Man thats why I miss the old BG2 games...you had romance but not like the sex simulator that are games are aiming for now. Hard sex in video game sells. 80% people in RPGs now mostly care for porn, what under pants their wear and if they can masturbate to a customized detailed character they made. Usually first mods for any RPG games...how to get everyone naked. lol I mean just look how popular is a recent thread on UNDERPANTS with boobies and how they changed it in the game with patch 8 ROFL.
In any case, romances in BG3 GO WAAAAAY TOO FAST. Its incredibly silly. But hey, for the masturbating daily gamer, I guess its a necessity in 2022??? When I was a teen in the 90s we had less convenient sources for that. And 56k dial-up wasn't really an option.
May come as a shock, but the modding part was already true back in the Neverwinter Nights / Morrowind days. As somewhat embarrased as I am to know what the NWN module called "A Dance with Rogues" is thanks to my forays onto RPGCodex, there's no denying its popularity in certain circles.
And it is worth noting that the better quality robe human female mages equip in BG1/2, the more pronounced the cleavage would get on the paperdoll. The nineties/early 2000s. And then there's Annah from P:T.
My main question regarding the romances is what would be the trigger for them and how they are going to be handled if you don't do the grove fight at all (there's nothing stopping you from that). It's certainly a strange choice to tie it narratively to the tiefling/goblin celebration at the moment.
... She even considers the idea of a threesome with Lae'zel, but leaves it for another day as a possibility. ...
I wonder upon game's full release, when we can pick origin characters, if I pick Lae'zel, how am I going to romance Shadowheart. I'm going to title Lae'zel "the true conqueror" if she success on SH
My guess is that they system isn't fully developed yet so the triggers and dialogues around it just are not in place and so the options are currently (or at least v7's) completely open. I doubt that when they are addressed this current scene at party will change quite a bit and so I think it's a bit early to say what improvements are needed. It's also possible that this scene is surreptitiously testing player choices to determine interest in each of the NPCs as potential romances with level of interest used to guide how much story to devote to fleshing out the romance tree for each NPC.
Anyway, I think at the very least well get something similar to Dragon Age Origins, or at least I hope so because those felt pretty natural.
I wonder upon game's full release, when we can pick origin characters, if I pick Lae'zel, how am I going to romance Shadowheart. I'm going to title Lae'zel "the true conqueror" if she success on SH
I don't think there will be any difficulty in romancing her as Lae'zel.
I played as a good/nice Githyanki Barbarian and Shadowheart acts very confused when I save her on the ship. Says something like; "I never expected a Gith to help me. Why would you do such a thing?". And as the relationship develops, she mentions something in the lines of; "you've been a pleasant surprise and very reliable. I will have to rethink about what I thought I knew about Githyanki".
Same thing was with Sebille (elf) and Red Prince (lizard) in Divinity Original Sin 2. Sebille hates lizards with passion because of what they did to her and made her do, but she eventually brings her guard down and can be intimate just like any other character.
I also play gith, but as bard and wizard. She seems to be pretty nice to a gith Tav, but just instantly get to hate Lae'zel somehow. Maybe it was because she saw Laezel suggest Tav to leave SH in that chamber, so she held some grudge on her.
Making every romance player initiated seems just as artificial to me as the other way around. Make every relationship idiosyncratic to each character, instead of some meta-textual given, or tied to some bullshit approval system. It's 2022, does anyone still like approval bars and the dialogue choices built around them
Also it's 2022 you don't need to be embarrassed to know what A Dance with Rogues is
OP, you should post this on the BG3 subreddit – if the ensuing reaction doesn’t incapacitate you with PTSD, let us know how it went. BG3 subreddit is the audience I feel Larian is largely going for with this ‘playersexual’ slant, and woe betide any who suggest it should be modified to appear, let’s be honest, truer to ‘real life’.
My guess – and this is completely subjective – is it’s targeted mainly towards a very young/teenage audience. People just starting to get into relationships, or people who’ve never had relationships, and it acts as a kind of easy-win wish-fulfilment. Just beat up a few gnolls and everyone’s throwing themselves at you to the point they’ll even switch sexual orientation.
Of course there are grown-ass adults who for some reason enjoy this too, but then there’s also a whole ‘romance’ novel market – though that does tend to be based on some sane principals of human behaviour: the opposite of playersexual, basically.
It has become a pivotal part of the modern RPG product, so it’s here to stay. I also, way back, expressed derision for what I still feel is an absurd set of contrivances – but now I’ve just stopped caring. Possibly because the entire BG3 story isn’t my cup of tea, so what’s another bit of nonsense in the mix?
I do think there’s something vaguely unhealthy about it, but hardly enough to warp the minds of ‘impressionable youngsters’ who might believe everyone’s playsexual in real life too.
That said, I definitely think being straight has influenced my own narratives and interactions so significantly that only in the la-la land of gaming fiction could something like this fly. So it largely depends on if you care about these characters having any kind of personal autonomy. I would, in most other fiction. In this? Heh…
I think its fine as is and think it's in line with Larian's philosophy to give players as much freedom of choice as possible.
Exactly. Its an RPG game. Players should have as much choice as possible, and should be able to do whatever the heck they want. I'm reminded of Dragon Age Inquisition romance, gender, and sexuality wars, and please... no more... Better to just keep options open for everyone, and if you don't like the character flirting with you just tell them you're not interested.
As for them coming on too fast. SH doesnt sleep with the MC, they just have a private conversation and share a kiss, which is perfectly in line with her character. For everyone it mostly fits their personalities. And for those that does not, well its still EA so they will probably improve it in the final game.
"There are three things that are strength incarnate: there is love of life, there is fear of death, and there is family. A family that loves death would have a strong pull indeed." - Tamoko
May come as a shock, but the modding part was already true back in the Neverwinter Nights / Morrowind days. As somewhat embarrased as I am to know what the NWN module called "A Dance with Rogues" is thanks to my forays onto RPGCodex, there's no denying its popularity in certain circles.
Sex and the Single Adventuress was a surprisingly well-made module, was inducted into the Neverwinter Vault Hall of Fame, and was so popular it even got a remake for NWN2.
I think its fine as is and think it's in line with Larian's philosophy to give players as much freedom of choice as possible.
but this is not the companions' characters.
just because the "convenience", the companions' characters are twisted to be bisexual?
you can not use "relationship" to hit all companions' romance. but you should be able to bind one of them with tadpole or an unique artifact to open the romance that relationship system can not reach.
but you should be able to bind one of them with tadpole or an unique artifact to open the romance that relationship system can not reach.
Just to be clear here... you're not happy with playersexual characters (not the same as bisexual, that's been covered plenty)... but you want to advocate for the players to be allowed to coercively rape their companions. That's an.... interesting position.
I think its fine as is and think it's in line with Larian's philosophy to give players as much freedom of choice as possible.
but this is not the companions' characters.
just because the "convenience", the companions' characters are twisted to be bisexual?
you can not use "relationship" to hit all companions' romance. but you should be able to bind one of them with tadpole or an unique artifact to open the romance that relationship system can not reach.
That is gross and creepy. So you basically want to strip your companions of free will and rape them? That is ok for you, but Player sexuality isn't?
"We are all stories in the end. Just make it a good one."
I think whats needed is actual romances need to play out, music needs to change npcs need to interect share personal stories, like in bg2, aerie sharing her wings being cut of, jaheera sharing her emotions over her husbands death, the music changing slightly sadder, your pc comforting these npcs / or not, and your relationships changing because of it.
Atm you can have sex with someone depending on if you petted a dog and it tipped your relationship just right, its just stupid.
Its like non of the writers for larian have ever played the original baldur's gate.
Can we please have some emotion and meaning, let us feel attached to the characters.
Stop all the simping onlyfangs daddy hellsing meme crap and make something meaningful, that has emotion behind it
So, this thread has responses that run from Sexual Predator 101 to, "but we have to be married, and can't enjoy it". The more I think about it, as I sit here deciding what would be "safe" to say, the more I realize that, in this particular instance, I'd be perfectly fine with "hey, let's have a one night stand. No strings attached, just use me like you own me" kind of thing. I know that will be shocking for some people, especially the "but you're only playing a female character so you can watch her butt pixels" crowd, but those kinds of things actually happen out here in the real world.
I'd still prefer clearly defined sexuality, but as for a deep emotional bond? In this instance, it wouldn't matter all that much. Save it for the late game, like most other games with romances do. I mean, there is one notable exception, Morrigan from Dragon Age Origins, you can have her sex scene the first night in camp. I've actually done it. I didn't know it was going to happen when I did it, it just flowed organically from the dialog we'd been having. What's even better is that the line that triggers the scene "It's cold in my tent all alone" can be met with "get an extra blanket"...
So, this thread has responses that run from Sexual Predator 101 to, "but we have to be married, and can't enjoy it". The more I think about it, as I sit here deciding what would be "safe" to say, the more I realize that, in this particular instance, I'd be perfectly fine with "hey, let's have a one night stand. No strings attached, just use me like you own me" kind of thing. I know that will be shocking for some people, especially the "but you're only playing a female character so you can watch her butt pixels" crowd, but those kinds of things actually happen out here in the real world.
I'd still prefer clearly defined sexuality, but as for a deep emotional bond? In this instance, it wouldn't matter all that much. Save it for the late game, like most other games with romances do. I mean, there is one notable exception, Morrigan from Dragon Age Origins, you can have her sex scene the first night in camp. I've actually done it. I didn't know it was going to happen when I did it, it just flowed organically from the dialog we'd been having. What's even better is that the line that triggers the scene "It's cold in my tent all alone" can be met with "get an extra blanket"...
I realise that people do have one night stands in real life, but I personally dont want real life from Baldur's gate I want high fantasy, and our interactions to feel meaningful , the world is full of instant gratification ( and thats ok for a evil root in bg3)
but as a player , I think we deserve music like this
and Depth and emotion to our characters, some could be one night stands like lazel. but why is bg3 not tapping in to the npc reactions that bg2 has, whats the point of taking the baldur's gate name if they dont want to capture any of the same feeling the original games tried to portray? I personally think they should try recapture what bg2 tried to do.
I wonder if having two different systems would be more effective. One measuring Respect/Friendship, based on day to day conversations. Another measuring Affection, based on plot points that are heavily connected to each companion. Disagreement with another's choices and how you personally feel about them aren't always the same thing. I still think each companion should have preferences, but at any good party, between alcohol, the mood, passion and excitement, even shy wallflowers can be swept up in the moment.
Balance is more than light and dark, more than sin and virtue.
So, this thread has responses that run from Sexual Predator 101 to, "but we have to be married, and can't enjoy it". The more I think about it, as I sit here deciding what would be "safe" to say, the more I realize that, in this particular instance, I'd be perfectly fine with "hey, let's have a one night stand. No strings attached, just use me like you own me" kind of thing. I know that will be shocking for some people, especially the "but you're only playing a female character so you can watch her butt pixels" crowd, but those kinds of things actually happen out here in the real world.
I'd still prefer clearly defined sexuality, but as for a deep emotional bond? In this instance, it wouldn't matter all that much. Save it for the late game, like most other games with romances do. I mean, there is one notable exception, Morrigan from Dragon Age Origins, you can have her sex scene the first night in camp. I've actually done it. I didn't know it was going to happen when I did it, it just flowed organically from the dialog we'd been having. What's even better is that the line that triggers the scene "It's cold in my tent all alone" can be met with "get an extra blanket"...
I realise that people do have one night stands in real life, but I personally dont want real life from Baldur's gate I want high fantasy, and our interactions to feel meaningful , the world is full of instant gratification ( and thats ok for a evil root in bg3)
but as a player , I think we deserve music like this
and Depth and emotion to our characters, some could be one night stands like lazel. but why is bg3 not tapping in to the npc reactions that bg2 has, whats the point of taking the baldur's gate name if they dont want to capture any of the same feeling the original games tried to portray? I personally think they should try recapture what bg2 tried to do.
Perhaps you should read the post you quoted again?
So, this thread has responses that run from Sexual Predator 101 to, "but we have to be married, and can't enjoy it". The more I think about it, as I sit here deciding what would be "safe" to say, the more I realize that, in this particular instance, I'd be perfectly fine with "hey, let's have a one night stand. No strings attached, just use me like you own me" kind of thing. I know that will be shocking for some people, especially the "but you're only playing a female character so you can watch her butt pixels" crowd, but those kinds of things actually happen out here in the real world.
I'd still prefer clearly defined sexuality, but as for a deep emotional bond? In this instance, it wouldn't matter all that much. Save it for the late game, like most other games with romances do. I mean, there is one notable exception, Morrigan from Dragon Age Origins, you can have her sex scene the first night in camp. I've actually done it. I didn't know it was going to happen when I did it, it just flowed organically from the dialog we'd been having. What's even better is that the line that triggers the scene "It's cold in my tent all alone" can be met with "get an extra blanket"...
I realise that people do have one night stands in real life, but I personally dont want real life from Baldur's gate I want high fantasy, and our interactions to feel meaningful , the world is full of instant gratification ( and thats ok for a evil root in bg3)
but as a player , I think we deserve music like this
and Depth and emotion to our characters, some could be one night stands like lazel. but why is bg3 not tapping in to the npc reactions that bg2 has, whats the point of taking the baldur's gate name if they dont want to capture any of the same feeling the original games tried to portray? I personally think they should try recapture what bg2 tried to do.
Perhaps you should read the post you quoted again?
nah im good thanks. your happy for no deep bond , save it for later romance can come later, i personally think thats rushing, check out my first sentence "I realise that people do have one night stands in real life, but I personally dont want real life from Baldur's gate I want high fantasy"
nah im good thanks. your happy for no deep bond , save it for later romance can come later, i personally think thats rushing, check out my first sentence "I realise that people do have one night stands in real life, but I personally dont want real life from Baldur's gate I want high fantasy"
hopefully this clears things up for you
Except that you aren't "good". You latched on to one part of the comment, and ignored the context in which it was offered because you don't want real life from your video game. That's great. It doesn't do or say anything about what I actually said, however. So, to be clear, in this party after the grove, I'm fine with a one night stand. It's cool that you don't want real life bleeding in to your video game, but that doesn't change the fact that these characters are supposed to be representing people, and while I would prefer that they have their own sexual identities, people will do these kinds of things, some more often than others.
So am I to understand that there are no one night stands in high fantasy? So, no brothels, no hookers walking the streets of Baldur's Gate, or any other cities? Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it doesn't, or can't, belong there. It's high fantasy, there's a good chance that it's more common than it is in real life.
![[Linked Image from bg3.wiki]](https://bg3.wiki/w/images/thumb/d/d4/Minthara_Approval.png/26px-Minthara_Approval.png)
