Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
I wouldn't say either Gale or Astarion are racist. Astarion uses everyone equally! And Gale's the academic type who just finds people intriguing. Neither of them respond negatively to Drow, Tiefling, Gith, etc.
The only comment I've heard from either of them is from Astarion, who, if you are a dwarf or halfling PC, will say "Normally I'm not impressed by people of your stature, but you're stronger than I gave you credit for." (For a PC of any other race, he will just say, "I'm not normally impressed by people...") So I suppose you could say he holds onto a bit of his High Elf snobbery, not sure it rises to the level of racism.
Yes, precisely this. On top of that, he's from the nobility as well. A number of his affectations and mannerisms that others describe as effeminate I actually think of as being posh, upper class snobbery.
So yes, Astarion is both a snob and a dandy, but the two aren't inherently linked
Yes, fair enough I suppose. They do frequently co-occur but not necessarily. Probably has more to do with wealth. Some poor subsistence farmer can't afford to be either a snob or a dandy.
Never get into it with a tween/teen edgelord. they literally do not have the capability to think beyond their immediate wants and anything that isn't giving them what they want, is just ammunition for their next whinefest.
To the OP's point. Yes, if you do evil things, you should expect people to react negatively to you, that was kind of the point of being evil in the first place wasn't it? You want no part of the greater good, you don't want to sacrifice for others, you want to be a self indulgent evil character (perfectly legitimate choice, not bashing on evil playthroughs) but then you complain, that your evil actions have consequence.
That's literally the reason you chose evil. To go against the flow, to buck the tradition of helpfulness etc...
Pro Tip: Evil people tend not to trust each other, for reasons. Very good ones. Like.... I don't trust my brother whenever he played a rogue/assassin type back in tabletop dnd days because he would buy into the character "Hey bro, i'm an assassin, dude offered me way too much to NOT kill you, I mean, i need to pay off..." EVERYone was a valid target to him, no loyalty, nothing, cuz duh, he's playing an evil murderhobo.
So even if you DO end up getting evil companions (later on) I wouldn't trust one to walk behind me, and I'm definitely not trusting him to watch over me while I sleep.
As a prime example of this: why would a character who doesn't believe in redemption keep Astarion around after he tries to murder you? You might have some characters thinking that it's safer with him but they've got to be in the minority
I wasn't even thinking about that time (although that time is also pretty hard to forgive) but about the nighttime chomping.
Not really, but my most recent game I decided my main char didn't want him around and there's an option to send him away because of that ('cause who wants to worry about their neck whilst they're asleep?)
I keep him around because he's useful. And once you allow him to start feeding on enemies, he has kind of an endless supply. So I figure why would he risk biting me once he has better options? He knows I'm dangerous and a fight between us is pretty evenly matched. He tried it once and got caught. I don't think he's going to try again. Also he needs me to help him stay free of his master and to deal with the tadpole issue. I'm much more useful to him alive than dead.
I'm not sure why everyone assumes his nighttime attack on you is an attempt to kill you. It's pretty obviously not. If you have him in your party and he's in stealth he can bite enemies without breaking stealth, being discovered, or even causing the enemy's health to drop. That's what he tried to do to you. It's definitely an assault, but not attempted murder. I don't blame people for being angry or for kicking him out, but "tried to kill me" is just... not really understanding what's happening there. Most times vampires feed they don't kill their prey. If they did, the whole city of Baldur's Gate would've been killed off centuries ago by Cazador and his coven.
And he seems to only lose control because of the "leash" he was tethered to by Cazador. Meaning, he doesn't understand his own strength and thirst - so to speak - because of being denied any sustenance beyond animals, scraps and the like. The "control" unfortunately is delineated to a dice roll. :/ Granted, this is more of my personal interpretation, but I suspect is fairly accurate.
As for denying him "people" to chomp on, he is disheartened but still pulls his weight. Personally, I usually allow him to snack, and let him use his Bite in combat. (works well with the amulet from Khaga
Yeah, I pretty much chalk up his lack of control to the fact that he's basically starving. This is evidenced by the fact that if you romance him and allow him to bite you then, he does maintain control. And if you choose to trust him not to bite you, he doesn't. So after a period of time where he's been allowed to feed more regularly, he has gained control.
Party banter Astarion has with Shadowheart indicates that he probably was feeding on people back in the city, but I also suspect that his master only allowed this when it suited him. Keeping his slaves on a borderline starvation diet would keep them weak and easy to control, nevermind the "fun" of just being cruel on purpose.
Yes, I know that. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
But if I were a sadistic utterly paranoid evil creature, I would not want my slaves getting any uppity thoughts, even if I KNEW they couldn't do anything about it. There's always the CHANCE right? (That's paranoia talking. "What if? What if?" "What if?") Keeping them weak both for fun AND insurance is exactly the sort of thing that would arise from insane paranoid ancient evil.
+1 Agree. ;)