Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Are any good alighment companions in plans?

I think it's pretty reasonable to think that Astarion as a vampire spawn is still inherently evil, since while they ignored a lot of rules, they did not ignore all of them. For instance he still has to drink blood or he gets weak, and he can't cross running water. So given the fact that he stil lacts evil, it's not a stretch to say that this rule didn't change. Maybe it did, but we won't be able to know for sure one way or another until we see if there's an ability to make him good or not.

did someone take over your account...? You're speaking style seems totally different now, and lack of emotes is completely out of character for you lol

That is called angry mod.

As much as the mod staff are over-stretched (or rather, under-staffed) and struggle to maintain a presence here, I would like to ask folks on both 'sides' of this discussion to please remain civil to one another, and to focus your attention on discussing the topic, rather than taking jabs at each other or judging each other based on assumptions of personality.

If we look at the reasons behind many of the stated alignments, they differ by creature, amongst undead. Zombies, and the vast majority of other insentient undead, for example, are marked as evil because they are the defiled remains of people animated by necromantic magic; they are insentient (or mostly so0, and instilled with an urge to hurt. Ghosts, by contrast, have the full spectrum available to them because they are the mostly intact spirits of former entities and retain much of who or what they were, including a majority of their personality.

Vampire spawn get the evil tag because while they can and often do retain memories of their past life, they do not retain their former emotions, feelings or empathy; they can, and often do, put on a facade of these things, either in mimicry of a life once lived, or as a means to an end, which is usually sating their hunger, or coveting the physical symbols of the things they liked or enjoyed in life. They are incapable of caring about or for others, and pursue only personal, selfish, physical motives as an obsessive facsimiles of those past feelings. In addition to this, they are incapable of self-direction outside the control of their master, and are only 'mostly' fully sapient; the hunger and the control are larger factors in their existence than their own sense of self.

Astarion's behaviour matches this more or less perfectly, and would give players reason to believe that when he says he cares about something outside himself, it is untrue. Some rules may be broken, but by his behaviour alone, he still seems to be showing the cold, selfish, physically-focussed passion that one would expect of a spawn.

However: As it's been explored, many of the rules governing him have been broken. He doesn't burn in the sun (Larian have acknowledge this as a deliberate change), he is not beholden to forbiddance (they've also acknowledged this). He also does not remain bound to his resting place or the need to sleep under earth (Larian have not acknowledged this and don't seem aware of it), and he has developed a particular unusual vulnerability to wooden stakes (This is ridiculous and stupid, and larian don't seem to be aware of their ignorance). He isn't bound by his master any more, or so he says (we cannot confirm this, but it seems likely to be true).

What does this mean for Astarion's personality? Well... It means that it is certainly *possible* that he has a capacity for change now that he did not have before. For that to be the case, he'd have to no longer bee a vampire spawn in the traditional sense, and it would lad us to ask the question of where his new capacity for emotion came from - the only place it could have come from would be the tadpole, and his transition towards becoming an illithid - they are a culturally evil race, and capable of change, but in them it is so long-term ingrained and reinforced by higher consciousnesses, as to be almost genetic at this point... but it's possible, at least.

So, it's feasible that Astarion may (May; we can't confirm or deny) now be *capable* of change in a way that he wasn't before... but what he shows us is that, vampire aside, Astarion himself is still a selfish, cruel and destructive person, and seems as though he would be regardless - he earns his evil tag by himself even without the vampire consideration - if he is suddenly capable of feeling things and engaging with emotions that he hasn't actually experienced in 200 years, he appears to have decided to continue to be cruel, selfish and destructive, with no regard for the lives of others. (Plot twist; Astarion is really interested in keeping the tadpole because it's been letting him feel things again, like he hasn't felt for hundreds of years, and he doesn't want to give it up... I... could see Larian attempting to run that line...)

I believe i can see where they get it from:

https://www.dndbeyond.com/monsters/17044-vampire-spawn

Stake to the Heart.
The vampire is destroyed if a piercing weapon made of wood is driven into its heart while it is incapacitated in its resting place.

So ... basicaly Toreador stuff from World of Darkness.
Would be cool tho.

That sentence which, if they had read it, would have prevented the ridiculous stake comments and associated murder scene paths? Ya, so... the result is, we have to conclude that Larian either fails at basic reading comprehension so hard that they don't understand what a conditional is, or they care so little about the forgotten realms and D&D that they're wilfully ignoring that sentence and are just running with 'generic vampire lore lol!' because they can't be arsed doing it correctly. Neither case is particularly heartening...

I wonder if this is your idea of "remaining civil" as you requested abowe.

Honestly, if i would be GM, i would ignore such condition aswell ...
Its silly that stake in your heart, when lay in your lair cause your complete destruction ... but anywhere else, in any other case, you just laugh to that. :-/

In my opinion, not more ridiculous than that the stake has to be wooden in general lore. Obviously I haven't tried it, but I would make the assumption that a metal stake would pierce a heart just as easily if not more...
I'm not that much traversed in Forgotten Realms vampire lore but I guess that the resting place part somehow adheres to you giving them their final rest? Something similar to liches and their phylacteries etc...

It's all about which lore you prefer. In Twilight vamps sparkle(!) in the sun but don't burn. In True Blood they are weak to silver which seems to do nothing against werewolfs etc. I've come to the conclusion that Niara cares more about Forgotten Realm lore than you do Rag and as has been established in the immersion thread, immersion is not high on your priority list but it is on Niara's, who in turn care less about game mechanics being potentially fun and comical if they in turn also break the picture she has of the game's universe. In other words...this will be yet another area where you will have to agree to disagree.

I agree with Niara. Lore is important. Create a Star Wars story while disrespecting the lore, and you get the Sequels - 7, 8 and 9. Now half the fans or more hate what Disney has done to Star Wars, and they're trying hard to win them back with Mandalorian and such.

That is what BG3 is doing currently by ignoring certain established lore. I've seen so many posts on this forum and Steam and Reddit with FR fans who are super ticked by BG3's lack of adhering to established lore.

And some wonder why others are calling it DOS 3 instead of BG3.

(To Rag's question) It is, yes. We should remain civil and polite to one another - the other actual users on this forum. This does not preclude being critical of decisions made by corporations, or criticising the game itself in various ways. The statement is an unfortunate truth: either they don't know and don't care enough to check their facts before committing resources, or they do know and they don't care at all; neither is an inspiring situation.

If you look at that page on vampire spawn and scroll to the bottom you see that there is more mentioned about vampire lairs. This looks indeed kinda like liches and linked to the master vampire. The master specifically creates it's lair and it's very essence warps the area.
Not sure if official, but I believe the "stake" must be wood because it is/was alive.

Depends ...
Im not sure if there is any reason explained in DnD lore, but i presume they took this from general folklore (or at least as inspiration) ... reason people used wood (at least in Slavic folklore, as far as i know, feel free to corect me if you have better source) was that dried willow bark was often used for healing against pain.
So people kinda logicaly presumed that wood have some "natural" power to soothe, and heal ...
There are also some sources (yes still talking about slavic folklore) that claim certain wood have power to soothe magic, willow is prime example of them, since that one is strongest.

Also, it would be most likely silly to spend valuable Iron (or Steel) for something so trivial as stakes.
Especialy since people in Slavic history were often burried with the stake in their heart, so logicaly, the more common material the better.

But i see what you mean.

Most likely ... question is if the "piercing the organ" is source of the damage.

I mean ...
We dont quite know how this even work ... Vampire heart dont even beat anymore, so why piercing it (no matter what you will use to do that) even have so destructive effect? Will it have same effect if you would make vampire explode? If you would burn the heart? If you would remove it from the body without piercing it?
And if so ... why?

If i would be allowed to present some headcannon ... i dare to presume that stake through heart is primarily symbolic ... you can imagine it as some part of long forgotten ritual, rest of which has not been preserved ... but this part was the most important.
Or you can find your own explanation ofcourse ... that is one of beauty of headcannons.

Dunno ...
I presumed its just bcs that is the place where Vampire will certainly rest during the day ... so, while they rest ... and therefore are incapacitated ... and therefore cant fight back ... you dont find better opourtunity to easily destroy it than right then and right there.

Could be wrong tho.

This is actualy interesting information (and kinda sad, if that impression is the outcome) since immersion is pretty high on my priorities, one could almost say its on the top ...
I just have a little different approach to it than Niara (and many others as it seems).

Anyway ...
I believe lore integrity is the therm you were looking for here ... immersion seem to be a little different topic ...
In my opinion exactly this is what happens, when player who have monsters learned try to metagame using that knowledge ... but GM is homebrewing (or just slightly alterning, to not be so dramatic) things to make that impossible to them.
In other words, i believe situations like this are exactly the reaspon Rule Zero was created for.

Yup, thats quite possible ...
But we could dismiss any discusion with that, couldnt we?

//Edit:
Good point!
I completely forgot about that one. :-/ Silly me ...

Its basicaly the same reason why Druids dont use any metal armor. Isnt it?

The thing is though, why would you change this specific detail the way Larian has? They've buffed him in numerous ways and took away numerous weaknesses already, yet have given him this weakness that makes him more of a generic vampire, and taken away an aspect that's specific to the lore. There's a lot of stuff that's explained by the tadpole, but not this. In this case of the stake, they just actually took away something interesting and unique about the setting.

Vampires in D&D have always been subject to some genre mishaps. Gothic horror plays by different rules than high fantasy, I think a lot of the 'rules' concerning vampires are there to exist in that context, so they might be less sticky in a more generally-themed campaign.

I also think that the newfound autonomy Astarion has from his master are the reason he acts the way he does, he seems to be interested in only maintaining that freedom whatever the cost. It would also leaves open the possibility for his personality to develop into different directions which I think is what they're going for, tragic victim who becomes either the villain or a better person. That's what I've thought they were doing anyway.

I think you are looking at it from wrong side ...

Its not like i would take all Vampire rules and start striking out wich dont suits me.
(Feel free to ignore this sentence if that is not what you were implying ... but it seemed like it a little.)

Imagining myself in Larian boots ...

I see it more like brainstorming:
Person A: "So, we have this situation where Astarion is caught trying to drink from our protagonsit ..."
Person B: "People were complaining a lot about first scene where they meet Astarion, that they dont have any chance to attack him right there on the spot."
Person A: "I see ... maybe we can do something about it here, they are clearly threatened by him again, lets not repeat the same mistake."
Person B: "Well, they are laying next to the bonfire ... how about give them option to grab one branch, snap it to make it sharp, and stake him?"
Person A: "Wouldnt that kill him instantly?"
Person B: "Yup."
Person A: "Hells, why not i like it ... make it happen."

All im saying is that im quite allright with such attitude.

Both were done just to make him "regular" adventurer ...
Just as with Drow who dont have sunlight sensitivity ...

This seems like pure ballance adjustment.

Well ... i gues you could call it covenience.
Astarion would most likely *never* (or at least not until the end of his story) return to his lair, wich would make him basicaly unstakeable.

In my opinion this opourtunity for roleplay solution was simply too good to be bothered with litteral trascription of rules ...
And while Niara and some other may see it as blasphemy, im honestly glad they decided to allow us to do this ...

Maybe its just bcs i dont have DnD rules so deep under my skin as some others around here, since im still newbie, i play actively just around a year and half ... but my DM (GM, PJ, dunno how you call it) is that kind of person who is often willing to close an eye an ignore part of the rule, IF he likes the idea players get, and the idea makes sense in some common therm of settings.
So im used to this, i like it, and im having lots of fun thanks to that.

Yeah, never seen anyone claim it is tho.

I dont think this is true ...
Nobody say that you "cant" stake Vampire while sleeping inside his lair ... and it would certainly be much smarter approach than going with wooden stake to open battle ( ) ...
This was just opourtunity, and they decided to allow it ... i dont think there is anything deeper behind it.

I mean, if folks don't want to read the spoiler tag and talk around it anyway, I guess I'll just post it in the open, since this is where the topic seems to have evolved to...


Yes and no, regarding the origins of the realms lore – They did 'kind of' start out with traditional vampire folk lore... but they did it as americans in an american setting, which is to say, they started out not with the old slavic lore, but with the generic media vampire lore.

However, from that, in terms of the realms lore itself, it has evolved over time and different editions, and becomes something unique and specific to itself. There has always been an 'origin' point for it, and the general lore of how it works in the realms has been consistent, even if different editions modify the exact source of it.

It's a soul curse, and stems from an original transgressor (most commonly, that first vampire is Strahd von Zarovich himself, but the story has varied edition to edition, and sometimes he isn't); the vulnerabilities and special weaknesses of vampires are attributed specifically to the nature of that original soul curse, and all of the descended vampire progeny bear the same weaknesses as a result; functionally, “It works that way because soul magic says it does”.

The vulnerabilities and weaknesses, however, are just boons to those who wish to destroy them; they aren't the be all and end all, or the only way. Vampires are not some special monstrous thing that is immune and immortal to all harm and death except by these means – Realms vampires aren't like that. They can't “only” be killed in these ways, as in generic vampire lore – Realms vampires aren't like that.

So, what happens if you explode one? It dies, of course. What happens if you rip one's heart out entirely or cut off its head? It dies, of course. It dies just as anything dies when you subject it to an effect that would kill it.

A vampire spawn (not a full vampire), is destroyed if it is staked while it is incapacitated, and in its resting place; these are important conditions that tie into the creature's background lore in the forgotten realms specifically (Ravnica vampires don't have this set of vampiric weaknesses because this is not part of that world's lore for the origin of vampires), and serve as a way of instantly destroying an otherwise tough creature for lower level or less capable adventurers (or peasants). Higher powered characters and more capable adventurers wouldn't need to rely on such methods - it's just a shortcut, or particular vulnerability that this kind of undead has, due to the specific nature of their curse and its origins. A true vampire isn't even destroyed by this weakness - only paralysed until the stake is removed.

If a vampire or vampire spawn doesn't have a fixed resting place, then it must rest under a foot of earth instead, in order to recuperate properly. – So Astarion should be sneaking off each night to dig a little trench for himself to nap in, in which he would be incapacitated until he roused, and if staked when discovered in such a circumstance, would be instantly killed.

If you stab one in the chest with a stake while these conditions aren't met, it won't do the special thing... but you did still just stab them in the chest and they're going to take the damage that being stabbed in the chest would reasonably do, just like anyone else would. You could even kill them that way, if you reduced their hit points to zero ^.^

That aside, yeah – generally the whole 'while at rest' clause remains there because that IS when they are the most vulnerable and weakest; invoking the weakness of their curse directly is not generally going to destroy a vampire who is active and fighty, but when they are vulnerable, and their guard is down, they are more susceptible too having that element of their curse invoked and turned against them.

These are all special and unique things that add flavour and style to realms vampires and make them their own unique creatures, apart from 'generic' vampires of universal media settings; Larian has removed one of them for the sake of a gag, or so it seems... and it's not the only time they've done this so far.

For me personally, I'm going to lose respect for a Dm (or anyone really) who would discard established in-universe lore for creatures out of hand or on a whim, while still claiming it to be that creature, in that setting.

So this:

“Person A: "I see ... maybe we can do something about it here, they are clearly threatened by him again, lets not repeat the same mistake."
Person B: "Well, they are laying next to the bonfire ... how about give them option to grab one branch, snap it to make it sharp, and stake him?"
Person A: "Wouldnt that kill him instantly?"
Person B: "Yup."
Person A: "Hells, why not i like it ... make it happen."

Is what I am absolutely NOT alright with in any way, and I will fight that kind of attitude tooth and nail at every step. It's a statement of people looking to have a laugh and turn a buck, who have no regard for the material they're working with, no respect for it, no drive to check their facts even briefly, and who do not care about portraying the material they're working with (which does not belong to them!) properly... It's disgusting.

How about this instead:

“Person A: "So the player is threatened by Astarion after they try to drink from them"
Person B: "Well ... how about give them option to grab one branch, snap it to make it sharp, and stake him?"
Person A: "Wouldn't that kill him instantly?"
Person B: "Yup."
Person A: "We should probably check that and make sure it works that way, just in case."
Person C: “Oh, actually, it turns out it wouldn't... this might be a really cool spot to show the players that Vampires work a little differently in the Forgotten Realms. It would give Astarion a chance for one last snarky line, too, before they kill him off properly?”
Person B: “Huh, I didn't know that.”
Person A: “Sure, that sounds cool, work on something like that.”

Resulting scene:

Plays as normal, up to the point of the player attempting to stake Astarion
PLAYER: [Lunges/thrusts/surprises (depending on point in the dialogue or bite), and stabs Astarion successfully]
ASTARION: [Staggering back and away] “Oof! Why you little...” [He extracts the stake and we see the PC shocked that this didn't work.]
ASTARION: “Looks like you've been reading too many stories, darling...” [Now snarling and ready to fight] “I think you'll find that the real thing is So much nastier than any fairy tale...”
[Combat begins; other party members wake, but are surprised. They make hostile voice barks about the revelation of Astarion's vampire nature, and join in on the player's side.]

This would be an opportunity to reveal the interesting ways in which realms vampires are specific to this setting, still lets the player dispatch Astarion with relative ease, since they've decided to do so, and it also potentially removes that ridiculous instance of Astarion casually taking the weapon out of our hands as though our PC is some kind of shrinking violet. (As an added bonus, for those still craving some silly – Astarion should take a d8 of damage initially, from the stab, and if the player rested with him very low, this could potentially kill him anyway.) Show of hands from those watching, who would prefer this version, over the current played-for-laughs stake-stabbing scenes? I know I would, even though I'm not generally one for killing characters unnecessarily.

Honestly the fact that he dies when you stab him in the chest, that he meditates rather than sleeping under earth, that he can't spider-climb and that he doesn't burn in sunlight just makes me lean more strongly to the idea that he's really just an elf who sharpened his teeth because he thought it was edgy, but has drunk his own cool aid to the point that he really believes he's a vampire now, when in reality, he's just a guy.... I'd believe that more readily than I'd believe that the tadpole suddenly made him *more* vulnerable to being staked than he was before, while it was removing his other weaknesses.

Yeah, i know.

This is exactly what i find funny ...

Explode: It dies, of course.
Heart removal: It dies, of course.
Heart pierced by wooden stake: It just gets some damage and you most likely start combat, bcs it was "not sleeping inside its lair".
Heart pierced by wooden stake just few metters elsewhere, while it is sleeping: It dies, of course ... instantly.

Just for the record, PrivateRaccoon was right, we dont have to agree on this one.

Yup, you said that before ...
I would really like to know why they are so important ... even tho i presume the answer is simply "bcs book say so" ...
(And that is the part where i would again use Rule 0.)

I presume that you just found especialy strong stick that gives Astarion 100% of his remaining HP will not satisfy you huh?
(Kidding!!! ... or am i? :P )

This is actualy interesting ... is that your headcannon, or can i ask for source?

Well, quite honestly i would like this ...

But i presume they keep something simmilar to option when you fail your atempt to stake him.

This is actualy quite funny idea.

There are some interesting American vampire/undead stories. If anyone is interested, I recommend the story of Mercy Brown. It's a quick read, and it reveals much about human nature.

Mercy was probably Lawful Good, when she was alive ...

That is a good one. Ask a mortician covered the story of Mercy Brown in her channel.

I have read story about lich that became Paladin even if using light hurt him. He was helping people in need. That's why I play as a CG kobold paladin in dnd.