pretty humans with pointy ears" they're more differenitated physically with elongated features.

As such, sticking to tropes is not in the cards by default. (Also, we have precedent in DOS2 where each companion could be anything. You'd assign them an initial class via dialogue where they comment on how good they are at whatever you ask of them)

Secondly, the bringing in of gender seems off-tangent for a topic about races. Not only that, but female warriors are in of themselves a trope, one that is rather popular (Especially to those whom are into Muscle Mommy's). Karlach doesn't buck any tropes, she very much embodies one. What would be subversion of the trope would be a warrior who was not physically imposing (Regardless of gender) and/or who disliked confrontation entirely. Not some musclebound meathead who loves to axe first and ask questions later.

Thirdly, human knight is not the defacto trope. It's normally the Dwarf race that gets the "Fighter" archetype, while Elves are given the "Mage" archetype and Humans get the "Ranger" archetype (On occasion Elf and Human archetypes are reversed. It depends on whether writers are more Legolas or Strider pilled).

As far as overall companion design goes... Ideally there's be at least 1 companion of each race (Well, technically, 2, one for good path and one for evil path) though this sort of design can often lead to underdeveloped "Token" characters that only exist to tick the box of having someone with a particular race (Or alignment... *Glares at Minthara*).

Though the very least there should be some level of diversity. Not just like 5 humans or 5 elves and then 1-2 other races. Even if you do proper origins so for example your Lizard PC starts in a Lizard town and has Lizard friends who follow them on their journey, you'd still want to have more diversity than that (For example, 3 of your race and then 5 of other races as potential allies)

Companions are a way to provide insight into other races. As not only do you get to see their interactions based on their race and how NPC's of various factions address them, but you also have dialogues where you can dive into their history and experiences. If all the companions are just bland humans who have no noteworthy interactions because everyone just likes humans in every setting because they're the bestest ever race to ever exist in the entire universe... Then you miss out on a lot of potential exposition in the lore for what? Maybe a few terrible sex scenes from a shallow "Romance" path that was shoehorned in because such things are popular?

The success was not without controversy and whilst Karlach's fans are extremely vocal, the reaction to her was very mixed. Quite a lot of us, particularly legitimate gay men, are pretty tired of female characters being given the physique, attitude and role of a male character in modern RPG's at the expense of male characters taking up that spot in a group.

Oh, totally agree, I just hope, they give us more diversity in companions and stick to their more unique take on elves and lizards.
People seem to have taken issue with me and others wanting some more diverse races and class combos in the companions. I want more interesting stories and personalities and don't really care about romances.
I don't honestly care, if the warrior in the group is male or female or non binary, as long as the character is interesting and exploring a new path/ story/ faction.

And quite a lot of people are pretty tired of female characters being relegated to being physically weak, timid and shy characters.

It's a bit laughable to say that there's a lack of strong male characters when that's the majority of gaming. Even in modern RPG's, the vast majority of strong roles are taken by men.

Meanwhile, there's PLENTY of support for strong female characters and timid male characters (Femboys are all the rage right now). Even though they still only make up a minority of characters.

It kind of feels like these "Legitimate gay men" are just sulking now that modern RPG's are finally actually having diversity rather than exclusively catering to their tastes.

I disagree. I think it became very clear that certain demographics sought to throw gay men under the bus at the first opportunity so that they can focus on pushing their niche fetishes into the mainstream, particularly those that are subversive.

My use of 'legitimate gay men' is to describe those who are not actually male or gay yet insist on speaking on our behalf. I will not go too deep into the matter here to avoid dragging the thread too far off topic but the term 'fujoshi' is relevant. I think it's strange that you're implying that many RPG's are 'catering to our tastes' when so few RPG's have ever made the conventionally attractive handsome men into romance options in the first place.

As an example, for as much as the Dragon Age games sought to be 'progressive', Alistair, Cullen and Sebastian were not romance options for male player characters.

Femboys are also very niche and bereft of masculinity. They tend to be what women obsessed with gay men tend to project onto hoping to engage in some twisted form of conversion therapy, whereas some gay men in denial like to convince themselves that if a guy is feminine or androgynous enough then it does not count as 'gay' which is in itself another form of erasure.

At any rate, we can simply agree to disagree - or take it to private messages, I suppose, if you genuinely want a debate on the subject.

And yet, masculine men that this subsection of gay men are attracted to are continually the main characters in almost every video game ever made.

Ignoring the fact that gay men aren't of one unified taste. Where some do prefer the more effeminate types of men. Or even the types that like the "Ugly" men.

Gay men, like literally anyone else, is not a single category. Even within the group of "Gay men" there would be a desire for diversity. Not just musclebound hunks.

Further to that, there are many other groups of people. Each with their own diversity of tastes.

That these diverse tastes are now being explored, isn't a slight at gay men. It's the opposite, it's trying to be inclusive to all those other groups, including those aforementioned other gay men who like different types of men.


So your argument is that people who aren't gay men are tired of seeing this specific gay preference replaced by other depicitons?

So... Why do we care? If they're not the target audience (As they are not male or gay) then why would anyone care if they get upset that this is happening?


So few RPG's even have romance options in the first place.

Given that such things are very much not a priority for developers. It was only relatively recently with Bioware that it actually became a thing (But it's still very much shallow and underdeveloped)

Meanwhile, most games - of every single genre - will be predominantly filled with conventionally attractive handsome men.

Most protagonists, are conventionally attractive handsome men.

All the while, there have been continual attacks against developers for actually including conventionally attractive beautiful women. Like, literally many studios have been affected by "Feminists" raging about the constant portrayal of conventinallly attractive beautiful women in video games, to the point where development has been affected (For example, the upcoming Fable reboot intentionally sabotaged the appearance of its female characters because of this. While woke developers produce garbage like Concord with its ugly female characters)

With conventionally attractive handsome men not being affected in the same way at all. No-one has been raging about their inclusion. No-one cares if they are "Objectified" like characters such as Kratos who go around half naked while having "Unreasonable standards for beauty" like what female characters get attacked for. Even though these are by far the most popular characters across video games.


And yet, the characters themselves are designed in a way that appeals to this particular crowd of gay men.

In terms of design, they are still catering to this desire for the strong male type you desire. Even if their characters aren't designed to be gay (Though Dragon Age: Origins did have Zevran who was exclusively gay).

Romances in more recent times have been more progressive (Or rather, even more shallow) allowing more characters to be playersexual (At the cost of individuality)


Projecting much?

Nah, femboys are popular. Many gay men like them.

Yes, they are bereft of masculinity... That's the point. If they weren't they wouldn't be "Femboys" they'd just be "Boys".

As I've mentioned, many gay men like this type of man. Just like many lesbians like the "Butch" and "Manly" type of woman.

People are diverse and have diverse interests. Not everyone of the same grouping likes the same thing.

At no point did I suggest that tastes do not differ, I am simply highlighting what it is considered to be overwhelmingly popular and considered to be conventionally attractive. Which is anything on the spectrum ranging from classically handsome men to average looking men and ruggedly handsome men.

There's also something to be said about addiction to adult content, which warps desires and tastes - which is why those who could be considered 'terminally online' gravitate towards the likes of 'femboys' and 'muscle mommies' even as both see very little discussion, acknowledgement or desire in the real world beyond a scant few exceptions.

Though this is getting a bit too off-topic and spicy for this forum, I imagine, so let us end the discussion there.

Larian has statistics what races are most popular. I think it was half-elves, but I'm too lazy to look it up . What I do remember is a statement from Swen Vincke , long ago, saying something like " we gave you horns and tails, use them". But despite this encouragement for players to immerse in tailed and horned characters, it didn't really seem to have worked. Elves and half-elves and humans remained the preferred races;

So yea, I guess the majority prefers to play a hero that looks somewhat human. I know I do. Actually I think I played mostly drow and half-drow. But I also played a Duergar and a halfling. But never a dragonborn , gnome or a tiefling.

While this may be true... One does have to factor in how well they were implemented and how interesting they were.

Many of these races were made "Humanized" so they weren't interesting and there's a lot of "Why would I play weird malformed human when I could play human?"

Then of course there's actual implementation of them. Dragonborn are ugly and weird. Tieflings tails clip horribly with everything. Small races are proportioned weird.

With finally, the last nail in the coffin... Many of these other races simply have fewer options. Races like gnome and halfling feel that they have much less available compared to elf or human.

So while yes, the prevailing trend will always be towards human and humelf (As Divinities more distinct elves were less popular as I recall) due to most people like playing characters they find sexy or are more easily self-insertable. The way Larian handled other races didn't do them any favours. Of course, Ixal would also bring up the point that the majority of players are gooners brought in by goonerbait marketing so they will play characters that they prefer in sex scenes in much the same way the cast of companions are all sex scene compliant (With the one potential companion to go against that being cut).

I can't believe we are still discussing gender roles in a fantasy game. Dudeguy is spamming every thread with his agenda and people are discussing an upcoming adventure RPG as if it is a dating sim.

The point of having companions of different races is to get a different insight into another culture. Especially if players only play human and elves, this is important for lore and storytelling. Lae'zel was interesting in that regard, because she gave us background about gith, which became important later. Given how important the Ironhand gnomes are, Barcus should have been a companion too.
This is what I mean: try to include the different races and factions in the companions, to get a full picture.
I don't play a romance game, I play an adventure that can include romance, but where romance shouldn't be the main focus. The romance and sex scenes in BG3 are minor compared to everything else.

Apparently J.R.R Tolkien included four hobbits and a dwarf because of "niche fetishes" and the story would havve been much better and more popular if he had made them elves and humans who fuck instead

Yeah, according to one person here at least. Nevermind that two hobbits actually saved the day and all the elves, humans and wizards would have failed miserably, if Sam hadn't faced his fears and basically dragged his friend to Mount Doom and Frodo hadn't volunteered in the first place.
Not to mention, Merry an Pippin who established a dialogue with an old and forgotten race ( but I guess, Ents are niche fetishes too)

Then again, being unbable to get a compelling character out of a white knight in shiny armor is just a limit of incompetent writers.
Tropes are tools, not marks of shame. Every story can be ultimately reduced to a series of more or less popular tropes in the end.
Consequently no trope is inherently bad and even the stereotypical "Paragon of virtue" can be great and even inspiring character in the hands of a good writer.

Yeah, I don't disagree with that and even had examples, where it worked and actually made sense.
The person I replied to was not looking for a compelling story though, but a character, they find attractive for romance.

Every character can be interesting, if it fits the story and narrative, but having a male human warrior just because ' attractive option ' is not enough. We had that with a certain male druid elf, who basically was just a romance without story.
Imo Wyll filled the knight in shining armor trope, with the twist that he actually is a fiendlock. We can discuss his rewrite, but in general I actually like him.

Honestly, even IF someone plays other races, companions are still important for diving into other cultures.

What with the whole schtick of having blank slate player characters that have no background and only generic dialogue options.

Like even if they do include every race as playable and someone actually does play those races... They will still be heavily reliant on a companion of said race to actually learn about its culture and the minutiae about life as one of those races. Thanks to Larian's heavy focus on blank slates and lack of proper Origins.

This is the reason I personally advocate for actual Origins. So that people who pick a race can experience the game through the unique lens of that race, with a proper background and unique prologue whereby the character is living in the culture of their race before events cause them to get sucked into the Act 1 main story (But will still have lasting alterations in NPC interactions based on their unique background).

As such a thing will bring more insight into the race, its culture and overall place in the world than if you can just randomly pick some exotic race and you just play the same blank slate game as if you were just a cardboard cutout...

Lae'zel is an excellent example as you say where her race has relevance to her character and the overall story, which makes it so interesting to have a gith companion.

As an example of the opposite for comparison, Astarion and Shadowheart are high-elves / half high-elf. But being a high elf has literally no relevance or impact on them as characters. They are only high elf because they are supposed to be pretty and elf is pretty. You can swap either of them to halfling and you wouldn't have to change a single line in their entire story. This is the pretty human with pointy ears stereotype, where the pointy ears are just there as decoration and it is entirely irrelevant that they are elves in every other regard.

To be fair, the same is true for all of BG3's cast besides Lae'zel. (Karlach's being a Tiefling is only relevant in that it gives a reason why she could survive in Avernus and the burning heat of her Infernal Engine heart - Beyond that, she could be anything).

Heck, even the Emperor being an Illithid feels kind of phoned in, even if it makes it into story it doesn't have any real relevance to the character (Especially given his stance of not being interested in becoming human again, so it's not as if his transformation has given him something to overcome...). Like, they could have literally have kept him as your Guardian throughout the entire game and nothing would really change for his characterization (If anything it might have improved things because then the choice between Emperor and Orpheus would be less ridiculously one sided, because instead of being a decision between Mr Evily McEvilface and Mary Sue, one of the characters is just a plain old adventurer who helped you out instead of an evil mastermind manipulating you for their own purposes)

It's one of the disappointing aspects of BG3's writing.

Though, DOS2 was much better in that regard. Fane being an Eternal, The Red Prince being a Lizard, Beast being a Dwarf and Sebille being an Elf were much more integral to their characters and stories (Of course, Lohse and Ifan both being human was, as is typical, completely irrelevant)

So it's not as if Larian cannot write race relevancy into characters. They just opted not to for BG3 outside of Lae'zel.