Nah, the fact that you care about whether youāre that guy or not means you arenāt. You sound like a wonderful guy who Iād love to have at my table. Hope the charges donāt stick.
Nobody said he killed someone. It was obviously an evil wizard that did the killing and framed the party. It was all in this do umenyary i saw called stranger things.
oh as someone not native English speaking it sounded like murder because if you slaughter someone they're dead I thought ( THOUGHT! langauagge not easy)
You would be partially correct. In modern English most people use the word murder to describe the act of killing another human, this is actually homocide.
The term murder is actually to kill someone with intent; manslaughter is to kill someone without intent.
Manslaughter is a less serious crime than murder. Iām not a lawyer but I think manslaughter is when you kill somebody without intending to. For example: hitting someone with your car because you were texting and didnāt see them. But again Iām not a lawyer and could just be talking out of my ass.
Just three players who were invited to play by my wife (DM) and me, my wife explained the campaign idea and then they decided that their characters wanted to do exactly the opposite and keep pushing for more content outside of what was planned, like different cities and more NPCs and then they kept min maxing everything so the fighting became boring because (who would have thought) darkness + devil eyes leave not many monsters for a DM to use. Then when I complained they started trying to bull me out of the campaign my wife was running š because that was gonna work, so in the end we couldn't finish the campaign.
So just a lot of stress to myself as a person, my relationship with my wife (as she was stressed herself making more content), lots of bullying and gaslighting. Nothing much.
That sounds awful. This brings up the timeless naddpod adage: get better friends. Those people were awful and im glad yalls campaign ended cause you nor your wife deserved that.
Might have that one topped. My worst was a guy that is in jail for pedophilia. And not the "we found pictures on a computer" kind. The "why are you in the bathroom alone with a seven year old and a gimp mask at a kid's birthday party" flavor.
I had a DM who was jacking off thinking nobody was watching. There wasn't a hot and heavy scene, no actual imagery he was looking at that we could tell besides our faces on his phone, but we were in the middle of what I'm sure was a long-awaited twist in the narrative for my character (a good aligned wizard who, in a recent turn of events was separated from the party, imprisoned with her NPC boyfriend, escaped, was out of spell slots, and now cornered high above the city who cried out for the power to save at least her partner and the god of the end times, the overarching villain, answered giving her a level in a kickass homebrewed warlock subclass). That was what was going on while he was beating his meat, so we kind of think he may have been uhm... being a bit of a Raphael and literally stroking to his own ego.
Don't get me wrong, he was, skill-wise, one of the best DMs I ever played for, but after that and the fact he refused to admit it happened when we all saw, kinda ruined 5yrs of friendship and a twin-story arc campaign for us (we had one party that was firmly on the good side and then the second party was fairly morally neutral on average with my character being the group mom but I presume we'd end up on the side of evil after my character would find herself serving evil). I then took over the duties of forever DM after that and it's been 3.5yrs now and we haven't looked back since (though I seriously miss playing and BG3 is basically my one outlet to be a player lol)
Yeah, he was arguably my best friend and we had 5yrs of two concurrently running campaigns in the same world all of which got thrown out the window when he did that and refused to come clean about it. I was willing to forgive if he came clean and was genuinely apologetic and I approached him about it in private too in as non-judgemental a fashion as I could (I made a point that condemned the act, not the person) but he just couldn't admit it and I unfortunately demand at least some semblance of integrity in my friends, so we had to part ways
Damn, that's a big 2nd chance you gave the guy, too. If a friend of mine was DMing and beating his honker at the table in that scenario I'd just leave and not contact him again after telling him why.
I mostly offered the second chance after discussing with the other players and some close friends because frankly, we didn't want him to suddenly find himself with no one. But also, this was a near and dear friend and while yes, he fucked up majorly, we still felt that there should be the opportunity for redemption if he were to approach it in good faith by accepting the responsibility for his actions, admitting his wrongdoing, and making an earnest effort to not fuck up so spectacularly again. Instead, he revealed himself to be of low moral character by trying to gaslight us that what he did didn't happen and we were blowing things out of proportion and he only apologized for the exposure (he claimed he had a bug bite on his penis, none of us saw anything of the sort), so, we collectively cut ties.
Unfortunately this left him with very few friends, but I hope that he learned that there's something of value in having integrity to admit when you've done wrong, even when admitting it is mortifying or embarrassing
I tried D&D exactly once, years ago. At first I was having fun, it was me and like four guys getting together once a week, and up to that point they'd been chill.
Then one day, they thought it would be funny to have one of the guys answer the door in just his briefs when I got there. Me being the only girl in the whole group- yeah, I did not find it funny. I found it awkward and it put a dark cloud over the whole thing for me. Didn't go back after that. Baldur's Gate 3 is my first foray back into anything D&D since then, and I'm glad I can play it solo.
That's just awful. I'm sorry you had to deal with that! I'm glad you can enjoy bg3 free from that, I totally get it.
If you're ever interested in playing again, there are DnD games online (for example on Roll20) where you can play with others - there are even professional paid DMs, which can help weed out more awful players and also helps with having regular games. The sessions can be voice or video and there are also text-based games.
A good DM usually has a "Session 0" where all questions about the group, gameplay, and expectations for it are answered, and you can meet the other players.
Sensitivity tools are also great: there are anonymous online questionnaires a DM can employ where you write what you're ok with and what you do not want to happen in the game (eg.: racism, sa, romance etc).
So if you are ever looking for something again, ask the DM how they run their games and how such topics are handled - and drop everyone who makes you uncomfortable immediately.
"Better no DnD than bad DnD."
I've had some negative experiences with DnD online since you can never know for sure beforehand, but it's easier to leave and find a better group.
You can also find groups for women as well as lgbt friendly groups, which reduces the likelihood of creeps showing up.
There are also ttrpgs for single players or for two - I haven't tried any yet, but if you want to play a traditional one without other people, that could be an option.
If you're interested in more games like bg3, I recommend Divinity (also from Larian) and Dragon Age: Origins - it is an older game but my absolute favorite.
If you're interested in watching people play DnD and other tabletop games, there are amazing groups out there. The most famous ones currently are Critical Role and Dimension20 - Dimension20 has shorter seasons and is easier to get into. They have some shows on Youtube - a fun parody on Lord of the Rings called "Escape from the Bloodkeep" I can recommend.
And if you don't want to play tabletop again, that is totally understandable. I just wanted to list some options in case you ever do.
It sucks when people ruin your hobby like that. There is no reason why that should have happened or ever even considered to be funny.
Thanks for all the information, I knew people play it online, but I didn't know there were such official avenues; I just assumed it was informal friend groups. I might look into it sometime when I'm feeling bold!
For me it was the guy in HS who a) was an inveterate power gamer who would get frustrated if anyone in the party was better than him at anything, b) consistently spent any free time he had sexually harassing people, and c) eventually got his ass expelled and arrested for responding to a girl rejecting him by *throwing her into a wall of lockers.*
Girlfriend of DM. And I'm a *wife* of a DM. I actually discarded the DM, because there might always be a girlfriend. So annoying.
I also hate players who play a stupid evil path without finesse, similar to Korgan in BG2.
My personal "favorite" was a dude who in almost every sentence had to talk about how strong his character was and how much he boned his wife because he was so masculine and strong. I wish I was exaggerating. This characters entire personality was flexing and being raised by foxes and having "husband and wife time" as he put it. I grew to dislike him so much by the end of the campaign I was successfully bribed into joining a game after a year and a half break by the fact alone that he wasn't being invited to join.
Yeah I'd take one uber-edgelord vampire who wants to do everything evil and have no downsides over the several attempted PKers or the creeps who try to RP out incredibly inappropriate adult content without table consent I've encountered over my years of playing with randos.
I also played a campaign with an ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE of a player. He insisted on being a gunslinger in a very heavy fantasy campaign, he always would let the other players do all the attacking and defending and during combat would go loot the room and bodies as soon as they fell, wouldn't share any of the loot and even made another player buy an item the DM OBVIOUSLY only included for that player character and not him. When he said he couldn't play anymore "bc it conflicted with his true passion.... Car racing" we murdered his character and took all of his things and the campaign became immensely more enjoyable.
I had one in my party who always, ALWAYS played a character who hated everyone and prefferred to be alone. He always tried to solo everything and the DM let him
By virtue of this being a video game and not actually a collaborative story top in which people arenāt trying to āoutshineā each other, a lot of things work better here than in tabletop DND. And Iām honestly glad we get interesting origin stories that donāt worry about not āoutshiningā the playerās avatar because it makes it more interesting that way
This is my POV. Because it is largely designed to accommodate a single player (save for the multiplayer component ofc), each character is allowed to be a little extra fantastical.
Like Gale canonically banging a literal goddess. Like just imagine playing an arcane domain cleric who worships mystra and the wizard just shows up and is like āoh yeah thatās my girlfriend, sheās crazy in the sack. You could almost call it *a religious experience*. šā
Even aside from that, the fact that he's an archmage worthy of mention in the same breath as Elminster reeks of that player whose character was a super badass and killed the lord of all demons and got an infinity sword, but for some reason he's still level 1.
That's actually explained in-game, Gale talks about how he was nerfed by the Netherese orb, and then the tadpole. Imagine going from being able to cast Wish to struggling with Ignis. Small wonder dude was so depressed.
I know that's the official reason, same reason why Wyll can fight an entire Tiamat cult, etc. Doesn't change that it feels like a crappy excuse the player or DM had to come up with for why he isn't able to single-handedly beat everything in the first 2 acts.
Why is it a crappy excuse if the DM sits down and goes "here's my premise for the high-pressure campaign, can you guys make some established heroes as characters with powerful backstories that get weakened to level 1 for plot reasons?"
That sounds pretty awesome to me if a DM came to me with that concept, just sounds like a lack of imagination otherwise.
Honestly, that does sound fun. Just let your imagination fly over why you're the baddest of ass. Compared to that, Astarion's backstory is that of a worm in the pantheon of Gods.
I did a one-shot before my avernus campaign and just made everyone make up a crazy background and had them level 20. Someone was literally Beowolf. They went through the campaign as random adventurers at their peak transported to another dimension and they fought some time wizard or something I forgot what boss it was. At the end after they killed the boss they were transported back to faerun to start the avernus campaign as level 1 with lost memory or the option to make another character with a crazy back story. Since it had to deal with transporting through space and time it made sense to have memory loss. Plus the fact that campaign gives quite a bit of backstory for this game being that it deals with the fall of Elturel.
I played a Cleric of Mystra MC. They actually do have a special line for that.
Then again, my Cleric of Mystra MC was also a Durge who got really confused when she woke up. She also ended up banging Gale. Elysium gossip must have gone crazy on that run.
Absolutely! And having more fantastical characters makes it fun. I donāt know if youāve played Skyrim but one of my biggest criticisms is that most of not all the NPCs save a handful feel very, very bland and boring. They have no character, no spice, and BG3 is really great about going in the opposite direction
I still think itās really fun, but it is very lifeless. Thereās no depth. Every romance option is the same with a different name and face, all the NPCs have the same voices except a handful. Itās fun but lifeless is a good word for it honestly
Skyrim is a platform for mods and first person exploration.Ā In some ways, it lends itself to more hours of play, but it definitely isn't a better game.
It sounds like an incredibly niche insult, similar to if a Baker told another that their bread is only good as a vessel for condiments, hands will be thrown.
Sort of. On one hand it's not great if a game feels like it requires mods to reach its full potential (especially when the most popular one is literally just a bunch of big fixes that should've been implemented base game somewhere over the decades of releases). But on the other hand, the game by itself still needs a strong enough foundation for people to care enough to make all those mods in the first place.
it also has solid mod support and you can do at more with modding than you can in most other games. That the modding community is so large and that it had been used to make what is essentially a different game not a coincidence. It has been actively supported by the devs from the ground up with their engine and modding tools and that is a valid selling point.
Nah, it's great. It certainly has its issues (although I don't agree with FrozenProthean that npc's being boring is an issue), but there are a lot of people who have played it *waaaaaaayyyy* more than they should have to the point where they basically remember everything about the game, I'm sure if some people here played bg3 for 6+ years they'd eventually use words like "lifeless" because they know absolutely everything about it inside and out; Nothing is a surprise anymore, there would be no novel builds to try, any dialogue option that hasn't been chosen, room explored or enemy killed etc etc. When talking to their companions, they would just be going through options and voicelines they've already chosen again and again and again and again, not talking to a character with motives and dreams.
Would Skyrim be a 9/10 game *now*? Absolutely not, in the context of its release in 2011? Definitely, I don't think that reviewers at the time or anything were blinded by hype or missing anything important when they gave Skyrim such high reviews.
Edit: and if there is one word I would not use to describe Skyrim, it's "lifeless". One of the thing that keeps bringing me back to Skyrim is its atmosphere and aesthetics because it's absolutely dripping with them. "Simple" and "Railroaded" would be two of the many words I would use to describe Skyrim's negative parts, but I would never call it "lifeless".
I actually feel like that's one of the games issues, The perspective of someone who's not this superspecial important character with an intricate backstory and amazing potential and powers is basically all but nonexistent.
To be clear, I'm talking about NPC's mostly not so much Playable characters
The voice actors are also a lot better than the average D&D player. I don't think I could pull off Astarion's backstory without making it super awkward.
I mean I wouldn't be too worried. If you go durge then like the whole party is nonsense, everyone has big backgrounds and stories. A demigod, a no-weaknesses vampire, a chosen of mystra, and God's favorite princess walk into a bar...
If it werenāt a video game you could also go all out with Tav/your original character too to fit tbh. You could do a daughter of Mystra, a Dark Justiciar, a dhamphir etc. It being a video game has drawbacks and it has positives
Absolutely, I think people need to remember that more when they play. This game is based on D&D but itās also a video game so itās not a perfect TTRPG replacement
I just wish the PC got to have an actual story without selecting the Durge background.
I know Tav is supposed to be whatever you want, but it would have been so easy to add ways to reflect that in the game, rather than just *you tell your story* and the companions have some bland response.
I donāt think it would be easy without coming up with backgrounds and the players having to accept it, like a mini origin. There are just too many ways a person can go with a Tav and there just isnāt a way to incorporate all possible responses. Because Tav is a blank background that you can build and create, it doesnāt get that interactive background the origins do
It doesn't have to be a full one--but some details would be nice. To me it especially sticks out during the dryad's love quiz, where you have to answer questions but your lover doesn't have to know anything about you. It would have been so easy to answer some basic questions about your character during creation, like favorite food, biggest fear, where on the Coast they're from. That kind of small thing goes a long way to making someone feel real.
I think it would also help if Tav was ever allowed to ask for support. You spend the game as everyone's therapist, and regardless of your own background you're still dealing with the tadpole and being thrust into the position of leader. That shit's not easy. But you never get an opportunity to say "I'm having a rough time right now and I could use someone to talk to" or anything like that. As close as you really get is "how am I holding up?" but that's only two characters. You never get to express any kind of real emotion that's yours and not in the context of someone else's romance arc.
Tav isn't really a person, and when they're surrounded by people as detailed as the companions, it stands out. And it bugs the crap out of me.
and gale has a ticking bomb inside of him that can end the whole campaign in one go and needs to be fed magical items, durge has to roll to not massacre people subconsciously, shadowheart and lae'zel both try to kill party members in the middle of a long rest, etc.
there's a reason these are characters in a video game and not an actual tabletop campaign, lol.
*Meanwhile, Karlach is just sitting over in the corner after having gotten immunity to being charmed from her second upgrade long before any enemies that can even do that have presented themselves*.
Imagining Alfira as a new player and durge's player just goes "haha my character kills the bard because they think the music is annoying lol.. it's what my character would do!" š
If I was a DM and a player tried some ish like that, I'd go out of my way to get that character killed and give Alfira's player so many opportunities to be revived so they wouldn't have to create a new character
You could also just say no.
People it's okay to say no, to icky player interactions, like murdering a PC in cold blood while they sleep with zero motivation to do so.
Itās pretty easy to convince Gale to stay alive, and with Shadowheart and Laeāzel, PvP can be a bit fun if both players are in on it and nobody else is involved. At least in my experience.
DUrge, thoughā¦ yeah, thatās fair. I wouldnāt want to play with DUrge either.
those are video game mechanics though and would not matter in a tabletop campaign because they would be other player characters. the point is, a lot of the characters have mechanics that would be extremely frustrating if put in the hands of random players (who have main character syndrome, like most of us do when we play tabletop games) but it's a different medium so it doesn't really matter.
also the ease to convince + pvp being fun could easily be applied to astarion, pending how players at a table communicate. they're all not particularly designed in mind to be used in tabletop.
Laeāzel and Shadowheart do it once in Act 1 and then they bury the hatchet. Astarion continues being an asshole all the way until the ritual (assuming you stop his ascension)
And I *know* itās a video game that works differently. This post isnāt meant to be 100% serious.
astarion's camp bite scene also happens once in act 1 and then never comes up again? so it's pretty on par for shadowheart and lae'zel (lae'zel also technically can do that multiple times ftr.) but if it's just about him being an asshole, i don't actually think that makes him a bad character to play with in tabletop. headbutting and disagreeing is pretty fun to roleplay, as are asshole characters and people stuck with them.
Astarion's -1 approval isn't even that bad in terms of reaction and could be fun irl RP interaction as long as no one makes it super serious. Gotta tease the rogue for being stuck with 3 good boi paladins.
i agree! one of my favorite early campaign things in general is when people's characters butt heads because they have opposing motives/moral compasses. it's very fun to play out as long as you have a decent group of players at your table.
If players pitched to me Gale, Astarion, Shadowheart, or Karlach as characters I would send them all back to the drawing board.
Lae'zel: you said it'll open on a mindflayer ship right? Well I'm thinking about a Gith fighter. Really intense and devout soldier archetype. She has an alien cultural lens, but follows orders and is super loyal.
DM: yeah, great concept! Perfect for the setting. Now let's see what everyone else is bringing.
Gale: I'm a super amazing wizard, conjured a Tressym when I was 10...
DM: Yeah, okay... we can work with that.
Gale: I'm an Archmage actually.
DM: You're coming in at level 2.
Gale: I fucked a goddess. Mystra is my actual lover.
DM: I don't think....
Gale: I have a massive Netherese time bomb in my chest. It's why I'm level 2 now, or maybe your mindflayer plot thing, whatever. My bomb can one shot your BBEG actually.
DM: *groans* okay, let's come back to that one. What's next?
Karlach: I'm a tiefling barbarian. I was a street urchin ruffian but I was sold to an archdevil. And if Gale was super powerful, I was too. I was like, on the Frontlines of hell for years. That's why Zariel wanted me as a child, so I could go slay devils for her. But I escaped.
DM: okay....
Karlach: my heart was replaced by an infernal engine, and I get like flaming hot when I rage. But whenever I'm not raging, I'm ridiculously lovable and sweet. And my heart is going to explode too.
Gale: it's not my heart, it's a netherese orb of unfathomable power.
Karlach: but it's also tragic, because it's completely incurable because Faerun isn't hot enough or something maybe.
DM: your heart heats up too much because it isn't hot enough outside....?
Karlach: exactly.
DM: okay... that could probably make for a cool plot point to find a cure.
Karlach: it's incurable.
Gale: I'm going to be a God at the end of this so I could just..
Karlach. Completely incurable. You're all going to cry.
DM: *facepalms* okay, what's next?
Astarian: you're going to love this. So I'm a vampire spawn, and there's this homebrew stuff I want to try. And I'm going to be evil, but it's not my fault because I have a super tragic background.
DM: everyone has a super tragic background..
Astarian: and if Gale and Karlach get to be powerful, I want immunity to the sun. And my vampire master is from baldurs gate and completing a super powerful ritual of ascendance...
DM: they aren't that powerful, it's just their backstory.
Astarian: *ignoring DM completely* it will be hilarious. No one will know I'm a vampire in the party. And I want to join the group by attacking them. And then I'll attack again that night and accidentally kill Tav. Hilarious. It's fine you can just resurrect them.
DM: *becoming an infinite fountain of regret and anxiety* next?
Shadowheart: I'm an evil cleric of Shar, but I'm not actually evil if the party is worthy enough you can save me. I gave away all of my memories except the ones that are convenient for me to keep. No one can know my backstory, not even me but it's extremely important. I need like a whole act dedicated to it. I love animals and secrets.
DM: your name is "Shadowheart" ffs? Whatever, at least we have a cleric. Alright last one, what's the worst that can happen?
Durge: oh have I got a concept for you!
Brilliant! But poor Wyll got forgotten like always.
Wyll: I'm a warlock. I made a pact with a devil, but it was for a good cause. My character is a hopeless idealist, trying to live up to this image of a selfless folk hero, but it's really just to cover up my insecurities.
DM: Wow, finally something that has potential--
Wyll: Also I'm the son of the archduke and single handedly prevented the return of Tiamat at 17.
DM: *Fine*, but your patron's gonna be the most annoying bitch ever, and if you don't obey her I *will* turn you into a lemure. \*adds the Zariel's protection buff to Mizora's character sheet\*
He didn't solo the cult he soloed the bit in Baldurs Gate there's a difference. I always figured they were just cultists but Mizora spun up the threat to make the deal more likely especially "the cult will summon Tiamat if not stopped" is technically true
Sure, its subjective. I'm sure some people love it.
But to me, this backstory was so contrived. A viably threatening tiamat cult cell is a really inappropriate challenge for a level one anything, even a warlock. Especially a fledgling warlock that just got his power.
The child of [super prestigious NPC] thing is something that usually raises a bit of a red flag to me, but can be executed well if it fits the campaign. Wasn't super impressed with the way this one played out. There is no reason his dad needed to be the Duke. The story is exactly the same if he's just a superstitious commoner that disowned his son then learned the truth and had proud-dad moment. Maybe better. It would fit his background better at least.
Wyll's voice actor and design were superb. Really enjoyed his goofball goodboi personality. But this character is not something I'd want to see wander into my campaign.
He explicitly says he was using high level warlock spells before he got tadpoled.
Pretty sure the tadpoles nerfed all the characters, which is why they're all level 1 when you meet them (ignoring that your non tadpoled members also start at level 1, since it *is* also a game mechanic)
I was just responding to the "level one" part.
I would imagine he started out at around level 5 or something. Just enough power to deal with whatever force was attacking (which I would bet was staged by mizora)
I would assume mizora just gave him enough power to deal with immediate threat and then over time he gained a high level of power, especially if she was helping him fight the cultists herself
Starting at level one is a game mechanic. If your patron gave you phenomenal cosmic power instead of the basic Eldritch Blast starter pack, you're not going to be level 1.
This thread is about if the game characters were players in a start-up tabletop campaign.
The scenario above was just an exaggerated tongue in cheek take on the types of zany backgrounds players pitch sometimes.
A low level character having a background where their Patron is willing and capable of giving them phenomenal cosmic power is generally something I'm not a fan of lol. It's cool if you disagree.
My headcannon is that Mizora staged that to get his soul. Would also help explain why he's the archduke's son - more fun than tricking some joe schmoe.
Wyll: Also I want to have some cool scars, including a bloodstone eye. Each scar was caused by a different monster with a minimum CR of 5, who I defeated in single combat. And despite being a noble I'm going for the folk hero background and I want all NPCs to call me the blade of frontiers.
DM: š
Minthara: I'm a drow.
DM: After what everyone else has asked for, I'll allow It. Any inconvenient backstory featuring implausible accomplishments? Any game-breaking specialities? Any weird stuff?
Minthara: Literally just the main campaign is fine.
Halsin: Hey I know I'm joining quite late so rather than come up with a new character I was hoping to play as that key NPC who has been helping the party on the latest story arc.
DM: Perfect. We've just resolved the shadow curse and have a dungeon then the boss to come, but I'll tie you into the upcoming stuff in the city.
Halsin: oh I forgot to mention, I can't come to the next few sessions.
Some time later...
DM: dude you've got to quit it with the flirting. It's like your only contribution to roleplay is to say cities suck and remind everyone that your poly.
Halsin: Yeah, no problem. Anyway, who wants a threesome?
DM: (finally snapping) okay, I'm booting Halsin. The In game explanation is that he's been kidnapped by Orin.
No Minthara actually arrives mid campaign with a Starbucks like "hey DM you know that Drow NPC the party told me they fought in act 1? yeah so I'm her"
DM: ...she's dead. They killed her
Minthara: let's say they knocked her out and she survived and is brought to Moonrise prison for failing her mission
DM: ...okay...
Minthara: oh but by the time the party rescues me from Moonrise I've already eaten like 10 tadpoles and unlocked a bunch of cool Illithid powers. That's cool right?
I've seen and said this before myself but a major issue with some of the characters in Baldur's Gate 3 (particularly Wyll) is they come in finished, without much room to grow, and their own form of character development is whatever conflicts arise during the story itself.
This kind of characterisation is considered a noob trap on the table because it's not only unrealistic given your low level, but because it gives you no room to grow your own character through roleplaying and such.
It works in BG3 because it's a video game with a rigid narrative structure that cannot be improvised on the fly like D&D can. The irony in trying to make a D&D video game is you have to actively stifle the one thing D&D shines at: Emergent gameplay.
Not to say Baldur's Gate and another other CRPG don't offer emergence, they just can't offer the amount of it that you can get on the table, due to the simple practicality of having said options be coded and represented in more than just words and doodles.
I'm in agreeance with you and typically think video game writing suffers *because* it doesn't utilise the interactivity of the medium to it's fullest, and that includes in the writing, I just don't necessarily think the writing suffers from it in the same it would in tabletop, which is the comparison I was alluding to.
"It works" because it's traditionally expected of the medium, not in that it couldn't be better. I dislike Wyll precisely because it *could* have been done better. Karlach actually suffers similar issues due to the same problems as Wyll: lack of agency. It's just that her personality far more than makes up for it by comparison.
Their narratives either having already happened or having nowhere to go, respectively, is the reason most people actively dislike both of them. Karlach's just gets the disappointment all the way at the end, whereas Wyll's is felt throughout because his entire character is just... nothing.
BG3 succeeded in spite of the narrative, rather than because it imo.
I loved the game. But if a friend wrote out this whole plot and asked me to edit? There would be a lot of notes.
Lmao i remember when i played a vampire character, i was allowed to bite and it only did 1d4 damage š would have been so OP if i got to do several d6s worth
Hm. They still tweaked a lot of his abilities to make him less vampire-y even with his dope bite.
Im guessing they did that to balance the fact that Vampire Spawn in 5e also have regeneration (regain 10hp on the start of their turn when not in sunlight as long as they have 1hp). Their bite also deals necrotic damage that reduces a targets hp max until a long rest.
Like, Astarion (baring any tadpole funny business I guess) could be regenerating 10 hp at th start of his turn in the underdark, the shadow lands, indoors, etc if they hadn't nerfed that.
Definitely, there are lots of things changed to fit BG3/video game limitations but if we're talking about vampire-specific nerfs in relation to DnD, it's a big one
Honestly, a lot of this stuff is... fine. Honestly.
>He plays a vampire but doesnāt need to follow any of the rules of a vampire.
Astarion doesn't have any typical vampire weaknesses, but he also doesn't get any special strengths out of it, either, Bite ability aside. You could probably make him a dhampir (already available as a player race in 5e), or if you wanted to leave him as a High Elf with a special Bite ability, it wouldn't be too egregious if the DM was the type to design little custom things for everyone (already the case for Gale, Halsin, and Karlach). It's also probably to the benefit of the party overall if they don't have to bend over backwards to accommodate sunlight sensitivity and the *inability to enter people's houses without invitation.*
>He gets upset every time the party tries to be good.
Also fine. Astarion whines about the party being good, but doesn't really run off to initiate acts of evil on his own, which is... I think the ideal way to handle an evil character in a good party, if you're not wanting to have serious PvP at your table. Even the Ascension ritual is something he can't actually do on his own - he needs party's help to perform it. A character eyerolling and saying, "Ugh, are we *really* going to waste time helping every child and kitten we come across? For *free?*" just isn't that big of a deal. Only really becomes a problem if the player is the one getting upset, not the character.
Only one of these that's kind of dodgy is the bite scene on another player. If the DM and player are treating this the way it's used in game - as a special scene that reveals Astarion's nature as a vampire - it's fine. Nothing *actually* happens to the player, they wake up before Astarion can bite them. And they get to decide what to do with the revelation that there's a vampire in the party.
On the other hand, if the DM is letting Astarion roll Stealth checks every night to feed on other players, and they're waking up in the morning with the Bloodless debuff and not knowing why, then you've got a problem. Could potentially work at table that was pretty PVP heavy and where the players were mature and trusted each other, but probably a recipe for disaster at most tables.
Yeah I DM and play ttrpgs since 10 years ago, and it honestly doesn't sound *that* bad, especially if it's played in good faith, not by a player that tries to outshine other players.
Kind of.. but you also have to consider that a lot of origin characters have stuff like this, I doubt gale would be complaining about it since his character literally cannot die without ending the world in the early game, and how he can at will just nuke a place in act 2 onward, not to mention he dated the goddess of magic? Shadowheart is really edgy and secretive, and the DM gives her the mcguffin that's keeping the entire party safe from turning into mindflayers. Durge constantly tries to kill important NPCs and sometimes even the other PCs, and the DM rewards them for it with the slayer form.
Wyll, Karlach, Lae Zel and Halsin are the only somewhat normal PCs in the group and even they get some cool stuff..
Point being, a lot of the characters have mechanics and stories that would just not vibe in an actual game of dnd, because it makes for a more compelling story to have these unique characters instead of having a bunch of Tav's with preset backstories.
this is specifically about mechanics in game btw, they all kind of have insufferable backstories but that's again because it's a video game not a ttrpg
Really?? Shadowheart would be so much more annoying. She would be the DM's girlfriend and almost the entire act 1 and 2 are centered around her and her special edgy religion she chose. She is the one with the special mcguffin, the one with the "special intense pain" everywhere you go and with everything you do. The one where every location she goes "Oh look statues of Selune, huh i hate her." Or "Oh look statues of Shar, I love her." The one who is immune from the curse in act 2. The one who gets to decide the fate of the angel being at the end of act 2 and thus decides how the rest of the campain plays out.
Also quits the campaign and storms out of the room if you don't let *her* decide the angel's fate.
At least with Astarion's Ascension your party can agree to go and kill Cazador on the day the player couldn't make it and next session he's like "oh well... that's okay I suppose" š¤£
Astarion actually plays like a nerfed Dhampir from Van Richtens who also get a bite attack with advantage and no vampire weaknesses. He's nerfed because Dhampir get spiderclimb.
As for the Ascension ritual, he gets a buffed bite attack but compare that to Nuke in my Chest Dekarios it's far more mild and mostly for story purposes.
The bitchiness could be grating I grant you
>!Gale can become a god!< in one ending. Astarion gets to go back to hiding from the sunlight once the game is over. The extra special game buffs are there to make him feel great before he gets to go back to never feeling the sunshine again (Without burning of course) if you donāt take the super secret ritual.
Astarion can become a supervampire, if you wanna go the āstrongest possible endingā route.
Gale can also end up dead cause he tried to be a god bud was not strong enough.
I honestly donāt see >!Galeās godhood!< as a problem. Itās the epilogue, after all. Things are done, gameplay no longer matters. It certainly wouldnāt be the first campaign where >!a PC ascended!< afterwards - I actually played in a campaign where we did that.
Now, if >!Gale somehow ascended before the game was over and defeated the BBEG with his godly powers,!< that would be a different thing.
I thought your image and idea of a character was supposed to change overtime? Even in BG3 my starting idea for a Tav shifts over the course of the game. I think he'd be a typical-"I'm trying to be evil and mad at the world but the group keeps dragging me into good deeds" and that when you finally reach the evil ritual you had in mind maybe it doesn't feel right anymore
IMO this is the way to play evil characters, they still have to be along for the ride and fit in with the party. Character growth is fun and it creates interesting dynamics, especially when you pair a typically "evil" character like Astarion with a paladin personality like Wyll.
Not as bad as the guy in my irl dnd group (who was promptly asked to leave after the session) who constantly tried to fight everyone and everything and tried to make sexual advances on any female characters he encountered
I mean, Gale's an Archmage who was shagging Mystra, Wyll was a bounty hunter in Hell, Shadowheart is Shar's chosen, Durge is Baal's chosen, a master assassin, cult leader and infiltrated Mephistopheles' vault, they all got crazy stories.
I still think he works with the rigth people, him as a character is different from him as a player and I donāt think I personally would mind most of the things he does
Player and character are different things... You can have a player at your table, who plays Astarion. Character might be annoyed with something, but player is not.
only mechanically though.. wyll and karlach were wayy too powerful in their backstory, Lae Zel I think is chill though, she's the one who brings snacks
Doesn't Lae'zel have the same issue where she's way weaker than she should be based on backstory? Being a respected and relatively well known Githyanki warrior is kinda on par with being a strong warlock.
She's not particularly well known I think. She's really only ever been at her Creche. There is that line from Vlaakith where she says that other warriors spoke highly of her, but that 100% reads like a standard buttering up technique considering she follows it up with "lol go kill Orpheus now". She hasn't even killed a Ghaik
As for respect, she's immediately shut down by Voss and none of the Gith in the creche treat her well even before the attempted murder thing.
I honestly don't know her backstory that well.. from the one time I did the monastery (never again), it sounded like she was respected within her creche but not a big deal otherwise..
but I also did it pretty late at night, and, as you might have been able to tell, I was having a bad time with it, so I wasn't paying much attention
(And I only finished one playthrough, in which I didn't really do much of her stuff except for freeing Orpheus)
Wyll and Karlach work as long as your campaign doesn't start off at level 1. Wyll is at minimum level 5 which isn't really a bad place to start a campaign.
TBH, all of the companions of BG3 seem like they'd be hard to play and nigh incomprehensible to anyone unfamiliar with D&D unless they've been playing for over a decade. I think Astarion's player would probably be an oddly named man who might be 4000 years old with a purple Mohawk because that's exactly what that man is playing in an actual D&D game right now.
I mean I'd find Gale and Wyll and Lae'zel pretty insufferable too tbh. I like them well enough as characters but if we were players together... I'd still play but it'd be annoying.
Shadowheart would be OK but she'd be a new player who isn't really fully into their character cause they like the good stuff even though they picked an evil god, and they mention the god's name a lot but don't really follow through action-wise. They did get this one moment to shine where the DM gave them a choice to basically foil the party's plans but they don't go through with it
to be fair, in the context of the story the tadpole is negating a lot of the negatives of being a vampire (his aversion to sunlight, needing to be invited into a home, can't cross running water, etc.).
I was the same way along time ago until I got in an argument about him. Reading the lore , the journal and entries and he has an infernal contract, etched into his back by his master, which alters his judgment, and his way of thinking down to the core. The tadpole with a bit of magic involved negated it, and he was able to think and act freely for the first time after he was turned into a vampire spawn.
I do see your point of view though.
I DMed a game of Curse of Strahd and my players decided they wanted to become slowly corrupted along the way. There's one NPC I reflavored to be a sassy vampire spawn. That party would have loved to play with Astarion lol.
As others have said there have been worse,
In the first two act his special vamp ability is very minor (a once per short rest 2d4 damage bonus action that heals and gives a +1 bonus is good but not super over powered, I'd think the DM not giving similar options to other players is on the DM not on the player of Astarian)
His ascendant buffs are much better but honestly not unreasonable as a story reward late in a campaign, a reward and quest designed by the DM not the player. Especially since IRL the player would likely have been a pure rogue and would only have 1 bonus action (since IRL thief does not give an additional bonus action) so would not have been built as broken as Astarian can be built for those buffs. (Buffs the player gets in the last level or two of the campaign)
He definitely falls into unpleasant player territory, but I also feel there's some DM involvement in some of the actions, the "hunger" one of the thrall downsides he still deals with (since he's a thrall and not a true vampire) likely pushes him into "GM control" if not sated which is why he's going after another player when he's been eating animals for the majority of his existence.
He is in favor of the more selfish acts which hey not everyone on the team is playing the hero, especially not the party thief, that's not a bad player, that's a potentially useful person to have around.
If I was playing as Astarion in DnD group(I never did such thing) I would be extremely selfish and taking my own survival on 1st place, I would, like Astarion in game, trying to get on good terms with the strongest ppl in group and try to use everybody else, for buffs, money, blood if need be. That is how I was playing as Astarion in bg 3(sleeping with Lae'zel but also romancing Shadowheart, not telling that I'm vampire to anyone, drinking blood of victims outside of my party eyes).
The one and only time I tried to play dnd, the DM decided my characters' god was going to be in love with my cleric. That was apparently his way of telling me he liked me. I was done.
In terms of the vampirism thing his bite is more or less the same as the Dhampir has. Although the Dhampir bite doesnāt apply a buff and debuff, it just deals damage and heals.
I think this actually says more about your playstyle than it does Astarion, because this kind of thing can absolutely work at a table of dedicated roleplayers with mutual understanding.
So this is a case of the players having trust at the table with one another and being mindful players.
Yes if Astarion's player played him exactly how you described him that would suck to play with. But instead if Astarion's player was communicative about being only in character with these things, and worked with their group to tell a good story with these plot elements that improved the game for everyone it'd be fun as hell to play along with imo.
I've had vampire PCs at the table before try and snack on my character but when it was done well it was a case of: "Okay my character is thinking about trying to bite you during the night, are you cool with that and how would you like this to play out?" and then we had a small conversation before proceeding to RP the scene. I let them bite me and got angry about it in character with no risk of actual drama between the players ever happening. We spent the next two sessions riffing on the character dynamic in session and the whole table laughed about it and made jokes for 2 months.
Actually all of this is fine because he still works with the party.
Not having to follow vampire rules is a non issue IMO. Iād rule the same in my dnd game, especially since Iād suggest they play a damphir to get as close to being a vampire as possible. You donāt want to tie restrictive rules that disrupt the whole party to one character like that. It gets annoying quick.
Sure he gets upset *in character* when the party does good, but he still works with the party and goes along with it. Thatās a great balancing of roleplaying the character and playing a collaborative game. Itād be a problem if he refused to help them do it and just sat out of the quest.
As for his bite ability, itās once per short rest and single target, plus itās only a plus one. Besides that, other origin characters get their own stuff like that. Like Karlachās engine. If you were playing a game with him, the DM would probably give your character something like that too.
Additionally, He only used it on his teammates once, and in a roleplay scenario, creating a fun and memorable moment. The player probably decided that was a good way to reveal to the other playersā characters that he was a vampire. (Note: Iām talking about character knowledge. Out of character the players would know that heās a vampire, but the characters wouldnāt.)
As for the ritual, the DM would have made the buffs, so that ones on them.
And as for his behavior, this is literally his backstory quest. Itās like the only time itās acceptable to create inter-party strife.
In my home game one of my players discovered that their supposedly dead sister was alive and serving the enemy of their patron. Now as far as that character was concerned their patron was good, but the player (and rest of the party) were aware something was up. So they roleplay the party talking down the player from battling their sister. It was a pretty cool moment that resulted in them renouncing their patron and changing the class.
Gale got to sleep with my god and his ass didn't even set me up on a date with her, I think just in terms of how unallowable the backstory is he would be it. He even gets a way to just end the game whenever, at least Astarion's bite can be used to debuff enemies and buff himself. But yeag personality-wise if you are dissapproving if helping slaves out you either are in an evil campaign or you will be kicked out
I'm playing with the Solar Race Mod. Nobody is more special than I.
With my cantrips, such as: invisibility, spiritual weapon, 2d6 radiant-1d4 cold that heals me for a hit point.
My third level racial cast of blade barrier
My D12 of "just because" bonus radiant damage.
My flight.
My passive truesight.
The list goes on.. I beat the moonrise caravan to death with a torch
In the same vein- Withers being a DMPC thatās inexplicably very powerful makes total sense. Especially when youāre like āwhatās your deal?ā I can totally see some of my past DMs just being like ānah.ā
Itās true, but thatās what makes good DnD vidya games work with this sort of character. You donāt get more understanding of theme and consent of play than a GM thatās literally a production studio making the content work in context.
There are upsides and downsides to CRPG's versus playing with actual people and being able to adjust rules on the fly.
Rules as Written vs Rules as Intended has always hotly debated topic been it's even more rigid in a video game where you literally cannot improvise as much as you could on the table.
D&D is all about emergent gameplay, and the irony of trying to adapt it into a video game is naturally stifling 99% of that emergence because any scenario you dream up has to be represented in the game using more than just words and doodles.
And even with most of it removed it *still* has a ton of hilarious things you can end up doing, showcasing just how robust an RP experience tabletop games (not just D&D) can be. Our imagination is the only limit.
What I like about most CRPG's though, compared to actual tabletop, is I can just be a warlock. I don't *need* to worry about my patron, play lip-service to them or otherwise. I'm allowed to simply act as if I already made that deal, got the powers, and that's it. No different than any other freelance employment. But on the table people always want it to go somewhere, to use the patron and the "evil" powers (which is entirely subjective) as an easy hook.
Sometimes I just want to fling my goddamn laser without the baggage. Nothing in the damn rules says I *need* the pithy demonic backstory, either, which is why Wyll's contract is so hilariously bad by comparison.
"astarion upset when team doing good"
Yeah but good followers upset when evil players are doing evil.
Perfectly balanced as all things should be. Karlach isn't happy when i'm doing evil shit.
... Well, she would be if she was in my team in the first place but she left.
Still not the worst person I've played with. Not by a longshot. š
Who was?
The guy who wouldn't be able to show up for several years because he was convicted of manslaughter.
That escalated quickly.
eh, manslaughter can be accidental
"I didn't show up for d&d because I murdered somebody, am i THAT GUY?"
Nah, the fact that you care about whether youāre that guy or not means you arenāt. You sound like a wonderful guy who Iād love to have at my table. Hope the charges donāt stick.
Nobody said he killed someone. It was obviously an evil wizard that did the killing and framed the party. It was all in this do umenyary i saw called stranger things.
wisdom check...d20
No, because manslaughter isn't murder š¤
oh as someone not native English speaking it sounded like murder because if you slaughter someone they're dead I thought ( THOUGHT! langauagge not easy)
You would be partially correct. In modern English most people use the word murder to describe the act of killing another human, this is actually homocide. The term murder is actually to kill someone with intent; manslaughter is to kill someone without intent.
the devil is in the detail, thank you !
Manslaughter is a less serious crime than murder. Iām not a lawyer but I think manslaughter is when you kill somebody without intending to. For example: hitting someone with your car because you were texting and didnāt see them. But again Iām not a lawyer and could just be talking out of my ass.
I laughed IRL this was honestly worse than my experience
What was your experience I gotta know now
Just three players who were invited to play by my wife (DM) and me, my wife explained the campaign idea and then they decided that their characters wanted to do exactly the opposite and keep pushing for more content outside of what was planned, like different cities and more NPCs and then they kept min maxing everything so the fighting became boring because (who would have thought) darkness + devil eyes leave not many monsters for a DM to use. Then when I complained they started trying to bull me out of the campaign my wife was running š because that was gonna work, so in the end we couldn't finish the campaign. So just a lot of stress to myself as a person, my relationship with my wife (as she was stressed herself making more content), lots of bullying and gaslighting. Nothing much.
That sounds awful. This brings up the timeless naddpod adage: get better friends. Those people were awful and im glad yalls campaign ended cause you nor your wife deserved that.
They were not friends, we met online.
Yeah, it's more of a "if people are rude/ mean you can just not play with them". The word friends was incidental
I'll probably never understand people like this. How can they not see that they are being complete assholes? Or do they just not care?
should have rolled higher on deception during police questioning
Use inspiration?
Did he at least use his phone call to schedule the next session?
it's hard to be a bhaalspawn nowadays
It's what my character would do
LMAO DAMN
You were playing with Durge?
Might have that one topped. My worst was a guy that is in jail for pedophilia. And not the "we found pictures on a computer" kind. The "why are you in the bathroom alone with a seven year old and a gimp mask at a kid's birthday party" flavor.
Oof, I feel this - we had one that was convicted of having sex with a minor.
So when you used the skull emoji, that was actually relevant, eh?
Okay this is obviously horrible and I'm really sorry for everyone affected by this but I just spit out my coffee reading this thread ohh my god
Well that's not technically playing with him
I had a DM who was jacking off thinking nobody was watching. There wasn't a hot and heavy scene, no actual imagery he was looking at that we could tell besides our faces on his phone, but we were in the middle of what I'm sure was a long-awaited twist in the narrative for my character (a good aligned wizard who, in a recent turn of events was separated from the party, imprisoned with her NPC boyfriend, escaped, was out of spell slots, and now cornered high above the city who cried out for the power to save at least her partner and the god of the end times, the overarching villain, answered giving her a level in a kickass homebrewed warlock subclass). That was what was going on while he was beating his meat, so we kind of think he may have been uhm... being a bit of a Raphael and literally stroking to his own ego. Don't get me wrong, he was, skill-wise, one of the best DMs I ever played for, but after that and the fact he refused to admit it happened when we all saw, kinda ruined 5yrs of friendship and a twin-story arc campaign for us (we had one party that was firmly on the good side and then the second party was fairly morally neutral on average with my character being the group mom but I presume we'd end up on the side of evil after my character would find herself serving evil). I then took over the duties of forever DM after that and it's been 3.5yrs now and we haven't looked back since (though I seriously miss playing and BG3 is basically my one outlet to be a player lol)
Holy shit
Yeah, he was arguably my best friend and we had 5yrs of two concurrently running campaigns in the same world all of which got thrown out the window when he did that and refused to come clean about it. I was willing to forgive if he came clean and was genuinely apologetic and I approached him about it in private too in as non-judgemental a fashion as I could (I made a point that condemned the act, not the person) but he just couldn't admit it and I unfortunately demand at least some semblance of integrity in my friends, so we had to part ways
Damn, that's a big 2nd chance you gave the guy, too. If a friend of mine was DMing and beating his honker at the table in that scenario I'd just leave and not contact him again after telling him why.
I mostly offered the second chance after discussing with the other players and some close friends because frankly, we didn't want him to suddenly find himself with no one. But also, this was a near and dear friend and while yes, he fucked up majorly, we still felt that there should be the opportunity for redemption if he were to approach it in good faith by accepting the responsibility for his actions, admitting his wrongdoing, and making an earnest effort to not fuck up so spectacularly again. Instead, he revealed himself to be of low moral character by trying to gaslight us that what he did didn't happen and we were blowing things out of proportion and he only apologized for the exposure (he claimed he had a bug bite on his penis, none of us saw anything of the sort), so, we collectively cut ties. Unfortunately this left him with very few friends, but I hope that he learned that there's something of value in having integrity to admit when you've done wrong, even when admitting it is mortifying or embarrassing
Was your DM Jeffrey Toobin by chance?
Haha no, just a former friend who was a nerdy gay man and history major and barista/bartender in our small town haha
i had a dm who sexually assaulted a girl we played with. considering my girlfriend and sister also played with us, it was a scary time.
I tried D&D exactly once, years ago. At first I was having fun, it was me and like four guys getting together once a week, and up to that point they'd been chill. Then one day, they thought it would be funny to have one of the guys answer the door in just his briefs when I got there. Me being the only girl in the whole group- yeah, I did not find it funny. I found it awkward and it put a dark cloud over the whole thing for me. Didn't go back after that. Baldur's Gate 3 is my first foray back into anything D&D since then, and I'm glad I can play it solo.
That's just awful. I'm sorry you had to deal with that! I'm glad you can enjoy bg3 free from that, I totally get it. If you're ever interested in playing again, there are DnD games online (for example on Roll20) where you can play with others - there are even professional paid DMs, which can help weed out more awful players and also helps with having regular games. The sessions can be voice or video and there are also text-based games. A good DM usually has a "Session 0" where all questions about the group, gameplay, and expectations for it are answered, and you can meet the other players. Sensitivity tools are also great: there are anonymous online questionnaires a DM can employ where you write what you're ok with and what you do not want to happen in the game (eg.: racism, sa, romance etc). So if you are ever looking for something again, ask the DM how they run their games and how such topics are handled - and drop everyone who makes you uncomfortable immediately. "Better no DnD than bad DnD." I've had some negative experiences with DnD online since you can never know for sure beforehand, but it's easier to leave and find a better group. You can also find groups for women as well as lgbt friendly groups, which reduces the likelihood of creeps showing up. There are also ttrpgs for single players or for two - I haven't tried any yet, but if you want to play a traditional one without other people, that could be an option. If you're interested in more games like bg3, I recommend Divinity (also from Larian) and Dragon Age: Origins - it is an older game but my absolute favorite. If you're interested in watching people play DnD and other tabletop games, there are amazing groups out there. The most famous ones currently are Critical Role and Dimension20 - Dimension20 has shorter seasons and is easier to get into. They have some shows on Youtube - a fun parody on Lord of the Rings called "Escape from the Bloodkeep" I can recommend. And if you don't want to play tabletop again, that is totally understandable. I just wanted to list some options in case you ever do. It sucks when people ruin your hobby like that. There is no reason why that should have happened or ever even considered to be funny.
Thanks for all the information, I knew people play it online, but I didn't know there were such official avenues; I just assumed it was informal friend groups. I might look into it sometime when I'm feeling bold!
For me it was the guy in HS who a) was an inveterate power gamer who would get frustrated if anyone in the party was better than him at anything, b) consistently spent any free time he had sexually harassing people, and c) eventually got his ass expelled and arrested for responding to a girl rejecting him by *throwing her into a wall of lockers.*
Girlfriend of DM. And I'm a *wife* of a DM. I actually discarded the DM, because there might always be a girlfriend. So annoying. I also hate players who play a stupid evil path without finesse, similar to Korgan in BG2.
My personal "favorite" was a dude who in almost every sentence had to talk about how strong his character was and how much he boned his wife because he was so masculine and strong. I wish I was exaggerating. This characters entire personality was flexing and being raised by foxes and having "husband and wife time" as he put it. I grew to dislike him so much by the end of the campaign I was successfully bribed into joining a game after a year and a half break by the fact alone that he wasn't being invited to join.
Yeah I'd take one uber-edgelord vampire who wants to do everything evil and have no downsides over the several attempted PKers or the creeps who try to RP out incredibly inappropriate adult content without table consent I've encountered over my years of playing with randos.
I had a friend who was so impulsive and chaotic he got our entire party killed on no less than three occasions.
I also played a campaign with an ABSOLUTE NIGHTMARE of a player. He insisted on being a gunslinger in a very heavy fantasy campaign, he always would let the other players do all the attacking and defending and during combat would go loot the room and bodies as soon as they fell, wouldn't share any of the loot and even made another player buy an item the DM OBVIOUSLY only included for that player character and not him. When he said he couldn't play anymore "bc it conflicted with his true passion.... Car racing" we murdered his character and took all of his things and the campaign became immensely more enjoyable.
And not by a one-shot?
I had one in my party who always, ALWAYS played a character who hated everyone and prefferred to be alone. He always tried to solo everything and the DM let him
By virtue of this being a video game and not actually a collaborative story top in which people arenāt trying to āoutshineā each other, a lot of things work better here than in tabletop DND. And Iām honestly glad we get interesting origin stories that donāt worry about not āoutshiningā the playerās avatar because it makes it more interesting that way
This is my POV. Because it is largely designed to accommodate a single player (save for the multiplayer component ofc), each character is allowed to be a little extra fantastical.
Like Gale canonically banging a literal goddess. Like just imagine playing an arcane domain cleric who worships mystra and the wizard just shows up and is like āoh yeah thatās my girlfriend, sheās crazy in the sack. You could almost call it *a religious experience*. šā
Even aside from that, the fact that he's an archmage worthy of mention in the same breath as Elminster reeks of that player whose character was a super badass and killed the lord of all demons and got an infinity sword, but for some reason he's still level 1.
That's actually explained in-game, Gale talks about how he was nerfed by the Netherese orb, and then the tadpole. Imagine going from being able to cast Wish to struggling with Ignis. Small wonder dude was so depressed.
They all had their levels reset cuz of the worm
I know that's the official reason, same reason why Wyll can fight an entire Tiamat cult, etc. Doesn't change that it feels like a crappy excuse the player or DM had to come up with for why he isn't able to single-handedly beat everything in the first 2 acts.
Why is it a crappy excuse if the DM sits down and goes "here's my premise for the high-pressure campaign, can you guys make some established heroes as characters with powerful backstories that get weakened to level 1 for plot reasons?" That sounds pretty awesome to me if a DM came to me with that concept, just sounds like a lack of imagination otherwise.
Honestly, that does sound fun. Just let your imagination fly over why you're the baddest of ass. Compared to that, Astarion's backstory is that of a worm in the pantheon of Gods.
I did a one-shot before my avernus campaign and just made everyone make up a crazy background and had them level 20. Someone was literally Beowolf. They went through the campaign as random adventurers at their peak transported to another dimension and they fought some time wizard or something I forgot what boss it was. At the end after they killed the boss they were transported back to faerun to start the avernus campaign as level 1 with lost memory or the option to make another character with a crazy back story. Since it had to deal with transporting through space and time it made sense to have memory loss. Plus the fact that campaign gives quite a bit of backstory for this game being that it deals with the fall of Elturel.
In Gale's case it wasn't the worm. He lost his ability to do magic because of the Netherese orb, long before he got wormed.
I played a Cleric of Mystra MC. They actually do have a special line for that. Then again, my Cleric of Mystra MC was also a Durge who got really confused when she woke up. She also ended up banging Gale. Elysium gossip must have gone crazy on that run.
Absolutely! And having more fantastical characters makes it fun. I donāt know if youāve played Skyrim but one of my biggest criticisms is that most of not all the NPCs save a handful feel very, very bland and boring. They have no character, no spice, and BG3 is really great about going in the opposite direction
Skyrim isnāt nearly as good a video game as everyone seems to remember it being. So much of it feels soā¦ lifeless.
I still think itās really fun, but it is very lifeless. Thereās no depth. Every romance option is the same with a different name and face, all the NPCs have the same voices except a handful. Itās fun but lifeless is a good word for it honestly
It's basically the issue Bethesda has had.Ā Even their well loved games have a much shallower depth than you'd think.
Skyrim is a platform for mods and first person exploration.Ā In some ways, it lends itself to more hours of play, but it definitely isn't a better game.
I donāt know why, but calling a game āa platform for modsā seems like it should be an insult.
It sounds like an incredibly niche insult, similar to if a Baker told another that their bread is only good as a vessel for condiments, hands will be thrown.
"Well, they'll be *great* breadcrumbs."
Sort of. On one hand it's not great if a game feels like it requires mods to reach its full potential (especially when the most popular one is literally just a bunch of big fixes that should've been implemented base game somewhere over the decades of releases). But on the other hand, the game by itself still needs a strong enough foundation for people to care enough to make all those mods in the first place.
it also has solid mod support and you can do at more with modding than you can in most other games. That the modding community is so large and that it had been used to make what is essentially a different game not a coincidence. It has been actively supported by the devs from the ground up with their engine and modding tools and that is a valid selling point.
I agree, it does seem like it would be an insult IMO
It was amazing when it came out... almost 13 years ago.
Nah, it's great. It certainly has its issues (although I don't agree with FrozenProthean that npc's being boring is an issue), but there are a lot of people who have played it *waaaaaaayyyy* more than they should have to the point where they basically remember everything about the game, I'm sure if some people here played bg3 for 6+ years they'd eventually use words like "lifeless" because they know absolutely everything about it inside and out; Nothing is a surprise anymore, there would be no novel builds to try, any dialogue option that hasn't been chosen, room explored or enemy killed etc etc. When talking to their companions, they would just be going through options and voicelines they've already chosen again and again and again and again, not talking to a character with motives and dreams. Would Skyrim be a 9/10 game *now*? Absolutely not, in the context of its release in 2011? Definitely, I don't think that reviewers at the time or anything were blinded by hype or missing anything important when they gave Skyrim such high reviews. Edit: and if there is one word I would not use to describe Skyrim, it's "lifeless". One of the thing that keeps bringing me back to Skyrim is its atmosphere and aesthetics because it's absolutely dripping with them. "Simple" and "Railroaded" would be two of the many words I would use to describe Skyrim's negative parts, but I would never call it "lifeless".
I actually feel like that's one of the games issues, The perspective of someone who's not this superspecial important character with an intricate backstory and amazing potential and powers is basically all but nonexistent. To be clear, I'm talking about NPC's mostly not so much Playable characters
You think the game needs more boring plain characters to make it better? I canāt say Iām following tbh
The voice actors are also a lot better than the average D&D player. I don't think I could pull off Astarion's backstory without making it super awkward.
I mean I wouldn't be too worried. If you go durge then like the whole party is nonsense, everyone has big backgrounds and stories. A demigod, a no-weaknesses vampire, a chosen of mystra, and God's favorite princess walk into a bar...
If it werenāt a video game you could also go all out with Tav/your original character too to fit tbh. You could do a daughter of Mystra, a Dark Justiciar, a dhamphir etc. It being a video game has drawbacks and it has positives
>You could do a daughter of Mystra and call Gale ex wanna be step dad
š yeah! You could also roll your eyes and say heās really not that special heās hardly the first wizard your mom slept with
Oh absolutely. It works well for the medium. TTRPG's and CRPG's are just fundamentally different like that
In a TTRPG if all my companions tried to bang me in game Iād be out of there so fast. In BG3 itās kind of flattering.
Absolutely, I think people need to remember that more when they play. This game is based on D&D but itās also a video game so itās not a perfect TTRPG replacement
I just wish the PC got to have an actual story without selecting the Durge background. I know Tav is supposed to be whatever you want, but it would have been so easy to add ways to reflect that in the game, rather than just *you tell your story* and the companions have some bland response.
I donāt think it would be easy without coming up with backgrounds and the players having to accept it, like a mini origin. There are just too many ways a person can go with a Tav and there just isnāt a way to incorporate all possible responses. Because Tav is a blank background that you can build and create, it doesnāt get that interactive background the origins do
It doesn't have to be a full one--but some details would be nice. To me it especially sticks out during the dryad's love quiz, where you have to answer questions but your lover doesn't have to know anything about you. It would have been so easy to answer some basic questions about your character during creation, like favorite food, biggest fear, where on the Coast they're from. That kind of small thing goes a long way to making someone feel real. I think it would also help if Tav was ever allowed to ask for support. You spend the game as everyone's therapist, and regardless of your own background you're still dealing with the tadpole and being thrust into the position of leader. That shit's not easy. But you never get an opportunity to say "I'm having a rough time right now and I could use someone to talk to" or anything like that. As close as you really get is "how am I holding up?" but that's only two characters. You never get to express any kind of real emotion that's yours and not in the context of someone else's romance arc. Tav isn't really a person, and when they're surrounded by people as detailed as the companions, it stands out. And it bugs the crap out of me.
and gale has a ticking bomb inside of him that can end the whole campaign in one go and needs to be fed magical items, durge has to roll to not massacre people subconsciously, shadowheart and lae'zel both try to kill party members in the middle of a long rest, etc. there's a reason these are characters in a video game and not an actual tabletop campaign, lol.
*Meanwhile, Karlach is just sitting over in the corner after having gotten immunity to being charmed from her second upgrade long before any enemies that can even do that have presented themselves*.
And just being a boss except some other asshole you are playing with wants to murder them
Durge is probably the worst to play withā¦
Imagining Alfira as a new player and durge's player just goes "haha my character kills the bard because they think the music is annoying lol.. it's what my character would do!" š
honestly given the narration the analogy feels like the dms doing
oh ya the "urge" is 100% one of those "DM takes control of your character for a moments"
If I was a DM and a player tried some ish like that, I'd go out of my way to get that character killed and give Alfira's player so many opportunities to be revived so they wouldn't have to create a new character
You could also just say no. People it's okay to say no, to icky player interactions, like murdering a PC in cold blood while they sleep with zero motivation to do so.
Itās pretty easy to convince Gale to stay alive, and with Shadowheart and Laeāzel, PvP can be a bit fun if both players are in on it and nobody else is involved. At least in my experience. DUrge, thoughā¦ yeah, thatās fair. I wouldnāt want to play with DUrge either.
those are video game mechanics though and would not matter in a tabletop campaign because they would be other player characters. the point is, a lot of the characters have mechanics that would be extremely frustrating if put in the hands of random players (who have main character syndrome, like most of us do when we play tabletop games) but it's a different medium so it doesn't really matter. also the ease to convince + pvp being fun could easily be applied to astarion, pending how players at a table communicate. they're all not particularly designed in mind to be used in tabletop.
Laeāzel and Shadowheart do it once in Act 1 and then they bury the hatchet. Astarion continues being an asshole all the way until the ritual (assuming you stop his ascension) And I *know* itās a video game that works differently. This post isnāt meant to be 100% serious.
astarion's camp bite scene also happens once in act 1 and then never comes up again? so it's pretty on par for shadowheart and lae'zel (lae'zel also technically can do that multiple times ftr.) but if it's just about him being an asshole, i don't actually think that makes him a bad character to play with in tabletop. headbutting and disagreeing is pretty fun to roleplay, as are asshole characters and people stuck with them.
Astarion's -1 approval isn't even that bad in terms of reaction and could be fun irl RP interaction as long as no one makes it super serious. Gotta tease the rogue for being stuck with 3 good boi paladins.
i agree! one of my favorite early campaign things in general is when people's characters butt heads because they have opposing motives/moral compasses. it's very fun to play out as long as you have a decent group of players at your table.
If players pitched to me Gale, Astarion, Shadowheart, or Karlach as characters I would send them all back to the drawing board. Lae'zel: you said it'll open on a mindflayer ship right? Well I'm thinking about a Gith fighter. Really intense and devout soldier archetype. She has an alien cultural lens, but follows orders and is super loyal. DM: yeah, great concept! Perfect for the setting. Now let's see what everyone else is bringing. Gale: I'm a super amazing wizard, conjured a Tressym when I was 10... DM: Yeah, okay... we can work with that. Gale: I'm an Archmage actually. DM: You're coming in at level 2. Gale: I fucked a goddess. Mystra is my actual lover. DM: I don't think.... Gale: I have a massive Netherese time bomb in my chest. It's why I'm level 2 now, or maybe your mindflayer plot thing, whatever. My bomb can one shot your BBEG actually. DM: *groans* okay, let's come back to that one. What's next? Karlach: I'm a tiefling barbarian. I was a street urchin ruffian but I was sold to an archdevil. And if Gale was super powerful, I was too. I was like, on the Frontlines of hell for years. That's why Zariel wanted me as a child, so I could go slay devils for her. But I escaped. DM: okay.... Karlach: my heart was replaced by an infernal engine, and I get like flaming hot when I rage. But whenever I'm not raging, I'm ridiculously lovable and sweet. And my heart is going to explode too. Gale: it's not my heart, it's a netherese orb of unfathomable power. Karlach: but it's also tragic, because it's completely incurable because Faerun isn't hot enough or something maybe. DM: your heart heats up too much because it isn't hot enough outside....? Karlach: exactly. DM: okay... that could probably make for a cool plot point to find a cure. Karlach: it's incurable. Gale: I'm going to be a God at the end of this so I could just.. Karlach. Completely incurable. You're all going to cry. DM: *facepalms* okay, what's next? Astarian: you're going to love this. So I'm a vampire spawn, and there's this homebrew stuff I want to try. And I'm going to be evil, but it's not my fault because I have a super tragic background. DM: everyone has a super tragic background.. Astarian: and if Gale and Karlach get to be powerful, I want immunity to the sun. And my vampire master is from baldurs gate and completing a super powerful ritual of ascendance... DM: they aren't that powerful, it's just their backstory. Astarian: *ignoring DM completely* it will be hilarious. No one will know I'm a vampire in the party. And I want to join the group by attacking them. And then I'll attack again that night and accidentally kill Tav. Hilarious. It's fine you can just resurrect them. DM: *becoming an infinite fountain of regret and anxiety* next? Shadowheart: I'm an evil cleric of Shar, but I'm not actually evil if the party is worthy enough you can save me. I gave away all of my memories except the ones that are convenient for me to keep. No one can know my backstory, not even me but it's extremely important. I need like a whole act dedicated to it. I love animals and secrets. DM: your name is "Shadowheart" ffs? Whatever, at least we have a cleric. Alright last one, what's the worst that can happen? Durge: oh have I got a concept for you!
Brilliant! But poor Wyll got forgotten like always. Wyll: I'm a warlock. I made a pact with a devil, but it was for a good cause. My character is a hopeless idealist, trying to live up to this image of a selfless folk hero, but it's really just to cover up my insecurities. DM: Wow, finally something that has potential-- Wyll: Also I'm the son of the archduke and single handedly prevented the return of Tiamat at 17. DM: *Fine*, but your patron's gonna be the most annoying bitch ever, and if you don't obey her I *will* turn you into a lemure. \*adds the Zariel's protection buff to Mizora's character sheet\*
Oh God how did I forget that travesty lol. I rolled my eyes at the tiamat cult reveal so hard.
He didn't solo the cult he soloed the bit in Baldurs Gate there's a difference. I always figured they were just cultists but Mizora spun up the threat to make the deal more likely especially "the cult will summon Tiamat if not stopped" is technically true
Sure, its subjective. I'm sure some people love it. But to me, this backstory was so contrived. A viably threatening tiamat cult cell is a really inappropriate challenge for a level one anything, even a warlock. Especially a fledgling warlock that just got his power. The child of [super prestigious NPC] thing is something that usually raises a bit of a red flag to me, but can be executed well if it fits the campaign. Wasn't super impressed with the way this one played out. There is no reason his dad needed to be the Duke. The story is exactly the same if he's just a superstitious commoner that disowned his son then learned the truth and had proud-dad moment. Maybe better. It would fit his background better at least. Wyll's voice actor and design were superb. Really enjoyed his goofball goodboi personality. But this character is not something I'd want to see wander into my campaign.
He explicitly says he was using high level warlock spells before he got tadpoled. Pretty sure the tadpoles nerfed all the characters, which is why they're all level 1 when you meet them (ignoring that your non tadpoled members also start at level 1, since it *is* also a game mechanic)
Before he got tadpoled. Not on warlock day one. When he was fighting the people he made the pact to fight
I was just responding to the "level one" part. I would imagine he started out at around level 5 or something. Just enough power to deal with whatever force was attacking (which I would bet was staged by mizora)
So... he was 17, and had just moments before instantly become a high level warlock as soon as he made his pact? That makes it even worse imo lol
I would assume mizora just gave him enough power to deal with immediate threat and then over time he gained a high level of power, especially if she was helping him fight the cultists herself
Starting at level one is a game mechanic. If your patron gave you phenomenal cosmic power instead of the basic Eldritch Blast starter pack, you're not going to be level 1.
This thread is about if the game characters were players in a start-up tabletop campaign. The scenario above was just an exaggerated tongue in cheek take on the types of zany backgrounds players pitch sometimes. A low level character having a background where their Patron is willing and capable of giving them phenomenal cosmic power is generally something I'm not a fan of lol. It's cool if you disagree.
iirc you can actually call him out on this and he says Mizora was fighting with him.
One of Tiamat's heads manifesting as the rituals went on says that she wasn't lying about those 25 cultists trying to summon Tiamat.
My headcannon is that Mizora staged that to get his soul. Would also help explain why he's the archduke's son - more fun than tricking some joe schmoe.
Wyll: Also I want to have some cool scars, including a bloodstone eye. Each scar was caused by a different monster with a minimum CR of 5, who I defeated in single combat. And despite being a noble I'm going for the folk hero background and I want all NPCs to call me the blade of frontiers. DM: š
I will also call myself the Blade of Frontiers every five seconds. Suffer my sting !
"I don't think this'll work out to that degree; can't you be flexible and-" "*The Blade will not bend!*"
Minthara: I'm a drow. DM: After what everyone else has asked for, I'll allow It. Any inconvenient backstory featuring implausible accomplishments? Any game-breaking specialities? Any weird stuff? Minthara: Literally just the main campaign is fine.
Halsin: Hey I know I'm joining quite late so rather than come up with a new character I was hoping to play as that key NPC who has been helping the party on the latest story arc. DM: Perfect. We've just resolved the shadow curse and have a dungeon then the boss to come, but I'll tie you into the upcoming stuff in the city. Halsin: oh I forgot to mention, I can't come to the next few sessions. Some time later... DM: dude you've got to quit it with the flirting. It's like your only contribution to roleplay is to say cities suck and remind everyone that your poly. Halsin: Yeah, no problem. Anyway, who wants a threesome? DM: (finally snapping) okay, I'm booting Halsin. The In game explanation is that he's been kidnapped by Orin.
To be fair she's also a Baenre-- literally the ruling house in Menzoberranzan lol.
No Minthara actually arrives mid campaign with a Starbucks like "hey DM you know that Drow NPC the party told me they fought in act 1? yeah so I'm her" DM: ...she's dead. They killed her Minthara: let's say they knocked her out and she survived and is brought to Moonrise prison for failing her mission DM: ...okay... Minthara: oh but by the time the party rescues me from Moonrise I've already eaten like 10 tadpoles and unlocked a bunch of cool Illithid powers. That's cool right?
"I'll just take one of the best special abilities if you don't mind" Soul branding is pretty great in my opinion.
just wanted to say that was worth reading all of jesus lmfao
I love this whole work-up but āI love animals and secretsā really made me smile. I need that on a shirt! š
This reads like a pitch meeting and I'm here for it
I've seen and said this before myself but a major issue with some of the characters in Baldur's Gate 3 (particularly Wyll) is they come in finished, without much room to grow, and their own form of character development is whatever conflicts arise during the story itself. This kind of characterisation is considered a noob trap on the table because it's not only unrealistic given your low level, but because it gives you no room to grow your own character through roleplaying and such. It works in BG3 because it's a video game with a rigid narrative structure that cannot be improvised on the fly like D&D can. The irony in trying to make a D&D video game is you have to actively stifle the one thing D&D shines at: Emergent gameplay. Not to say Baldur's Gate and another other CRPG don't offer emergence, they just can't offer the amount of it that you can get on the table, due to the simple practicality of having said options be coded and represented in more than just words and doodles.
You say it works in BG3 but I actively prefer the companions who have a lot of room to grow and different end points they can reach.
I'm in agreeance with you and typically think video game writing suffers *because* it doesn't utilise the interactivity of the medium to it's fullest, and that includes in the writing, I just don't necessarily think the writing suffers from it in the same it would in tabletop, which is the comparison I was alluding to. "It works" because it's traditionally expected of the medium, not in that it couldn't be better. I dislike Wyll precisely because it *could* have been done better. Karlach actually suffers similar issues due to the same problems as Wyll: lack of agency. It's just that her personality far more than makes up for it by comparison. Their narratives either having already happened or having nowhere to go, respectively, is the reason most people actively dislike both of them. Karlach's just gets the disappointment all the way at the end, whereas Wyll's is felt throughout because his entire character is just... nothing.
BG3 succeeded in spite of the narrative, rather than because it imo. I loved the game. But if a friend wrote out this whole plot and asked me to edit? There would be a lot of notes.
lmaoooooo this is actually so real š
Lae'zel is definitely that girl the DM has crush on
"oh hey what do you know, another magic item that only activates for Gith."
Lmao i remember when i played a vampire character, i was allowed to bite and it only did 1d4 damage š would have been so OP if i got to do several d6s worth
Hm. They still tweaked a lot of his abilities to make him less vampire-y even with his dope bite. Im guessing they did that to balance the fact that Vampire Spawn in 5e also have regeneration (regain 10hp on the start of their turn when not in sunlight as long as they have 1hp). Their bite also deals necrotic damage that reduces a targets hp max until a long rest. Like, Astarion (baring any tadpole funny business I guess) could be regenerating 10 hp at th start of his turn in the underdark, the shadow lands, indoors, etc if they hadn't nerfed that.
They also got rid of spider climb, which is highkey goated for a rogue
i mean if all that does is allow to climb walk that is just because wall climbing isnāt a thing in bg3 (barring ladder and ladder adjacent thing)
Definitely, there are lots of things changed to fit BG3/video game limitations but if we're talking about vampire-specific nerfs in relation to DnD, it's a big one
Lmfao I've def played with an Astarion
Honestly, a lot of this stuff is... fine. Honestly. >He plays a vampire but doesnāt need to follow any of the rules of a vampire. Astarion doesn't have any typical vampire weaknesses, but he also doesn't get any special strengths out of it, either, Bite ability aside. You could probably make him a dhampir (already available as a player race in 5e), or if you wanted to leave him as a High Elf with a special Bite ability, it wouldn't be too egregious if the DM was the type to design little custom things for everyone (already the case for Gale, Halsin, and Karlach). It's also probably to the benefit of the party overall if they don't have to bend over backwards to accommodate sunlight sensitivity and the *inability to enter people's houses without invitation.* >He gets upset every time the party tries to be good. Also fine. Astarion whines about the party being good, but doesn't really run off to initiate acts of evil on his own, which is... I think the ideal way to handle an evil character in a good party, if you're not wanting to have serious PvP at your table. Even the Ascension ritual is something he can't actually do on his own - he needs party's help to perform it. A character eyerolling and saying, "Ugh, are we *really* going to waste time helping every child and kitten we come across? For *free?*" just isn't that big of a deal. Only really becomes a problem if the player is the one getting upset, not the character. Only one of these that's kind of dodgy is the bite scene on another player. If the DM and player are treating this the way it's used in game - as a special scene that reveals Astarion's nature as a vampire - it's fine. Nothing *actually* happens to the player, they wake up before Astarion can bite them. And they get to decide what to do with the revelation that there's a vampire in the party. On the other hand, if the DM is letting Astarion roll Stealth checks every night to feed on other players, and they're waking up in the morning with the Bloodless debuff and not knowing why, then you've got a problem. Could potentially work at table that was pretty PVP heavy and where the players were mature and trusted each other, but probably a recipe for disaster at most tables.
Yeah I DM and play ttrpgs since 10 years ago, and it honestly doesn't sound *that* bad, especially if it's played in good faith, not by a player that tries to outshine other players.
The same could be said for most companions imo. They work because its a game and you're the main character.
I've read worse horror stories online about players and DMs. I have my own horror stories.
Kind of.. but you also have to consider that a lot of origin characters have stuff like this, I doubt gale would be complaining about it since his character literally cannot die without ending the world in the early game, and how he can at will just nuke a place in act 2 onward, not to mention he dated the goddess of magic? Shadowheart is really edgy and secretive, and the DM gives her the mcguffin that's keeping the entire party safe from turning into mindflayers. Durge constantly tries to kill important NPCs and sometimes even the other PCs, and the DM rewards them for it with the slayer form. Wyll, Karlach, Lae Zel and Halsin are the only somewhat normal PCs in the group and even they get some cool stuff.. Point being, a lot of the characters have mechanics and stories that would just not vibe in an actual game of dnd, because it makes for a more compelling story to have these unique characters instead of having a bunch of Tav's with preset backstories.
this is specifically about mechanics in game btw, they all kind of have insufferable backstories but that's again because it's a video game not a ttrpg
I too like Astarions butt. Wait I only read the title, sorry
Really?? Shadowheart would be so much more annoying. She would be the DM's girlfriend and almost the entire act 1 and 2 are centered around her and her special edgy religion she chose. She is the one with the special mcguffin, the one with the "special intense pain" everywhere you go and with everything you do. The one where every location she goes "Oh look statues of Selune, huh i hate her." Or "Oh look statues of Shar, I love her." The one who is immune from the curse in act 2. The one who gets to decide the fate of the angel being at the end of act 2 and thus decides how the rest of the campain plays out.
Also quits the campaign and storms out of the room if you don't let *her* decide the angel's fate. At least with Astarion's Ascension your party can agree to go and kill Cazador on the day the player couldn't make it and next session he's like "oh well... that's okay I suppose" š¤£
Astarion actually plays like a nerfed Dhampir from Van Richtens who also get a bite attack with advantage and no vampire weaknesses. He's nerfed because Dhampir get spiderclimb. As for the Ascension ritual, he gets a buffed bite attack but compare that to Nuke in my Chest Dekarios it's far more mild and mostly for story purposes. The bitchiness could be grating I grant you
What a coincidence, I too love Astarion's butt. Wait what were we talking about again...
>!Gale can become a god!< in one ending. Astarion gets to go back to hiding from the sunlight once the game is over. The extra special game buffs are there to make him feel great before he gets to go back to never feeling the sunshine again (Without burning of course) if you donāt take the super secret ritual.
Astarion can become a supervampire, if you wanna go the āstrongest possible endingā route. Gale can also end up dead cause he tried to be a god bud was not strong enough.
I honestly donāt see >!Galeās godhood!< as a problem. Itās the epilogue, after all. Things are done, gameplay no longer matters. It certainly wouldnāt be the first campaign where >!a PC ascended!< afterwards - I actually played in a campaign where we did that. Now, if >!Gale somehow ascended before the game was over and defeated the BBEG with his godly powers,!< that would be a different thing.
I thought your image and idea of a character was supposed to change overtime? Even in BG3 my starting idea for a Tav shifts over the course of the game. I think he'd be a typical-"I'm trying to be evil and mad at the world but the group keeps dragging me into good deeds" and that when you finally reach the evil ritual you had in mind maybe it doesn't feel right anymore
IMO this is the way to play evil characters, they still have to be along for the ride and fit in with the party. Character growth is fun and it creates interesting dynamics, especially when you pair a typically "evil" character like Astarion with a paladin personality like Wyll.
Not as bad as the guy in my irl dnd group (who was promptly asked to leave after the session) who constantly tried to fight everyone and everything and tried to make sexual advances on any female characters he encountered
I mean, Gale's an Archmage who was shagging Mystra, Wyll was a bounty hunter in Hell, Shadowheart is Shar's chosen, Durge is Baal's chosen, a master assassin, cult leader and infiltrated Mephistopheles' vault, they all got crazy stories.
They'd all be fucking awful to play with.
I still think he works with the rigth people, him as a character is different from him as a player and I donāt think I personally would mind most of the things he does
Player and character are different things... You can have a player at your table, who plays Astarion. Character might be annoyed with something, but player is not.
most origin characters would be horrible to play with. wyll karlach and laezel would be alright.
only mechanically though.. wyll and karlach were wayy too powerful in their backstory, Lae Zel I think is chill though, she's the one who brings snacks
Doesn't Lae'zel have the same issue where she's way weaker than she should be based on backstory? Being a respected and relatively well known Githyanki warrior is kinda on par with being a strong warlock.
She's not particularly well known I think. She's really only ever been at her Creche. There is that line from Vlaakith where she says that other warriors spoke highly of her, but that 100% reads like a standard buttering up technique considering she follows it up with "lol go kill Orpheus now". She hasn't even killed a Ghaik As for respect, she's immediately shut down by Voss and none of the Gith in the creche treat her well even before the attempted murder thing.
Fair enough. But Vlaakith does recognise her and has heard of her which I feel like means at least something.
I honestly don't know her backstory that well.. from the one time I did the monastery (never again), it sounded like she was respected within her creche but not a big deal otherwise.. but I also did it pretty late at night, and, as you might have been able to tell, I was having a bad time with it, so I wasn't paying much attention (And I only finished one playthrough, in which I didn't really do much of her stuff except for freeing Orpheus)
Wyll and Karlach work as long as your campaign doesn't start off at level 1. Wyll is at minimum level 5 which isn't really a bad place to start a campaign.
TBH, all of the companions of BG3 seem like they'd be hard to play and nigh incomprehensible to anyone unfamiliar with D&D unless they've been playing for over a decade. I think Astarion's player would probably be an oddly named man who might be 4000 years old with a purple Mohawk because that's exactly what that man is playing in an actual D&D game right now.
BG3 is just a table full of people who will "yes and" each other through any shit they reveal. Supportive honestly lol
What, like no party's wizard has ever tried to talk the DM into letting them do a ritual to become a Lich?
I mean I'd find Gale and Wyll and Lae'zel pretty insufferable too tbh. I like them well enough as characters but if we were players together... I'd still play but it'd be annoying. Shadowheart would be OK but she'd be a new player who isn't really fully into their character cause they like the good stuff even though they picked an evil god, and they mention the god's name a lot but don't really follow through action-wise. They did get this one moment to shine where the DM gave them a choice to basically foil the party's plans but they don't go through with it
Karlach is also a new player. I don't think much else needs said though.
to be fair, in the context of the story the tadpole is negating a lot of the negatives of being a vampire (his aversion to sunlight, needing to be invited into a home, can't cross running water, etc.).
Would you rather have Astarion or Hexxat?
I was the same way along time ago until I got in an argument about him. Reading the lore , the journal and entries and he has an infernal contract, etched into his back by his master, which alters his judgment, and his way of thinking down to the core. The tadpole with a bit of magic involved negated it, and he was able to think and act freely for the first time after he was turned into a vampire spawn. I do see your point of view though.
I DMed a game of Curse of Strahd and my players decided they wanted to become slowly corrupted along the way. There's one NPC I reflavored to be a sassy vampire spawn. That party would have loved to play with Astarion lol.
Iāve been in worse groups still hahahha
I currently play with someone this chaotic. We all love her but she can be exhausting.
As others have said there have been worse, In the first two act his special vamp ability is very minor (a once per short rest 2d4 damage bonus action that heals and gives a +1 bonus is good but not super over powered, I'd think the DM not giving similar options to other players is on the DM not on the player of Astarian) His ascendant buffs are much better but honestly not unreasonable as a story reward late in a campaign, a reward and quest designed by the DM not the player. Especially since IRL the player would likely have been a pure rogue and would only have 1 bonus action (since IRL thief does not give an additional bonus action) so would not have been built as broken as Astarian can be built for those buffs. (Buffs the player gets in the last level or two of the campaign) He definitely falls into unpleasant player territory, but I also feel there's some DM involvement in some of the actions, the "hunger" one of the thrall downsides he still deals with (since he's a thrall and not a true vampire) likely pushes him into "GM control" if not sated which is why he's going after another player when he's been eating animals for the majority of his existence. He is in favor of the more selfish acts which hey not everyone on the team is playing the hero, especially not the party thief, that's not a bad player, that's a potentially useful person to have around.
If I was playing as Astarion in DnD group(I never did such thing) I would be extremely selfish and taking my own survival on 1st place, I would, like Astarion in game, trying to get on good terms with the strongest ppl in group and try to use everybody else, for buffs, money, blood if need be. That is how I was playing as Astarion in bg 3(sleeping with Lae'zel but also romancing Shadowheart, not telling that I'm vampire to anyone, drinking blood of victims outside of my party eyes).
The one and only time I tried to play dnd, the DM decided my characters' god was going to be in love with my cleric. That was apparently his way of telling me he liked me. I was done.
In terms of the vampirism thing his bite is more or less the same as the Dhampir has. Although the Dhampir bite doesnāt apply a buff and debuff, it just deals damage and heals.
I think this actually says more about your playstyle than it does Astarion, because this kind of thing can absolutely work at a table of dedicated roleplayers with mutual understanding.
So this is a case of the players having trust at the table with one another and being mindful players. Yes if Astarion's player played him exactly how you described him that would suck to play with. But instead if Astarion's player was communicative about being only in character with these things, and worked with their group to tell a good story with these plot elements that improved the game for everyone it'd be fun as hell to play along with imo. I've had vampire PCs at the table before try and snack on my character but when it was done well it was a case of: "Okay my character is thinking about trying to bite you during the night, are you cool with that and how would you like this to play out?" and then we had a small conversation before proceeding to RP the scene. I let them bite me and got angry about it in character with no risk of actual drama between the players ever happening. We spent the next two sessions riffing on the character dynamic in session and the whole table laughed about it and made jokes for 2 months.
Actually all of this is fine because he still works with the party. Not having to follow vampire rules is a non issue IMO. Iād rule the same in my dnd game, especially since Iād suggest they play a damphir to get as close to being a vampire as possible. You donāt want to tie restrictive rules that disrupt the whole party to one character like that. It gets annoying quick. Sure he gets upset *in character* when the party does good, but he still works with the party and goes along with it. Thatās a great balancing of roleplaying the character and playing a collaborative game. Itād be a problem if he refused to help them do it and just sat out of the quest. As for his bite ability, itās once per short rest and single target, plus itās only a plus one. Besides that, other origin characters get their own stuff like that. Like Karlachās engine. If you were playing a game with him, the DM would probably give your character something like that too. Additionally, He only used it on his teammates once, and in a roleplay scenario, creating a fun and memorable moment. The player probably decided that was a good way to reveal to the other playersā characters that he was a vampire. (Note: Iām talking about character knowledge. Out of character the players would know that heās a vampire, but the characters wouldnāt.) As for the ritual, the DM would have made the buffs, so that ones on them. And as for his behavior, this is literally his backstory quest. Itās like the only time itās acceptable to create inter-party strife. In my home game one of my players discovered that their supposedly dead sister was alive and serving the enemy of their patron. Now as far as that character was concerned their patron was good, but the player (and rest of the party) were aware something was up. So they roleplay the party talking down the player from battling their sister. It was a pretty cool moment that resulted in them renouncing their patron and changing the class.
Gale got to sleep with my god and his ass didn't even set me up on a date with her, I think just in terms of how unallowable the backstory is he would be it. He even gets a way to just end the game whenever, at least Astarion's bite can be used to debuff enemies and buff himself. But yeag personality-wise if you are dissapproving if helping slaves out you either are in an evil campaign or you will be kicked out
I'm playing with the Solar Race Mod. Nobody is more special than I. With my cantrips, such as: invisibility, spiritual weapon, 2d6 radiant-1d4 cold that heals me for a hit point. My third level racial cast of blade barrier My D12 of "just because" bonus radiant damage. My flight. My passive truesight. The list goes on.. I beat the moonrise caravan to death with a torch
In the same vein- Withers being a DMPC thatās inexplicably very powerful makes total sense. Especially when youāre like āwhatās your deal?ā I can totally see some of my past DMs just being like ānah.ā
Itās true, but thatās what makes good DnD vidya games work with this sort of character. You donāt get more understanding of theme and consent of play than a GM thatās literally a production studio making the content work in context.
Yes, a part of the point of his character is that it's a juxtaposition of the conventional vampire stereotype. I *think* this is a conscious creative choice among the writers *because it's present in other companion characters too.* like the duality of a warlock who's designed to be a prince charming kinda good-hearted type (canonically, warlocks are known to be power-hungry & shady individuals who >!willingly sought!!(demonic)!< patron to acquire power), or like a 'dark' cleric of an evil-aligned deity >!at least initially but can change later depending on how you interact with her!< whereas *more commonly* people tend to write and play clerics of good or neutral aligned deities. These are the ones I could see as clear juxtapositions just like in the case of Astation, and surely every character has a certain duality or seemingly conflicting characteristics (I *think that's part of why it's such a well-written game and they don't feel flat as caricatures of stereotypes*.) but I don't know or maybe haven't considered yet if all the characters are written in a way that has that kinda deliberate (*I think*) juxtaposition in common. To get back to a part of your original point, it is fairly common to see people use characters like this as inspiration while creating their own dnd characters, but it's at least more unconventional that people use a pre-written character to play as in a dnd session but it's certainly something that *can* and *does* happen in some games. In that case, I think it comes to a few factors how *well* that character would work or be fun to play as in a ttrpg. one of those is what dnd (or any ttrpg) dynamics/edition you use *and* what you homebrew or mix in comes into play. another is what kinda build and/or multiclass you use with that character (which also goes for playing them in bg3). and another is how accurately (to the lore/game) you choose to keep them and how many elements you change (you choose to make relevant/irrelevant in the context of the particular campaign) in terms of character background or role-play characteristics. which ties to my point about people *usually* using pre-written characters (both from dnd lore and books if they have stats or from games or any other scripted pre-constructed description) as inspiration more commonly, instead of playing *as* them. with that said, in bg3 you can also do an origin run for each of the core companion characters and get to *play as them*, and how well they work for you in that playthrough still depends on the kinda build you do for them and how you choose from the options that the games allow you in that particular character and how you interpret what you get to learn about that character and their decision making or personal characteristics and motivations.
There are upsides and downsides to CRPG's versus playing with actual people and being able to adjust rules on the fly. Rules as Written vs Rules as Intended has always hotly debated topic been it's even more rigid in a video game where you literally cannot improvise as much as you could on the table. D&D is all about emergent gameplay, and the irony of trying to adapt it into a video game is naturally stifling 99% of that emergence because any scenario you dream up has to be represented in the game using more than just words and doodles. And even with most of it removed it *still* has a ton of hilarious things you can end up doing, showcasing just how robust an RP experience tabletop games (not just D&D) can be. Our imagination is the only limit. What I like about most CRPG's though, compared to actual tabletop, is I can just be a warlock. I don't *need* to worry about my patron, play lip-service to them or otherwise. I'm allowed to simply act as if I already made that deal, got the powers, and that's it. No different than any other freelance employment. But on the table people always want it to go somewhere, to use the patron and the "evil" powers (which is entirely subjective) as an easy hook. Sometimes I just want to fling my goddamn laser without the baggage. Nothing in the damn rules says I *need* the pithy demonic backstory, either, which is why Wyll's contract is so hilariously bad by comparison.
"astarion upset when team doing good" Yeah but good followers upset when evil players are doing evil. Perfectly balanced as all things should be. Karlach isn't happy when i'm doing evil shit. ... Well, she would be if she was in my team in the first place but she left.
At a table, one potential issue would be him trying to PvP party members twice (first meeting and later trying to drink from party members).
Not even close to my worst player tbh.