I don't know, it has a ton of views and replies. So I have at least a slight bit of hope that this topic would be addressed. But still, this whole thing kind of makes me feel like dirt if Im gonna be honest. I know it's a game, but I still hate this feeling.
As things get longer more people take a look. But - to put this as kindly as possible - that isn't a measure of quality. I came here because of the length of thread and was shocked to find a small number of people who post very often have somehow convinced themselves the poly romance partner is - deep in her heart - a monogamist. But the argument just doesn't hold up.
Originally Posted by Netav
Again, she denies any poly proposal from player with Karlach(she's attracted to her at least) or Astarion. But she is ok with an idea of having casual sex without any hard feelings(or relationship). Doesn't that mean that she is ok with an open relationship, but not poly(she wants Tav for herself)?
Here's a good article that lists was people think of primary partners / nesting paryners / anchor partners. As Tav likes to say "first in my heart". SH wants to be first in Tav's heart:
And using the terms in that list she feels hurt and jealousy with Mizora but compersion when Tav asks about being with Halsin. To me this seems a very consistent poly principle - ask first, not asking is cheating.
Now you are on to something that SH's desire to "first in Tav's heart" is so strong she might qualify as monogomish*. She only wants Tav to be with people who won't threaten her primary relationship. Karlach is a threat, Halsin is not. Note that she also says no to the twins if she and Tav haven't had sex by themselves first. She wants to establish base camp and then go exploring.
* (and if you start doing some research your will *hundreds* other terms
Why do you keep ignoring every instance of her rejecting poly and being mono herself, and pushing your own headcanon based on ONE instance at the start of the game? All while linking some obscure articles irrelevant to the conversation.
She literally rejects every poly proposal in act 2. All 5 options. Thats not headcanon. Headcanon here is only that you assume she rejects it ONLY because she feels threatened to not be first in Tav's heart. Karlach for example is doomed and SH herself shows attraction to her in act 1. All you have for "poly" evidence is her tiefling party line, where in order to make her say it - you have to play dumb, and make weird, not obvious interpretation there.
I don't know, it has a ton of views and replies. So I have at least a slight bit of hope that this topic would be addressed. But still, this whole thing kind of makes me feel like dirt if Im gonna be honest. I know it's a game, but I still hate this feeling.
As things get longer more people take a look. But - to put this as kindly as possible - that isn't a measure of quality. I came here because of the length of thread and was shocked to find a small number of people who post very often have somehow convinced themselves the poly romance partner is - deep in her heart - a monogamist. But the argument just doesn't hold up.
Originally Posted by Netav
Again, she denies any poly proposal from player with Karlach(she's attracted to her at least) or Astarion. But she is ok with an idea of having casual sex without any hard feelings(or relationship). Doesn't that mean that she is ok with an open relationship, but not poly(she wants Tav for herself)?
Here's a good article that lists was people think of primary partners / nesting paryners / anchor partners. As Tav likes to say "first in my heart". SH wants to be first in Tav's heart:
And using the terms in that list she feels hurt and jealousy with Mizora but compersion when Tav asks about being with Halsin. To me this seems a very consistent poly principle - ask first, not asking is cheating.
Now you are on to something that SH's desire to "first in Tav's heart" is so strong she might qualify as monogomish*. She only wants Tav to be with people who won't threaten her primary relationship. Karlach is a threat, Halsin is not. Note that she also says no to the twins if she and Tav haven't had sex by themselves first. She wants to establish base camp and then go exploring.
* (and if you start doing some research your will *hundreds* other terms
But...it's not? Like, just reading through this and I have to say something here because it seems to me that you are reading WAY into what isn't there. For example, the whole 'primary' thing. There is no negotiation there. She isn't setting boundaries, expectations or ultimatums in that conversation because the context is her offering to break it off entirely when the subject is brought up at all. Saying she just wants to be the primary in a poly arrangement, when she doesn't even try to do just that, doesn't hold water at all.
The second issue is you taking poorly written out-of-character moments as not being poorly written OOC moments. The same thing can be seen in the characterization of the Emperor, where if you are trusting or suspicious, the game will always prove you right. Even if you flip flop between conversations, exposing the lack of coherency. SH suffers from the same thing, such as making a quip about relationship drama to my Durge, conveniently forgetting her prior experience with relationships (little) and the fact that she has amnesia. Starting the romance she tells you casual flings aren't a Sharran thing, but if and only if you cheat does she pull a 180 and say the exact opposite. This is not a reflection of her being interested in open or poly, it's the writer bending over backward to 'justify' the player's romantic decisions.
Third is, while you can make an argument for an alternate interpretation of one thing, it does not happen in a vacuum. Further developments and additional context should inform of your interpretation of that first thing, not the other way around, especially when it starts not making a lot of sense or starts reaching.
Lets summarize what we have about poly/mono things in act 1-2: 1.)She shows NO interest in poly relationship if asked directly. Thats just it, stop trying to headcanon anything. 2.)She is flirty but won't sleep with others if not romanced/shows no interest at others. 3.)The only indication that you can classify as "poly" - at tiefling party where she says "not today" if you ask her about sharing a bottle with all friends. But, I may be dumb, how the hell you came into this conclussion. I even rewatched this scene and it's just blatant that she wants you 1v1 and it's funny dialogue choice to play dumb? It doesn't even end with sex or anything.
Lol. We're both "headcannoning" here. We have different interpretations of the party conversation - I don't think it's playing dumb I think it's being playful. We don't see Tav's facial expression but I imagined that Tav was trying to suppress a grin when asking "just a bottle"?
This is what flirting looks like. You are talking about sex and relationships while ostensibly talking about wine.
She literally rejects every poly proposal in act 2. All 5 options. Thats not headcanon. Headcanon here is only that you assume she rejects it ONLY because she feels threatened to not be first in Tav's heart. Karlach for example is doomed and SH herself shows attraction to her in act 1. All you have for "poly" evidence is her tiefling party line, where in order to make her say it - you have to play dumb, and make weird, not obvious interpretation there.
I'm sorry to see you change from a productive, conversational tone to confrontational one. I would ask you to change your tone.
Did you read the article I sent? I think you make some good points but that the nesting partner or monogamish is the better interpretation.
Do I have to repeat myself? You are just trying to headcanon there for some reason. She just rejects every poly proposal. She never says anything about "being threatened", thats just your headcanon here. The fact there is that she REJECTS them, even with Karlach, even after she flirted with all of them(if thats inportant for you). You really don't need more proofs. I'm not trying to be mean or anything, I just see you ignoring that fact.
Do I have to repeat myself? You are just trying to headcanon there for some reason. She just rejects every poly proposal. She never says anything about "being threatened", thats just your headcanon here. The fact there is that she REJECTS them, even with Karlach, even after she flirted with all of them(if thats inportant for you). You really don't need more proofs. I'm not trying to be mean or anything, I just see you ignoring that fact.
I have seen people make that claim in the thread more than once. I think you are projecting. You are accusing me of your crime. You are headcannoning and finding others guilty.
Since I am bit annoyed I'll be blunt - I think your reading of the party event is shallow and your seem incapable of understanding nuance and are demonstrating an inability to read subtext. All forgivable sins if your weren't presenting your headcannon as the obvious interpretation.
This is life advice here: replay the wine conversation but just experiment with the idea that there are layers of meaning to the conversation. "Just a bottle" is playful. Sh response "it's quite a bottle" is simultaneously playful, a barb and a demand for respect "don't underestimate the quality of this vintage - I'm not offering you a cheap merlot"
Second time today: please, everyone, respect others’ rights to hold and express views other than your own.
And in response to a question asked above, no, no one needs to repeat themselves. If they find themselves doing so, then that indicates they’ve already made their point of view clear and it’s time to agree to disagree.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
Cool, we ignored main argument again I guess. Wine dialogue is that she only say's "not today", both side can headcanon this I agree, alright.
Can you tell me what I am "headcanoning" in her poly proposal rejects though? She just says no. "In truth, I don't think I'd want to be your spare lover. I'd always want more of you than you'd have to spare."
*Ahem* (We were possibly posting at the same time.)
Originally Posted by The Red Queen
Second time today: please, everyone, respect others’ rights to hold and express views other than your own.
And in response to a question asked above, no, no one needs to repeat themselves. If they find themselves doing so, then that indicates they’ve already made their point of view clear and it’s time to agree to disagree.
Originally Posted by Netav
Cool, we ignored main argument again I guess. Wine dialogue is that she only say's "not today", both side can headcanon this I agree, alright.
Can you tell me what I am "headcanoning" in her poly proposal rejects though? She just says no. "In truth, I don't think I'd want to be your spare lover. I'd always want more of you than you'd have to spare."
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
Cool, we ignored main argument again I guess. Wine dialogue is that she only say's "not today", both side can headcanon this I agree, alright.
Can you tell me what I am "headcanoning" in her poly proposal rejects though? She just says no. "In truth, I don't think I'd want to be your spare lover. I'd always want more of you than you'd have to spare."
As I've said repeatedly. That interpretation of the words is not inconsistent with a desire to be a primary parter / nesting partner / ect.
You may not like my interpretation but I have responded to that point repeatedly. I think you have shallow reading of the conversation and that my interpretation is consistent with the options in chapter 3 while yours are not. Which is the point of this thread. A small number of high engaged people would like to see their interpretation of SH be the only one.
Cool, we ignored main argument again I guess. Wine dialogue is that she only say's "not today", both side can headcanon this I agree, alright.
Can you tell me what I am "headcanoning" in her poly proposal rejects though? She just says no. "In truth, I don't think I'd want to be your spare lover. I'd always want more of you than you'd have to spare."
As I've said repeated. That interpretation of the words is not inconsistent with a desire to be a primary parter / nesting partner / ect.
You may not like my interpretation but I have responded to that point repeatedly. I think you have shallow reading of the conversation and that my interpretation is consistent with the options in chapter 3 while yours are not. Which is the point of this thread. A small number of high engaged people would like to see their interpretation of SH be the only one.
When does SH ask the player if Karlach is someone to be threatened by? Does she ever ask how serious you are with any of the other companions? Why is she just assuming she wouldn't be the primary partner with Karlach or the others? The player should decide who is a primary partner or not, not an npc just assuming things. If SH is fine with Halsin, there's no reason she shouldn't be with Karlach, period.
Cool, we ignored main argument again I guess. Wine dialogue is that she only say's "not today", both side can headcanon this I agree, alright.
Can you tell me what I am "headcanoning" in her poly proposal rejects though? She just says no. "In truth, I don't think I'd want to be your spare lover. I'd always want more of you than you'd have to spare."
As I've said repeated. That interpretation of the words is not inconsistent with a desire to be a primary parter / nesting partner / ect.
You may not like my interpretation but I have responded to that point repeatedly. I think you have shallow reading of the conversation and that my interpretation is consistent with the options in chapter 3 while yours are not. Which is the point of this thread. A small number of high engaged people would like to see their interpretation of SH be the only one.
But thats headcanon on your side though? What makes you think that she is "threatened" by 5 origins, but not by Halsin? My interpretation about her being monogamous and ok with open relationship is also consistent, is it not? Only that I consider Halsin as a fling. The only difference we have here is that you continue to classify her as default poly, ignoring the fact that she rejects said "poly" in act 2. Her lines about this are as blunt as they are. Your description with different classifications of poly relationships is just an attempt to "shoehorn" her into being poly and thats what I consider headcanon from you. I agree that wine dialogue can be read differently and hence we get 2 different "headcanons".
When does SH ask the player if Karlach is someone to be threatened by? Does she ever ask how serious you are with any of the other companions? Why is she just assuming she wouldn't be the primary partner with Karlach or the others? The player should decide who is a primary partner or not, not an npc just assuming things. If SH is fine with Halsin, there's no reason she shouldn't be with Karlach, period.
I don't think the Karlach bit is well written. In fact don't think Karlach is a very well written character at all. (I know that is a very unpopular opinion)
But the only answer I can give is the one you must also give: it isn't there in the text. SH never says "nesting partner" neither does she say "exclusive", "monogamous" or any other words that would support your interpretation.
But my interpretation is consistent with all of her dialogues while yours is not. And, again, that's what you are asking for, right? To have your interpretation become cannon and my interpretation to be eliminated from the game?
Alright, enough. We're all repeating ourselves. We see one thing while you see another thing entirely. Let's just leave it at that. Although, most people playing the game as monogamous will believe that Shadowheart leans the same way. That's all I'll say.
You are putting words in SH's mouth that are never there. You say she is threatened, yet she doesn't even IMPLY it. So your interpretation is simply headcanon, like you're pulling things out of thin air.
My interpretation is also consistent without headcanon, even though some don't like it. The difference between our interpretations is you try to headcanon her act 2 poly proposal as wanting "nesting partner" or seeing "threat" in other companions to be not number 1, while I just consider Halsin as a fling(He even says that he doesn't like word "relationship" when you ask him about it). P.S.
My interpretation is also consistent without headcanon, even though some don't like it. The difference between our interpretations is you try to headcanon her act 2 poly proposal as wanting "nesting partner" or seeing "threat" in other companions to be not number 1, while I just consider Halsin as a fling(He even says that he doesn't like word "relationship" when you ask him about it).
That still isn't consistent with what's established in act 1/2 but okay lolb
My interpretation is also consistent without headcanon, even though some don't like it. The difference between our interpretations is you try to headcanon her act 2 poly proposal as wanting "nesting partner" or seeing "threat" in other companions to be not number 1, while I just consider Halsin as a fling(He even says that he doesn't like word "relationship" when you ask him about it).
That's right. We're all head cannoning here. I'm sincerely happy we came to an agreement. I can't get the party emoji to show up on this forum so: *party emoji*!
I wouldn't mind some improvements to the dialogue - especially the cringe swan line - but prefer to see poly interpretations better supported instead of having the monogamy path be the only path. Ironically I end the game with a pretty mono SH since my Tav doesn't want to hire the twins, cheat with Mizorra or climb mount Halsin. But I'm glad those are in the game for the people who like them.
But this just doesn't seem like a pressing issue where the endgame does. I want Larian to fix that before the revise the romances.
Originally Posted by Ehhhh123
Alright, enough. We're all repeating ourselves. We see one thing while you see another thing entirely. Let's just leave it at that. Although, most people playing the game as monogamous will believe that Shadowheart leans the same way. That's all I'll say.
Agreed. I will see her as a nesting partner, others as strictly mono. I hope the game supports both interpretations. I don't think it's an accident that mono people see SH as mono and poly people as poly. Is this the best interpretation of poly one could get? No. Is better than PF: Kingmaker? I think so, yes.
She literally rejects every poly proposal in act 2. All 5 options. Thats not headcanon. Headcanon here is only that you assume she rejects it ONLY because she feels threatened to not be first in Tav's heart. Karlach for example is doomed and SH herself shows attraction to her in act 1. All you have for "poly" evidence is her tiefling party line, where in order to make her say it - you have to play dumb, and make weird, not obvious interpretation there.
