As Umbra say ...
We dont know the full scale yet.
Sure Narator is not (as it seems so far) "a character", Narator represents our mind, our inner voice ...
But if that inner voice, our mind, our memory and stuff are twisted by the power of "some entity" so we tend to like her more, it kinda makes sense to me that voice will talk to us in seductive way.
As I said, (and as you simply choose to ignore, it seems, Rag,) this doesn't matter; the facts of the situation are clear, and there is no 'unknown' information surrounding these:
If: 1) Narrator represents an active force in the game (Which, if it is doing ANYTHING beyond *reliable* external narration, it IS being pitched as; our narrator in this game IS doing this.)
and 2) Narrator is doing anything other than narrating its own direct thoughts and actions (which, again, it is doing since it's telling us what we think, feel and sense, and putting a deliberately motivated spin on them much of the time)
and 3) Narrator is also doing more standard factual narration for us as well,
Then: the narrator is no longer fulfilling the role of narrator. It is an unreliable narrator claiming, external to the game, to be a reliable one, and
requiring us to
accept it as a reliable one the vast majority of the time. There is a contradiction and conflict in the voice role here - a role which, with all of these elements, now needs to be served by two separate elements. This is bad design and bad writing. It literally
Does Not Matter what in-universe explanation you use to justify it, or what elements you might suppose that we don't know about yet... this problem stands external to all of that, and none of that has any capacity to alter these details.
The narrator is not a person; Notice that you're using active pronouns for the role: don't. It's not a person. It's the narration. If you are ascribing persona, such as pronoun identification and desires, intentions, wants, and how characters think of or feel about it, to the narrator, then you are not describing a narrator - you are describing an in-universe entity. The narrator, if it is a narrator, is not that, unless it is narrating its own actions and thoughts alone.
If it has intentions or desires, if it manipulates or spins perspective, then it is NOT a narrator any more - it's a character. And a character is not a reliable narrator and should not be attempting to fill that role; it's poor design.
Basically, there is an in-universe force attempting to affect and influence us; that's fine! That's great! That's not the narrator and it should never be the narrator! The narrator should let us
know and
show us that this is happening, but they are
not the same entity, because one of them is
not an entity at all - it's the narrator. It's very easy to convey these things and still keep them apart; Larian haven't, and this is just plain bad writing and bad design, not an artistic choice or mysterious decision. It's just flawed.
==
Here's something neat they COULD do: Have a new narrator voice for all of the reliable world narration, descriptions of scenes, settings and people; this one should not be dripping with sex and honey, because it is the story's narration. Then, have this second pseudo-narrator voice slide in, full of honey and seduction, all-and-only for the parts where it is actually spinning your perspective or trying to make you think differently about something; because unlike the narrator, this voice is an inner entity that our character is literally experiencing the actions of. Make that clearly distinct, but keep the interplay of the in-universe force attempting to influence us. That would actually work.
Last point to reiterate again: in a player-character driven RPG, a narrator should never,
Never tell the player what their own character thinks or feels about anything. That is for the player to decide - having anything else tell us those things without us first indicating our desire to the game, is the very worst crime a character-driven RPG can commit.
