So i play a 8 Charisma Dwarf warrior.
I pick up Laezel as a companion on the ship (mandatory) shes a real demanding bitch isn't she? i try to piss her off as much as possible because i don't like her neither physically or mentally.
I pick up Astarian as a companion even thou he starts off putting a knife to my throat, he certaintly looks like a wierd fella and nothing about him is trustworthy, i brush him off just like Laezel and they keep disaaproving with most of my choises
The first time i make a full camp, Astarion wants to fuck my lil ol ugly dorf?!?!?! thats from wanting to murder me to havin sex in a split second..... hmm ok well to each his own i guess i just ended up killed the lunatic and none of my opther companions seemd to care about that either.
Next camp Laezel sneaks in on me wanting to slit my throat because of the little frind we carrry around´in our heads, ok i try to talk some sense into her and fails the check, she wipes the camp because all the healing pots and healing food was stacked on her, so she just attack/heals nonstop until were all dead. ::) quite funny actually , but offcourse i have to reload to suceeed the check for her to calm down., i then proceed to take another long rest and then laezel wants to fuck my lil ol ugly dorf?!?!!? wtf ghet away from me you mentally unstable frog, i decide i have to end her misery because i simply can't trust her AT ALL.

Is this really how the game is ment to be played ?1? if yes i need to have an option for making my own stable companions please, i donø't give a rats ass about sex and sexual relations in videogames because it's always gonna be the creators prefrences pushed down my throat, just like having to selecet a preference in looks from the caracter creation, im not simply into physical attraction its a combination of so many other things and none of the premade companioons in BG3 tiks any of my boxes just the contrary.

Actually Lae'zel is pretty well written and voice acted. The Gith are arrogant supremacist arseholes who are less tolerant than the Drow. Personally would just smash its head in and nick her armor but the companions are limited. The overly dramatic elven vampire would meet the same fate just like the self-promoting egotistcal cretin that Wyll is. As for the romance crap I find it difficult to believe all your companions are willing bump uglies with literally anything you create. Lae'zel would use a halfling as a sex toy then eat it afterward.

The romance options are forced on you out of the blue which makes no sense. I would have thought to recieve such interest you would need to show interest first? I think Larian need to tone it down a bit personally. I know people like this stuff but me personally? Narr unless I can get a taxi afterwards after robbing her LCD TV and laptop I am not bothered.

We're getting pointless sex options because apparently this is the future of games, one short, one tall, one fat, one thin, etc and if it doesn't have a bit of nookie it isn't 'real'. I suppose It'll make it more popular with 13 year old console players, or at least exercise one arm.

Personally I don't see any point in sex in computer games and haven't since, well, ever.

As for the randomness and pointlessness, its written by people who are probably in lockdown and can't remember what the real world is like.

Or who think 'Friends' is the real world.

That is actually a good point, it "feels" like its written for 13 y old boys that think Pornhub is actually reallife situations.

The companions are not all in. Some will be less edgy or evil. But they are coming later. So far I have only found Shadowheart to be romanceable for my taste.

Agreed with what people here say. For me romance is detrimental to my enjoyment of a game. I'd also much prefer the resources to be directed to something more worthwhile.

It wouldn't be as bad if it was at least player-initiated or toggleable. People always say "hurr durr, there's no romance unless you want it to be there, what's your problem". The problem is that the companions are all ridiculously horny. I don't want to have to fend off "weird sex cult" (as someone described it). I want to be in an adventuring party, not on some dating group. And one dirty-minded companion is enough. I'll just kick him out. All of them? No thank you. Custom party says hello.

you guys don't get it, its the tadpole............who want to have sex like in the movies species

tadpole in your head = more libido , vamp can walk in houses , drow can walk on sunlight ....... we gain superpowers....

it's all mindflayers doing I tell ya so "they" can watch

Lewd tadpole going out of control.

Leave my murderous horny shadow people alone!

Hahahahah good one

I agree, it is off putting how everyone is trying to bang my character. And not just that, they've flirted with each other in banter quite a few times during my gameplay too.

This people really need to take a cold shower.



Honestly, same.

while i get the desire to have 'meaningful' and well written romance storylines within an rpg, i do wish that larian toned it down with some of the dialogue and how quickly it seems the romances progress - it may just be ea, but the fact that we are able to progress so far in current romances while still in act1 makes me wonder if these romance 'scenes' are supposed to trigger later on in the bg3 narrative. idk its just my personal opinion, but i also feel like the amount of romance content we have got so far actually runs into the *spoilers* territory where i wouldve liked to have explored more fully at launch going in blind.

im also concerned that larian may devote more attention to the romance interactions (which apparently can happen with every origin character/recruitable npc to the point where its almost meme-worthy) at the detriment of what i would consider higher priority feedback items (ie combat balancing, more immersive/significance of custom characters, party management controls, camera controls, act/narrative pacing, short rest/long rest cheese, moving camp location, additional content for launch [classes, races, etc.] etc.), but i suppose that is understandable and even expected given that one of larians big updates was almost entirely romance/rp focused (even if i still think it may not be the best use of resources at this stage of ea).

idk, its hard to describe, but i also think that the way larian has implemented romance hooks, writing, and how quickly things can escalate (even tho we still dont have any clear passage of time mechanics with day/night or camp rests really - even the tadpole is taking a break apparently) something is kinda lost in terms of a realistic story/narrative progression and that it can detract from npc companions in and of itself where they move from being able to stand independently as their own unique npc with their own goals and motives to just becoming a 'sidepiece' to the main character where their only significance to the story is now as the players love interest.

this very well may be toned down at full launch given some of the ea feedback noted here, and i would also say that if more companions are introduced after the act1 companion/map locks (still not a fan of btw) then that may work to alleviate the current concerns, but tbh i dont have high hopes. i anticipate that the additional recruitable npcs that the devs are creating/writing currently will all likely have potential to be romanceable and the merits of each romance will likely fall to the dev and how the studio finally implements it in game, whereas i think having npcs that you cant romance, even if the minority, would be a better application and avoid the dating sim comparisons.

(last comment - i hope we get more than just the 12 or so npc companions that larian has intimated, as respectfully, the recruitable mercenaries we are alleged to be able to recruit comes off as a lazy compromise/fix to replace companions the player may not want to use - im pretty sure we still dont have the details as to how this will be implemented? I also wonder why anyone would use a 'lesser' mercenary recruit instead of a more fleshed out dev written companion, unless the companion gets 'locked out' and isnt available or the player just really doesnt like the dev's origin/npc character [which may be more of a dev/larian writing issue]. this doesnt even take into account larians apparent preference for four companion slots which i would argue only works to further exacerbate these issues as the player is working with limited party choices at the onset and if players are opting to use mercs over the dev-npcs then that doesnt really speak highly of our companion choices.)

we can even date non- recruitable npc, like halsin and the drow

romance in bg3 will play a key part in the game. we barely scratched the surface

My initial optimistic guess was 12, but I'm afraid all signs point to 8. Or rather 8 is confirmed and anything beyond that is a maaaybe. At least that's my understanding.

Another incidence of where the characters in the game's community are more poorly-written than the characters in the game itself.

You are right those are the signs but we need to make it clear that's not at all keeping with the traditions of the BG series.

Oh, and romance is part of the BG2 experience and it plays an important role in Role Playing, fantasy literature and classic fairy tales. Tristan and Isolde, Arthur and Guinevere, the Iliad and Odyssey . . . into the present with contemporary novels and video games.

You think that's weird, I had a TT character dating her mount(dragonkin) and ended up with a half Dragon kid.

Romance happens in games. Lol.

I must say I'm very disappointed that there are only 8 companions planned. I respect the mindset of "quality over quantity", but you can go too far in this. It would be fine if it was a little bit less than BG2, but 8? Not good. Choice is critical in cRPGs. It's the same as with the scanned faces with no way to actually make "your" character (not an actor scan). It feels weird to criticize quality, but quality ate choice in this game.

+1 to all of this

I'm trying not to make a joke about this. Pushed down my throat is not funny. Rolls d20 . . .

While the good folk of Faerun (and beyond, seeing as Laezel is a gith) might wax poetically about the beauty of elves, everyone harbors a secret dwarf fetish. At endgame there will be a special [dwarf] only option to seduce the villain (whatever they are) to your side.

I pictured a dwarf shaking his beard like women in those shampoo commercials.



(I googled "dwarven beard loreal" and this was the best gif I found. I'm disappointed with the internet. Or my google-fu.)

What happens on critical?

Romance is optional just say "NO" it is seriously not that hard, I for one like the romance especially with Shadowheart. Also sex sales and its always been like that and every gaming company is going with it now looks like.

I'm afraid to find out what happen if I roll a one. I think . . .

The romance is good - you can choose not to participate. I'd argue that it's possibly too 'easy' - or the writers WANT you to establish a romance with one of the characters because that one may play a role in later acts on a side quest to rescue your boo or whatever.

But - someone else nailed it imo - it's the tadpole. Some may think 'it's forced' or 'why is everyone so horny'.....to that i ask 'Have you ever had a ticking time bomb in your head that you can feel squirm time and again?' - Knowing you could die from it in the next minute, day or month - you dont know the exact hour but everything is telling you it's gonna happen. With that kind of stress I'm only surprised it's not a full blown orgy every time you make camp.

Especially after battles, putae has it's genesis. At least here we have choice. Anybody can click "no".

Thank you sir; I am legit dying over here.

I kind of wish not every character was interested in the PC at least. I get why they made it this way. Player choice and all that. If you're playing a male character you should be able to still romance Gale or Astarion or whatever it is you want.

But at the same time it does make things a little awkward if you're trying to form plutonic relationships. As-is I don't think it is possible to just be good friends with Gale. He wants to bone, and you have to reject him.

There is something special about strong plutonic relationships based on mutual respect and admiration in which neither side has sexual interest in the other, and the game is missing out on that experience right now.

I thought you have to indicate romantic intentions in the wave scene first? Well, don't have to be plutonic, more like a friend. Perfect example would be Kim Kitsuragi. It is one of most realistic relations in video games.

And yet again, because of the creativity WALL that is CINEMATIC DIALOGUES even with mods we wont be able to change Larians imposed vision of romance.

If done right, subtle non intrusive romance is great. Even with sex scenes.
Right now if your an adult; its cringy, unnatural, pushed and definitely in many cases idiotic.

Here it goes again, <<BUT In BG2....>>there are some great romance dialogues/conflicts. One particular MOD called Yvette romance...such great content : (Everything starts with a strange parchment you may buy on the Promenade. It's a portrait of young lady. That's how Yvette appears in the game. Help her to remember who she really is, let her experience adventures, let her stay by your side - that may guide you to something more than friendship, something Sune herself would bless. Yet remember that Yvette's past can tear your with its sharp talons.)


Common, Larian studio is located near France right?! that's got to count for something.

"It is not what you think, I am a Vampire" is still my top romance related quote so far. And gith are supposed to lay eggs, not sure how a romance would work out here, it might end up sunny side up if we try to stay realistic.

Wave scene? I don't think I ever got such a thing. I've never flirted with Gale or Astarion, but when the tiefling party started both invited me for some hot sex and I had to turn them down as I was going for Lae'zel.

I have read something like that. In my case he just cheered PC and SH. Funny that only Astarion had yellow sign above his head. When I saw where it's going, I just simply reloaded and went straight to Shadowheart before interacting with others. This locked other romances. Maybe they patched Gale's triggers because I had no weave scene (kept him at distance, artifact feeding was enough from my side). PC is supposed to kiss Gale during weave scene or something. Not sure about sex after battle but Gale may give also awkward sex proposition post tielfling-camp scene, he ignores the fact PC has romanced someone else. Luckily, I have missed this unpleasantness (didn't trigger; weave scene required).

Okay, I wasn't going to post a response to this thread but my urge is too great.

Nobody, not Larian, not WotC, not gods, ghosts, or ghouls, are forcing you to romance or fuck anyone. The only character that has consistently come onto me through all playthroughs is Astarion which I think is only because I keep is affinity high. Unless you actively flirt with them and pursue them, Shadowheart, Gale, Wyll, even Lae'zel, do not come onto you. You have to actively pursue these options and go after them. There's no real 'forced romance' unless one character asking you for a booty call is too much for you.

As for the 'I'd much rather they make a good game'....implying they can't do both? Saying they're wasting 'resources' on romances is like claiming Destiny 2 wasted resources adding new weapons and mechanics. It's something people enjoy, something people thought of, and wanted to work on. Just because it's not your cup of tea, which is fine- I'm not particularly interested in watching pixels get it on either, doesn't mean it's existence is a waste of resources or is going to detract from the game. In my time playing the Beta, I've seen that the first half of act one has more interesting and engaging questlines and dialogue than the bulk of plenty of other games I've played, even in it's rough state.

Apologies if this sounds patronizing, I just don't understand the vitriol against an optional mechanic that plenty of other people are having fun with.

I'm also giving Larian a lot of my faith considering DoS2 followed the same formula and delivered an incredibly impressive game.

Its because you have to just say no. . .To all of them. Almost immediately. Contrasted with BG 2 where the opportunity to seduce a companion had to be earned over several interactions and hours of play. I can't speak for everyone but I have no interests in ruining anyone else's joy, by all means keep romance within the game. Flings can be as tasteless, easy, or disposable as people want them to be, or as involved, complicated and meaningful as people want them to be I don't care . .Just show some restraint. Allow the player to initiate some interest before the companions take turns dry humping their leg. The whole reason we have laws against sexual harassment in the work place is because people liked to be viewed as more than just objects of other people's lusts.

So the entire Illithid conspiracy is simply designed to obtain People Porn for tadpoles. Who's have thunk it !!

Bravo for such a nefarious plot, Dr. EvilTadpole

People keep repeating 'no one is forcing you'. This is a technicality, yes, sure, you can just say no.

To all of them. At the same time. All of them are trying to bang you early through the game during the same scene. You can say no, that doesn't make it any less weird.

You can say no, but you are still exposed to their weird advances and flirting with each other. To clarify, I don't mind romances in the game, I very much enjoy them, specially if they're well developed as a slow burn. I tested every romance scene in my playthrough because I was curious to see how it would unfold. And it feels weird and unnatural.

Hell, I was just trying to be friendly with Shadowheart, trying to make some girl friendship bond, I ended up triggering the romance scene even though I had no intentions of romancing a female. I rolled with it.

P.S: Still weird.

+1

The comparison to some Manson Family-esque sex cult really isn't terribly far from the reality in that scene. There is something incredibly tone deaf about celebrating a small scale genocide with a potential orgy.

This comment reminded me of my nightmare settlement in FO4 where my companions lived. I had approval maxed with all of them but had turned them down for the relationships. Every time I went to that settlement, they all started slowly converging on me like zombies because the relationship dialogue trigger was maybe bugged and they couldn't take no for an answer. Was really creepy.

I wonder if for this there couldn't be some early trigger that would possibly set a friends only status. Maybe in a camp conversation that had something to do with relationships in general and you could say something about having more important things to worry about. After that then there would be no advances by anyone and if you changed your mind later you would have to do a lot of work to get someone interested.

Eh, how you view this depends on a) your experiences during the playthrough and b) you experiences in life.

On my first playthrough I got everyone interested and I was happy to be able to focus on the character I liked. I thought the romance was sweet and true to form. A bit of Tsundre with the armor going right back on the next day. If we ever do sleep together it will be the result of slow burn. And unless I turn her towards the light, Shar will always come first . . .

On the second playthrough I gave into my inner DOS2 player and blew the world to bits and saved the grove in 2 days. With only two full rests I couldn't get anyone to look in my direction. Astarian told me he had standards (which was a hilarious line btw), Wyll told me he preferred the company of his tankard and Shadowheart wanted to drink alone. Oh and Lae'zel told me I was hawt but that I had challenged her too often so I could go soak my head. Good thing I have a dog to sleep at my feet, right?

Perhaps because I've had on again, off again relationships in real life SH doesn't seem so weird and because a number of my relationships / hookups started the way Astarian's romance started it didn't seem too quick. I remember when I was supposedly a chaperone for a group of late teens on a field trip -- two days was enough to get most of them exchanging tent partners. My guess is that is jarring for people who are on the demisexual end of the spectrum.

Of course I'm all for more -- but if there is going to be more text and a slower burn Larian will need todo what BG2 / PsT did and have conversations start in the middle of street. My second playthrough is any indication there won't be much time to complete a romance on the current time table.

This is simply not true. I have not attempted for a romantic relationship or selected any romantic/flirty options for ANY character during my first play through, yet - like most people here experienced - every single person in the camp wanted my character's booty during the celebration.




I simply do not mind as long as they keep it between themselves. Laz can have Wyll, Ast can have a random thiefling and Shadowheart can have Gale for all I care. But it DOES feel really weird that you get them ALL over you at the very same time even though your character have not showed even a hint of interest in any of them. It doesn't matter that you obviously can turn them down (I mean, what would Larians option be? :x ).

I could get if like 1 or 2 of the characters were really straight forward and maybe sexually motivated fairly early - sure. I could even accept if one or two had the personality of being persistent about it.

But yeah, it really wouldn't hurt to have one or two characters being more drawn back regarding the sexual stuff either.

Do note though - I do not think the solution to the problem is to make romance triggered EXCLUSIVE for the player - like the player having to flirt tirelessly in order to establish any romantic interest. I do like the idea of (some of) our companions being able to develop romantic feelings without us having to actively pursue it. Although I obviously do not classify their current behavior as feelings - WE BARELY KNOW EACH OTHER!

... To summarize - having a few companions being more into physical attraction is fine. Some people are like that. Having some companions a bit more laid back is also fine, cause some people are like that. Maybe some companions require your character to take the first step - while some other companions can develop feelings for your character overtime without having your character flirting with them. Just... Get rid of this "all of them wanna bang you at the same time"-thing - UNLESS it actually IS tied to the pod and those nasty hentai-folks (like for real, if they are the ones causing it then they're just gonna have to deal with being referred to as "hentai", it's not even about the tentacles).




Having an external option to "friend-zone" characters to simply not have them ever engage in romantic conversations with your character would absolutely be great, imo. Ideally, I'd like to see a small "turn off romance options"-box on each individual companion so that you can turn off romance entirely on whoever does not interest you (or rather, whoever you don't want being interested in your character*), whenever that is one, two or all companions.

But, I highly doubt they would implement it cause, yknow. "You can't turn people's feelings and desires off irl, you just gotta say no"... -.-

OP, what CRPGs have you played?

If you look at any CRPGs, or even any Action RPGs, they will have romance scenes.

The Dragon Age series, The Witcher series, Knights of the Old Republic series, and I'm sure cause CDProjeckt Red is working on it, that Cyberpunk 2077 will have romance scenes as well.

It is *not* for horny 13 year old boys. How sexist are you OP?

If you don't want to romance anyone that is your prerogative, but don't complain about it since so many games, and so many gamers like it! >_<

Cyberpunk 2077 will have romance in it if, they don't delay it for the 4th time

Yep every RPG out their has romance in it or that's what I want to say

Also Sex sales and video game companies see this so they go that route.

In BG 2 the romance dialogues were extensive and had the PC build a relationship wuth the NPC first. Which means that from the player perspective, the player had control over whether the romance even starts, and plenty of room to break it if they decided they were not interested. By comparison, if you place the PC in the position of having to repeatedly say no, it takes away from the player control over the situation and puts them in a reactive position. And I can understand why some dislike it, or find it uncomfortable or upsetting.

Yes, it's only a fantasy game, but I still think the topic should be handled with more care by Larian. The choice of whether even start or pursue gives the player more power than the choice of " just say no".

Those photoshopped wigs in commercials have nothing on that ginger beard. They should have hired this person for the battle of five armies scene.

I genuinely don't understand if people actually are aroused by the scenes for real...
The whole '' iT's FoR 13 yEaR oLdS '' just reeks of insecurity and projection imo.
We're not talking about hardcore porn with actual penetration on display at most we're talking about nipples.

It's like when people rant about how '' boobplate is oversexualized '', like how easily aroused do you have to be to think that's arousing?
I don't even think that it's sexy either it's just an aesthetic.
Do people actually think that those who like it sit around with their pants off jerking off to it?

Why do you think that calling a boob plate oversexualized means someone finds it arousing? I'd expect armor to serve to protect the character, not only by providing a physical barrier, but also by redirecting the force of the blows. With the boob plate, a sword hit would likely end up redirected towards the sternum. So what is the purpose of this design, other than to accentuate the shape and size of the breasts?

For me the "boob plate" simply exemplifies the attitude towards breasts in real life, and how they are sexualized regardless of the context and situation. I've gotten plenty of unwanted comments over the years, in random situations like jogging even, while wearing a ratty sweatshirt. If the boob plate is just "an aesthetics", then I wonder whose point of view it reflects.

"Unless you actively flirt with them and pursue them, Shadowheart, Gale, Wyll, even Lae'zel, do not come onto you"
This is simply untrue, no matter how you act or react they will come on to you, sure you can say no but it feels wierd instead of nice because it's forced and in a super unnatural wa.

To me Larian still needs to learn that less can be more.

I have played all of them , im 53y old and i also enjoyed most of them, i have no real problem with either nudity, sex or romancing in games, but i do have a problem when i feel its getting forced upon you, right now in BG3 every single character wants to have sex with you, just for the sake of " hey we need to find one for everyones taste" it gets beyond stupid and there is absoloutly no romance building involved its the eqivilant of going to tinder and look for a sexpartner.
I think the romancebuilding and sexcenes was very well done in The witcher wild hunt where you could go to a brothel if you just wanted sex or try to build a romantic realationship with yenneifer feks, but you had to actually work on that instead of every woman or man throwed themselfes at you even if they had a crush on you you actually had to be nice to them. also DA:O and Mass Effect was vey well done in that regard.

Is it Sexists to say that a certain demographic mistakes whats going on on Pornhub for reallife?? (i was a 13y old boy once and i remember what i thought looking at those colored mazines i found in my dads closet) I can point you to several studies that shows that is exactly the case. if your 13y old and not in that boat i apologize for hurting your feelings.
My point is that calling mass banging for romancing is to off touch with reality and for me personally i dont really care for such options because they rarely reassemble anything that could arouse me in any way.
My Question was if the poorly (in my opinion) implemented romancing in BG3 so far is what to expect , i would like to have an option to make my own neutral party.

I am not advocating to remove romanciong options , i am advocating to make them meaningfull, interesting and optional..

I completely disagree with you. How can you compare Witcher to BG3 and say that the brothel scenes were more noteworthy? Personally I didn't like the lewd romance scenes in TW3 at all (even though I love the game), as they were more like a blips, than any sort of roleplay.
We don't even have lewd scenes for everyone. The dialogues are there and yes, I would also like some changes to those and how they progress, but for characters like Lae'Zel and Astarion it still makes a lot of sense, that they make a move on you, especially at the party.
I have no idea what do you mean by neutral party? You will be able to have henchmen on full release, that was confirmed. I do not expect those characters will be making any moves on you.

I am sorry if you didn't have great experience in your childhood, but not everyone here is 13 year old kid. Parents need to parents their kids. This is an adult roleplaying game.

I'm actually laughing at what happened during your playthrough. They only show horniness after you save the tieflings. What in the world kind of choices did you make to end up with a playthrough like that? LOL None of that has ever happened to me in any of my playthroughs.

What kinda game are you guys playing? I was playing mostly a good character and basically everybody but Gale and Wyll hated my guts. And when it came to the celebration boning, only Gale was up for it--which is the character I wanted and worked towards anyway. I love romance in rpgs and I'm happy Larian is bringing us interesting characters to explore. Stop throwing tantrums for something that is absolutely optional and many people enjoy just because you don't see the appeal.

Now your just being silly Vamathi please go troll somwhere else.
Whhere did i even imply i did not have a good childhood? jeez
Where did i even imply that the brothels scenes where more notheworthy in the wicther ???
The brothesls in the witcher was 100% OPTIONAL do you even know what the difference is between a brothel and a romance option?? it appeas not and only reinforces my notion about a certaion demographic wich it could seem your a part of.

A Neutral party , is where i get to make my own travel companions, im perfectly fine with them noit haveing any background story other than the one i make up, im perfectly fine not having to see their approval rating on my decisions, and im perfectly fine with them not wanting to bed me.

You disagree with my intire post thats fine but by doing so you also contradict yourself when you apparently diagree with me on not wanting to remove romantic options?
you read what you want to read and you dont read the whole thing it appears , i suggest you read the actual text and stop putting your own twists on it.

Im not entirely sure TBH basicly i did nothing and i specifily tried to avoid the companions in regards to interacting with them, im totally with you , it made me laugh at one point because it was so silly, i also had a playthrough where Laezel said to me that since i ddint show her some affection she would go play with her self and shed suggest id do the same ???? just plain wierd writing to me.

I'm willing to give the devs the benefit of doubt for now, because at least in my game the dialogues with both companions and some of the npcs are bugged, and do not track the previous conversations and quests properly. Some conversations are looping (e.g. Gale keeps confessing whenever he gets hungry), and some refer to things that haven't happened in the game.

I agree with you, but it's also important to briung things to light in an EA session so that at least they get aware of it, if i say nothing there is a higher chance it will be neglected.
and again i have no problem with whatever they put in the game, i would just really like that some of the things gets put in as OPTIONS, would it really be hard to be able to toggle a switch on/off for romance dialogee? that could solve it and every camp would be happy, same goes for many other things in the game like the endlkess discussion about exploding barrels, a simple options to turn on/off exploding barrels should make everyone happy and it woiuld be like playing the game with difrent gamemasters.

I am 43 years old, and again and again I wonder how do people doesn't understand the concepts both of roleplaying (my toon are monogamous and somehow shy, so all the hornyness and gangbangig, didn't happen in my playthrough) and freedom of choice, I agree that Larian (but a lot of games do that) give not so many choices in dialogue options, and that the fact that all companions now are pansexual (ah i much I loved to play a homosexual toon in Dragon Age Origins who loved Alistaire, the fact that it was an one sided feeling only make the rpg aspect of it more engaging) can feel like a sort of cohercion, but you still have the option to avoid (and its not so complicated or pressing or repetitive as some players seem to find) them.

i play characters of different sexual orientations (fron asexual to pansexual) and is I the one who remains in control, I wanted a toon to fell for Astarion and so I let him to feed with its blood, still my toons made his choices despite what Astarion would like or not and so no romatic options, the same character declined the chance to romance Gale after the weaver cut scene, and didn't even thought of flirting when first met Shadowheart, with this character I ended Early Access without a romanced companio. Next toon, my fighter one, will be straight and fell for Laez'el, but again my dialogue options and the choices him will do wont be so that he can hit the other warrior.

But I plan to made, I dunno if a cleric or a rogue and I don't know if male or female, a pansexual polyamori toon to see if Larian gives the option to romance more than one character at the time.

As you can see choices I made.

The fact that larian gives the option to mass bang doesn't imply a player should do it if they don't feel that way. The more I read this thread the more I can not understand how that's not clear, or how players feel forced when I just ended early access without any romance because roleplaying my toon in a coherent way means he wont bend and change his ways even if it means to him to remain far from his beloved pale elf.

You are not forced to engage in romance at all, you have the option to say no. If you want to go through the entire game without romancing anyone then you can do so, because it is an option. Just like how Larian has it as an option where the player can bang everyone in the party if s/he wants to. If you want to play a sex crazed player then that is on you or if you want to be celibate and not do that. Then again you have the option, you are not forced to engage in romance at all. I seriously cannot see how other people can not see that romance is "Optional and you can say no" and it doesn't destroy immersion.

I think a big part of the problem with the romances right now boils down to the fact that all of the companions ACT like they want to sleep with you, even when they don't. In my opinion, it makes sense for Astarion to pursue you regardless of approval, because him and Lae'zel seem to want something more akin to a one-night stand (even if it might develop into something else later).

The problem is that everyone else will act jealous of this, even if they don't have high approval and even if you haven't triggered their previous scenes that are necessary for the romance. Ex. Wyll - he never got along with my character, I had him at neutral, and yet he sounded sad about the fact that I chose to spend the night with someone else. Then when I made the suggestion that he and I could get it on, he turned me down - even though his initial reaction was jealousy.

Same with Gale. His reaction to you spending the night with someone else is the same whether or not you've gotten the weave scene required to trigger his romance. He'll act jealous, then turn you down if you suggest something. Lae'zel's scene about "you'd wish you could sleep with me" was strange too, since she had never been flirty beforehand (only scene I can think of is when she called me "delightful" for betraying Astarion lmao).

I'd think that if Larian rewrote some of the celebration scenes to align more with how the companions actually percieved us (aka not have them sulk about us being with someone else when they don't even like us, except for if it makes sense for the character, I suppose), it'd feel less forced? Maybe add alternate friendship/rival scenes at the party for them, if you haven't met the conditions for their romance or don't have high enough approval.

I think that approval should play a bigger role overall in the interactions. Right now it rarely changes anything (apart from some of Gale's scenes, I think) up until the party. If the companions' responses were to gradually change to more positive/negative as their approval gets higher/lower (ex. when you ask "what do you think of me" to Shadowheart, having her respond "I wouldn't normally hang around you, but you'll do for now" when your approval is very high and the relationship is described as 'best friends' makes no sense to me). The only companion who currently has this is Astarion, and I hope the others will as well, with time.

Overall I'm very fond of the characters and I generally love romance and all kinds of relationships in games, but I have to agree that they feel odd so far in this game, even if I'm enjoying certain aspects of them.

Some of the spelling in here is making my inner self scream.

It's all optional guys. Don't want to bone someone, don't do it. No effing hard.

I am not saying that everyone says that but it's what I usually see people say.
I also reject this notion that '' boobplate '' would be dangerous... Unless we're talking about VERY extreme examples and only under very specific circumstances.
And I also think that asking that kind of a question is dumb in fantasy armor in general and is never consistently applied, if you're going to ask questions like these then most fantasy armor falls apart and even a lot of irl armor that was worn in combat.
Our ancestors didn't obsess so much about '' maximizing practicality '' as people think that they did, because in truth plate armor was incredibly resistant and there were liberties you could take in style and self-expression.
They literally used to wear breastplates shaped as corsets and other crazy concave shapes.

Also, accentuating masculinity was at the core of armor design historically.
Armor constantly changed with the times to accentuate masculinity based on what was considered masculine at the point of time, if women wore armor to the extent that they'd even be taken into consideration at all in the process of developing armor then armor would've adapted to accentuate femininity all the same.
The same argument that you're making against '' boobplate '' is precisely the mentality that actually did go into armor design historically.
And the mentality was very much that the male body was the peak of beauty and '' sexy '' by those standards, it's why naked male statues and in art were so common and if you read historical documentations of men especially kings and nobles the writers and their descriptions are incredibly thirsty.
The mentality going into developing armor historically was essentially the '' sexy armor '' mentality if you take the context of the times into consideration. It's not like today, back then masculinity was the most beautiful thing.

What I am saying too is that the sexual nature of breasts is severely overblown and that it's absurd to think that a piece of metal curved after a womans chest is sexualized.
The more extreme cases of '' boobplate '' too where it's literally two rounded individual cups only tend to exist in very heavily fantastical settings where people run around with gigantic Dragonslayer from Berserk style swords and helmets that have lighting shooting out of them.
And it being an aesthetic is my pov and I think any person that is in actual control of their own sexuality ( regardless of that, sexy is an aesthetic too ).
I am well aware that men can be creepy and make unwanted comments, but those same types of men are the ones that do look at this kind of armor as '' oversexualized ''.

'' Boobplate '' only exemplifies that attitude if you actually share that mentality, my point is that you don't know that.
It's unfair to assume that just because someone likes it or an artist designs it then it means that they did it for '' horny reasons ''. That was my whole point.
I don't think that I've ever interacted with an artist before that actually thought that way, it's a mentality I only ever see from people who don't like it just like how probably these same exact people believe that sex scene in games exist for fap material.
It's such an insanely narrow-minded view and I also think is indicative of some weird sexual issues irl.
Like I dunno where you're from but where I am from people aren't that easily aroused and breasts aren't a big deal and I also don't believe in allowing the most sensitive people to set the standards on behalf of everyone else.

Edit: Just for interests sake ( video ).
Ultimately I think that arguments about what is and isn't '' realistic and practical '' in a fantasy setting that isn't a simulator are kinda silly unless we're talking about extreme cases.
I mean even with '' chain bikinis '', loincloths warriors are still a thing in Baldur's Gate.
But thematically I can at least understand the argument against '' chain bikinis '' in a setting like Baldur's Gate.
Even if the equivelant but in leather still exists and uh, there's plenty of male NPC's already in loincloths and random pieces of plate the equivelant of '' chain bikinis ''...

With this I definitely agree. This isn't a problem with the companions or romance though. Just bad and somewhat lazy writing

The fact Wyll is jealous is even more preoccupying because he's got his mistress to care about. Even if he says it's over, he's still up to saving her. And the way he talks about the situation, it's not exactly clear whether their relationship is over or not. He's quite ambiguous on the matter, to say the least.

So if there is someone who shouldn't feel anything about a one night stand with another character, it's him. The reactions should be more nuanced and asynchronous according to their back story. At the moment, it looks like some events trigger exactly the same reaction to all the companions. And yeah, it smells bad writing to me.

be gentle! pretty sure a lot of users here are not native english users (like my self :P )

I’m so confused by this whole thread. There seem to be several issues going on.

Yes, Larian has some conversation bugs where choices aren’t correctly recognized or conversations are missed due to timing issues. I would expect them to fix this eventually.

But as for all 5 of the companions pushing sex at you? I just don’t see it, at least not in the half dozen games I’ve played. Some of the NPC may express interest in spending time with you at the party . . . but that can mean many things. It seems to me some people are reading more into it than is actually there.

Lae’zel – Yes, she is horny, I have no idea what turns on Githyanki but whatever. She has never actually been interested in my character and ends up with someone else. The whole conversation comes across more about her insecurities and trying to push her ‘my race is better than yours’ thing than anything else. But I do feel bad for Wyll . . . his interaction with Lae’zel sure didn’t sound consensual!!

Astarion – Yes, he wants sex, which seems to fit with his character perfectly. You had a couple conversation choices before he blurted it out and it was straightforward to turn him down. I’ve been propositioned in real life, its not that big a deal to say no and move on.

Gale – He wants to talk more about his situation and the romance scene should only trigger if you have previously initiated it in the weave scene. As far as I can tell it’s up to the player to initiate the romance options with Gale.

Shadowheart – Much like Gale, Shadowheart’s offer of spending time together is about getting to know each other, sex isn’t even an option. And again, you have multiple dialogue choices between moving toward romance or friendship.

Wyll – Isn’t even a thing yet in Early Access I believe?

So No, All your companions don’t all push sex on your character.

None of this seems like a problem to me (other than Larian needing to clean up the bugs). Its great that Larian is including options, I don’t really like Astarion at all but there are already fan sites, fan art, and apparently plenty of people out their thirsting after him! To each their own. And the writing for either Shadowheart or Gale romances seems much better/more mature than most game romances.

None of these disgusting companions are worthy of licking my boots, let alone sharing my bed: a githyanki savage and two males who I allow to accompany me for now; perhaps they will make a nice gift to the Matron Mother, perhaps I will sell them to the fighting pits. As for the others, the darthiir made me sick just looking at him, he's in the dirt where he and all his traitor kin belong, and the cleric made a fitting sacrifice to Lolth to beseech her aid.

II like you.

LMAO! I love this.

This is what I have encountered as well. You have to choose the romantic options, for them to take place, in my multiple playthroughs.

obviously you have to choose the romantic options for the actual romantic cinematics to take place.
but if you simply choose friendly options throughout the playthrough and happen to have enough approval, any/all of the companions all of a sudden come on to you during the same night.
There are very few flirting/hinting at romance dialogue options before that night, so it comes as a shock and ruins immersion/the relationships you thought you were building with the companions

Quite so.

I just don't think this is true.

Shadowheart and Gale do NOT come on to the player unless you have already selected romance options. I suspect that which options are considered friendly or romantic is part of the confusion (and why some games now include Heart tags so the player doesn't accidently initiate romance). 'ninjamanced' has been a thing in games for years. And Wyll doesn't romance at all yet.

Astarion & Lae'zel are the only two companions that come on to the player on their own . . . which I think makes total sense for Astarion and well, Lae'zel is Lae'zel.

I have seen many youtube playthroughs (of various games) where players picked romance options and were then surprised by the outcome. They typically weren't paying much attention to what they were selecting. Also it's possible that some language translations confuse the intent.

Really? "get some sleep . . . and try not to dream of tying me up?" "dahrling I thought you would never ask" "unless you'd like another nibble?" "I've been watching you and I like what I see" . . .

It doesn't come out of nowhere, the companions flirt with you and hint that they are interested in you way before the celebration night

Friend zone trigger would be nice. I am still a bit shocked after that queer vampire tried to screw my male mage.

Do you think that will make her MORE of a demanding bitch that you don't like or LESS of one? Being understanding works wonders.

Of course if you choose to suffer through her being even more of an ass then she already is, then by all means continue. I think that might even be your goal. People often overlook how counter productive it is to "be an ass yourself" which causes complication in reality. So simply tossing it in incase it's overlooked.

As for Lae'zel herself, she's a demanding bitch because she's afraid of not being in control. Of having her control taken away from her. I'm observant enough to know how people "tick". But what REALLY nails it home is how she'd rather take her own life then turn into a mind flayer. Her fear of course leads to hypocrisy and trying to kill the party (optional if she's not picked up the first time?) but that's what fear does. Make you what you hate. If we liked her and she was a mary sue we'd probably hate her more. But here we at least have context. Along with Shadowheart (who is afraid and mistrustful for other reasons) and other companions.

Pointing out that fear is counterproductive to making good sex happen. Lae'zel at least keeps hers in check more often then not. Shadowheart on the other hand stalls, hesitates, fixates on negatives... Ignorance (partly from memory loss) also factors in. If anyone is a cold bitch that won't show affection, it's her. Shes difficult for the sake of being difficult due to mistrust. Lae'zel on the other hand will be direct and upfront with you provided you are with her and show you have a brain. And make things happen quicker then shadowheart to boot. Though Lae'zel does have a bit of a closed minded nature, yet she can be challenged and listens to reason if pushed (and your logic adds up). Shadowheart on the other hand is more like to pull "deaf ears and turned backs". Of which can cause more harm.

Personaly I "kind of" like Lae'zel. At least to an extent. But even if I wasn't biased I'd consider her the lesser evil. Shadowheart worships a god that deals with loss (though she doesn't really belief in losing what matters) and this means she's more likely to ditch your ass in a time of need. At least until you get past her brick wall. Where Lae'zel's can be knocked down if you know how to do so, Shadowheart is... delicate and fragile. Weak even. Learning, getting stronger, but between Shadowheart and Lae'zel, Lae'zel clearly has the experience. She doesn't fixate on negatives as much as Shadowheart does. Has more of a "can do" attitude. regardless of what one thinks of her that's something to be respected.

I'll give you astarion, because it's very obvious he's a flirty sexual being. It matches with his character that he'd offer to sleep with you. His advances make sense.
But the other characters? There are still few lines. (Are there more than 1 or 2 SH lines than you quoted? What about Gale? Wyll? Lae'zel?)
And *importantly, you can't say you're uninterested in response to these (rare) flirty lines. No matter how you respond to the above ^ lines, I'm pretty sure if approval is high enough, the NPC remains interested in you. So what happens is: the relationships go from mostly platonic (again, slightly less so for astarion) to bam everyone is jumping your bones during the same night. And as others have said, get jealous if you decide to sleep with others. It subverts any friendships you're trying to roleplay building.

Aside from being contrary to KillerRabbit's quotes, you say that Wyll doesn't romance at all. However, others in this thread say that Wyll gets jealous that the player chooses to sleep with other companions. I'd argue that these two scenarios are one and the same; all the companions are interested in the player, and reveal their interest (through jealousy or "you want some fuck?") in the same night which makes it surprising, overwhelming, and disconcerting.

Either/and:
-all the companions should approach the player in different nights, as soon as their approval reaches some point
-there should be flags set earlier, where the companions are more overtly flirty and you can deny their interest
-the player initiates romance, and after the player flirts enough the npc starts flirting back

The problem is not any individual character. Each NPC can individually be interested in the player, fine. The problem is that all of them are. At exactly the same time.

No there is really only the one spontaneous flirty line, one line if you show interest, the tadpole use which tells you she is attracted and the smile that comes with the night orchid comment. But I think with her the few signs of affection is true to type because Shar isn't a goddess of hope and new beginnings she wants her clerics to embrace loss and sorrow. For SH new relationship is threat to the relationship with her goddess.

I can't really speak to Gale because I can't complete a playthrough with him. He just irritates me too much and I either kick him out or abandon the play-through. Perhaps on final release I'll make a half orc barbarian who is blind to his insults and manipulations. Not saying he's badly written but he's like Anomen -- well written and annoying.

Of course I'll have make sure the barbarian never puts on the band of intellect.

It isn't clear if Wyll is actually interested or if his ego is bruised because you didn't approach him. He seems to be in love / hate relationship with his patron and I'm guessing she the thing she asked for but couldn't give was for her to have his child.

I'm all for more dialogue! Give me walls of text. Give me longing, give me eye contact, let me notice her watching me when she thinks I'm not looking, let me notice body language, let me listen for the cadence of her breathing, tone of her voice, notice the hairs on her skin when I approach etc. But to give us more they would need to move the romance out of camp like BG2 did.

And again, the combination of we may die tomorrow but tonight we're heroes doesn't seem like a bad premise to me.

Don't mistake me I'm not a reflexive defender of devs -- I can be pretty critical -- but I kinda like these romances. SH is my favorite and Wyll's story intrigues me.

You failed the dice roll to get noticed.
You also failed the dice roll to establish trust when logic adds up.
You also fail the dice roll to not be seen the worst of and this creates mistrust.

... Basically I'm saying they better not pull too many dice rolls in this area. It completely takes me out of the experience. It seems a bit much that "understanding and trust" is watered down to dice rolls instead of debates and conversions with real weight that can enhance intimacy. We had that in BG2. Remember how you get Jaheira a necklace and she overreacts and becomes extremely jealous in the drow city? I'm actually poly myself so I'm biased (and I'm also good at addressing such concerns) so I'll start by saying I'm on the "other side of the fence" in that area, but blazes dues it feel "real" and like it can actually happen. And no cheap dice rolls to mask the outcomes of the situation either. You either say the right thing or the wrong thing. You either use good logic or bad logic. No dice rolls. Just "the logic itself". I feel like we might be missing that in places here. Then again not every conversation has a dice roll. But to GET to those conversations you need a dice roll. Unless that's just to get to it sooner and then come across it later perhaps? Someone will have to test that.

@KillerRabbit

I totally agree with you about more dialogue!

And to be clear, I mostly like all of the companions progressions separately. Lae'zel honors my combat prowess. Gale and SH grow to trust me in their own ways. Astarion...is drunk. :P

I just would prefer them to not to all come after me at the same night (as the camp is organized, I talk to them one after another in the span of a few minutes), and there to be more warning/intention on my part beforehand. Not for all of the companions necessarily, but more than is currently implemented.

He's definitely bi a complete whore.

edit: Kind of expect that from older/middle aged(?) vampires though.

Hes the easiest to misunderstand, baring Gale. As for complaints about manipulation with Gale, everyone does it (and most people don't even realise it). He's just honest about it. Honestly think some people are reminded of themselves or past lovers they fell out with when they look at him and project. Gale also has to focus more on himself then others because of the whole "I have a bomb inside of me" thing. Consider that. Sleeping with a BOMB! Try being in that situation and not being just a bit selfish. But he's not that selfish. which is surprising, considering his situation. If I had a bomb inside of me and had no one to care for I might just go BOOOM. So credit where it's due. But getting back to Astrion.

I would say Astarion is afraid, hides behind humor, admits it when you play along or call him out on it, wants to get close to someone and pretends to be confident but when something pleasantly surprising happens he's caught off guard, giving away his illusion of calmness and being in control. He gets flustered easily basically. He's so not used to being with people. Indicates a very isolated nature, which makes sense considering he's a vampire. Only MOST vampires don't get caught off guard that easily. If anyone is manipulative it's Astarion. But he does a very bad job of it due to his insecurities and fears making themselves VERY apparent. He genially tries but completely botches it up. Guess his former master was a bad teacher, eh? This will of course lead to fueling a desire to have guidance with another, which is why he plays along with you. Like when you get him to say please before sex. Or when he goes "Yes darling, that's what we call a lie." I admire his ability to play in tense moments (an ability Gale seems to lack) but I dislike being lied too regardless. At the same time "People do stupid shit out of fear". All the party characters will fall in line if challenged (they kind of have too if your interactions are to go well).

His reaction when you tell him not to feed off anything you can have a conversation with when you're a ranger able to talk with animals is particularly priceless. "You can literary talk to animals!" Poor guy is like a child at times. Throwing a temper tantrum. I don't think he's a fresh spawn, I think he's been very very sheltered and living in fear because of his former master. Leading to lack of experience in many situations due to simply being used. This also leads him to being quite compliment. When the right incentive is provided. Just like me. Only, you know, without needing blood. When you get THAT little you enjoy what you can get and focus on making others happy. To keep getting more appreciated. And Astarion's former master must have given him very little if anything at all.

Funny isn't it. How the hardest of times improves people the most. You can SENSE it with the other characters. But with Astarion you can really see it. Even if we know little of his former master we see a clear idea of why he's affected the way he is. And his fear shows clearly. They really got a good actor playing him.

That video you linked is really on point and I agree with much that you said.

Honestly, the entire debate regarding appearances, usefulness, realism etc in games when it comes to armor feels more or less irrelevant. I mean, we're talking about a world where there is *MAGIC* - if a bikini (regardless of fabric/material) gives you an invulnerability-bubble, then yes - people would use that irl. Or if you randomly got physically stronger by putting on a boobie-plate. People would use that irl too.

The entire debate basically always sums up to "this does not suit MY idea of this universe" - which is fine. But then we can all agree on that it is nothing more than a personal opinion. Which is as fine as any other opinion, of course. And hence, I believe all people should get whatever they prefer. The people who don't wanna use the bikini-plate should not have to, but the people who want to should be able to do so!

Whiiiiich, brings me to what I wanted to say all along but got side-tracked, I really, really hope that "transmogs", "outfits" or anything similar will be a thing (because this was really killing me in DOS2 >.< ). The way our character dress is really important in the aspect of roleplaying - but unfortunately, in a game based on stats and other magical values - a lot of people have to choose stat-sticks rather than their appearance-preferences.

If nothing else, I hope our modders got our back. I really don't wanna have to choose between functionality and style. Would make for a good separate thread!


Edit: Accidentally posted without finishing...

So, regarding the actual topic - I am pretty sure I saw some people witnessing about actually triggering a romance scene with Wyll. I can't speak for myself as I didn't romance anyone - but if I recall correctly, they said that there wasn't any actual sex but rather something similar to SH? Can anyone vouch for this?

I was about posting this video, good to see another Shad's fan in here.
I have played Neverwinter mmo and they have transmutation feature, whcich changed only appearance of armor and stats remind untouched. It was very popular back when I was playing the game. Could be nice feature to have in BG3.

I'm reminded of this:

I laughed way harder than I should've. That is 100% relatable.

From what I've gathered around the interwebs,

I have actually studied art for two years, before breaking off. I've met people who had a very objectifying view of women, degrading even. The industry has is fair share of creeps, because art being subjective, getting jobs & selling can be dependent on having the connections, and so a bad word from someone famous carries a lot of power. It seems to me that your argument is based around "I haven't experienced it, so it must be untrue, and people disagreeing are the ones with the problem."

That is a good surmise of my own interactions with them as well. I don't think Svalr is being disingenuous though. They may be difficult to have a conversation with but I don't think they intend to come off shitty or dismissive

BG3 is YA tween cringe writing to appeal to younger players. And it's awful. Dean Koontz has more to offer.

Really great analysis of Astarian @Taramafor, very insightful. And yes @mrfuji3 -- BG3 like most games has ground triggers for banters but I wonder if they could bring back something from BG2 -- the romance timer. After a certain amount of time has passed conversations just spring up. Gave a sense of randomness / spontaneity to the conversations.

Also had some downsides but I think those are overweighed by the natural' feel it lent to the interactions.

Well I've skimmed the thread and found a serious lack of discussion around the most underrated romance choice in the game, Novice Crusher. Give me more Crusher!

Shadowheart disapproves

yeah, well she also disapproved when I got my freak on with that S&M guy, so she's clearly sexually repressed.

I vote for romancing the skeleton who hangs out at camp. Think of all the bone-related puns!

Welp, she has 'long-burried secret' to uncover.

People have been trying to get at that Sharran Gem but not luck yet I hear

Don't look into to much op.. Its just badly written imo and honestly the nasty hateful companions don't deserve your sexy little dwarf.