Skip to content

Anomen, Aerie, Jaheira, Viconia

I haven't heard anything about the "old" romances in BG2EE so I thought I'd ask. Will they be open to more races or is this something that will stay as is? Is this something that can't be changed due to contract limitations?

If there is nothing in the way I'd really like these romances to open up for all races. As I see it it's a very non-invasive change and would only serve to make the game more enjoyable and complete.
«134

Comments

  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • rdarkenrdarken Member Posts: 660
    I don't think they can contractually change the old NPCs at all. so I'm assuming they won't love any new races.
  • MathmickMathmick Member Posts: 326
    While we're at it, lets open them up to all genders as well!

    Having small touches like this makes the characters a bit more 'real'. It wouldn't seem surprising to me at all if some people thought it was weird etc. to be with people of a significantly different race.

    That being said, having an additional romance option for shorties (or some subset of shorties) is hardly something I'd be against.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    Mathmick said:

    While we're at it, lets open them up to all genders as well!

    This is 2013, not 2003. You can't put homosexuality in video games anymore, people will be up in arms about it. BioWare used to be progressive, but even they have fallen into line nicely after Dragon Age Origins. Overhaul would be ruined if they did it now.
  • ForseForse Member Posts: 106
    Mathmick said:

    While we're at it, lets open them up to all genders as well!

    Having small touches like this makes the characters a bit more 'real'. It wouldn't seem surprising to me at all if some people thought it was weird etc. to be with people of a significantly different race.

    That being said, having an additional romance option for shorties (or some subset of shorties) is hardly something I'd be against.

    Yes? I'm not sure what your point is. Sure, make em all bi as well, it'd improve the game. Don't like romancing other races? Don't do it. It doesn't affect anyone who doesn't want to.
  • ForseForse Member Posts: 106
    I agree that racism and hetero-normativity can be used to define a character, but I think that the individual player's freedom weighs heavier here, especially since Viconia in this example doesn't even mention the PCs race. She's just absent.

    As I see it, romances are simply content. Each player should be able to enjoy it as he sees fit. To me it's like "what a let-down, I can't access this game content with my half-orc PC."

    If the designers were making a point of "Jaheira isn't into half-orcs", they should at least have given me some dialogue content implying that.

    Anyway, I think the loss far outweighs the benefit of the old romances simply ignoring some races (sexes too for that matter)
  • CorvinoCorvino Member Posts: 2,269
    I'm 99% sure Overhaul have said that they cannot legally change existing content in this way. It's something mods have opened up in the past, and doubtless will be able to again.

    Overhaul's new characters are not race-limited, and at least Dorn is open to both genders. Females now have at least three times as many romance options as vanilla BG2.

    Is this going to make everyone happy? Probably not. But it's what they're legally able to do, and is a lot better than what was there originally.
  • doggydoggy Member Posts: 313
    If you want love for all there's mods for that.

    I don't personally want that and are therefore content with the options in game.

    Like irl people have preferences, so has NPC's
  • Mrpenfold666Mrpenfold666 Member Posts: 428
    edited September 2013
    i would say that the fact characters only romance certain races is a good thing and people who think "they should just open it to all races" you have to think on A: is it physically viable, elf + halfling = brownie (if memory serves) so it is possible elf +dwarf i dont think can mix. plus you are technically talking about a different species a half orc is essentially a neanderthal in terms of body build being primitive humans (taken from AD&D monstrous manual) now im not here to judge but do you look at a caveman/woman and think "damn i want a piece of that" ? maybe you do but i dont.

    as for the homosexuality i'm fine either way, you have to think D&D is "medieval" times, life expectancy (for humans at least) wasn't very long and so having children was a large priority at the time, so same sex romances being impossible to have children and all weren't heard of. however that's not to say i dislike same sex romance to me it all boils down to the character i want to romance, if i like them ill romance them their sexual preferences don't matter to me personally so either way is fine and ill support BG2:EE and nag everyone i know to buy it just the same
  • ForseForse Member Posts: 106
    I didn't want to get into a sexuality debate with this topic but I'll respond to some posts. I think I've gotten a good enough answer to my initial question, so that's good.

    @KidCarnival
    "... most romancable NPCs don't have a reason or obvious statement about not liking dwarves/halflings/gnomes/half orcs. I also think this wouldn't require a rewriting; the NPCs address the charname by name, not by "human" or "elf". (If I remember correctly, only Viconia does this occassionaly.)"

    I agree with you here. So IMO the notion that it's "part of their personality" is flawed. I also recognize the problem with making them all bi when some/all of them may address the PC in a gendered way.

    "Also gotta love it when people who are likely not in the LGBTQA-add-letters-as-required community and go "it's 2013, hetero-normativity is sooo outdated". Yeah, newsflash, sadly it isn't."

    @Lord_Tansheron just said that being inclusive to LGBT folks isn't accepted, which is basically what you said.
    I don't know how you define "the community" but you can hardly tell who isn't part of it by a forum discussion. And I don't need to be part of a community to voice my opinion in the matter.

    "Shoving things in people's faces has never contributed to acceptance, and even if, it's not a RPG's place to do so. BGEE has made a statement, and that is more than one can expect from a game (compare other recent games that are still hung up on white straight gun-owning male protagonists)."

    I disagree with the first part and agree on the last part. Shoving things in people's face is one of the methods to combat neglection of minorities. I also think it is very much an RPGs place to do so when feasible and desired.
    Games that continually portray white men with guns as protagonists deny the possibility of main characters who are non-white, female or gun-less. One solution is putting those minorities at the front.

    I agree that BGEE has indeed made a statement. Still, there's more I'd love to see them do.

    @Mrpenfold666
    You mentioned that it's a medieval fantasy setting, so how can we possibly know what individual turn-ons people in the setting have. Just because our modern, western ideals dictate that human+elf=hot stuff and human+half-orc=yuck doesn't mean that's what everyone in Faerun thinks. Granted, the fluff on half-elves makes it clear that humans and elves turn each other on, but that doesn't mean individuals can't fall for half-orcs, halflings etc. Who knows what happens to your preferences when you live in a world full of fairytale creatures?
    On the homosexuality; Ed Greenwood has mentioned that most people in the realms don't bother much. Anything goes, sort of.

    That's all I have to say on the matter and I will probably not reply further in this thread as I'm not in the mood for this discussion. Thank you for your input. Good night!
  • MathmickMathmick Member Posts: 326
    Forse said:

    I agree that...
    -snip-
    ...Anyway, I think the loss far outweighs the benefit of the old romances simply ignoring some races (sexes too for that matter)

    If you give the player too much freedom they appreciate their choices less. You can see this right here in the forums: People ask the collective here whether they should, for example, play a Half-Orc powergamed Fighter to smash some face or play a somewhat weaker Human Fighter so they get some romance content.

    You also say that you need dialogue and explicit statements in order for something to be presented, where I disagree. The actual game mechanics are able to tell as much about the characters as dialogue is, when used correctly. An easy non-romance example is Edwin, who acts pretentious and superior with no evidence to back it up, however his bonus spell slots are a great way of telling you he is powerful through the mechanics. The sex/race-restricted romance mechanics are a way of presenting the characters' preferences to you.
    Forse said:

    If the designers were making a point of "Jaheira isn't into half-orcs", they should at least have given me some dialogue content implying that.

    ...I think they expect to figure it out for yourself? I've never run a Half-Orc and I would have guessed that just from the racial description.
  • KidCarnivalKidCarnival Member Posts: 3,747
    The thing is, Baldur's Gate is a fantasy RPG, not a dating sim. Romances are a tiny part of the product and likely not a top priority compared to quests, classes, game mechanics. This is not the medium to force players to re-think their stance on homosexual relationships. BGEE gives a nod to players who like same sex romances, or don't have a problem with it. But it's minor enough to let all the other players ignore it. It doesn't even have to do with homophobia - I prefer real world issues to stay out of my escapism, no matter what it is. When I play a fantasy game and pretend to be a beholder paladin or elf assassin or dwarven cleric, I don't want an NPC to start a conversation about taxes, politics, animal rights, enviroment and pollution or whatever else either. I just wanna play a fantasy game then and deal with those real world things in the real world.

    BG does give the player the freedom to pick a non-male, non-white, non-gun wielding, non-straight and even non-human protagonist. It's the nature of RPGs, and frankly, that's enough. There is no need to change NPCs to bisexual to make every player happy. That's not possible anyway. Even if every single NPC was bisexual and would romance every race, someone would still be unhappy about the inability to romance the travel encounter ogre mage.

    Also, my statement above meant - I'd be ok with opening the romance paths of NPCs for more races for the sake of variety. Not turn all NPCs into "one size fits all" solutions; just add a race option here and another there, so the shorties and half orcs have at least one option. (Which is taken care of by the new NPCs, who only consider gender and alignment, as far as I'm aware.)

    About the LGBT_ community: It's frankly really easy to tell in such discussions. People who claim that homophobia is outdated or a non-issue, for instance, have likely never bothered with LGBT issues outside that discussion. If they had, they would know that it is very much still an issue. The statement made above says exactly that - yes, it is 2013 and no, it is still not a non-issue, so any game including non-straight characters will have to consider the risk of hurting their sales and reputation. No matter how much your dwarf chick wants to romance Nalia, or how open minded you think everyone should be, the big picture still says it's a risky move. And overdoing it and turning a game that is meant to be a fantasy roleplay into a flagship of LGBT rights won't work out.
  • SCARY_WIZARDSCARY_WIZARD Member Posts: 1,438
    daven said:

    Why would Anomen suddenly be gay just because you're bi? His character is heterosexual.

    My male CHARNAME's portrait is Fabio Lanzoni. Every man wants Fabio, even Fabio!. :(
  • taltamirtaltamir Member Posts: 288
    My charname is a half-elf, I installed the mod removing race and gender limitations. Viconia normally will only romance humans. Her dialog keeps on focusing about the difference between humans and elves, how humans are so driven, how I don't understand elven mindset, etc etc.

    If they removed the gender and race limitations they would have to rewrite most of the romance.

    PS. all 3 female romantic interests are extremely racist elves.
  • MathmickMathmick Member Posts: 326
    After reading responses, I don't know if people realised my "Make everyone bi-" comment was sarcastic.

    I thought the exclamation mark gave it away but I guess not?
  • CorvinoCorvino Member Posts: 2,269
    edited September 2013
    Due to the length of this discussion and the intensity of feeling involved, BG3 will now be set in a Free Love commune during 1968 rather than the Forgotten Realms.

    There are no boundaries. Everyone is Bi. If you want to be an Elf, then you're an Elf, man. That's your right, they can't stop you. I hope you remembered to export the Shadow Dragon Scale armour, because you're going to need some resistance to the acid...
  • dementeddemented Member Posts: 388
    kamuizin said:

    Here we go... again. I'm totally against make all characters Bissexual. This is the recipe to destroy all the integration and character of any NPC. I'd rather have one or more exclusive homossexual NPCs, one or more exclusive bissexual NPCs and one or more exclusive heterossexual NPCs.

    Dragon Age is the best example for this, Dragon Age: Origins made the best romances i saw into an RPG. Morrigan romance is awesome, a truly bad girl, Alistair romance is very cool and Zevran romance is an homossexual romance that convince me of the NPCs sexuality option. Zevran IS bissexual, his story and personality reflect that.

    Dragon Age 2 was the opposite of this. Every single romanceable character was bi-sexual. It felt lazy and cheap. Then again most things in Dragon Age 2 felt lazy and cheap.

    That said, a world where everybody is bi-sexual and wants to jump your bones is alright with me.
  • KidCarnivalKidCarnival Member Posts: 3,747
    demented said:

    Dragon Age 2 was the opposite of this. Every single romanceable character was bi-sexual. It felt lazy and cheap.

    This, too.

    Every man wants Fabio, even Fabio!. :(

    Incorrect.
    Source: Am man, don't want Fabio. Z͟ac̢ha̴r҉y ͘Qu̶i̴nto ̴o͟r̷ Josh҉ ̢H̸ol̨lowa͡y̸,̶ o҉n̢ ͝th̀e ̡oţh̶er e͞y̵es̕t̕a͞lk̢..̶.
  • BladeDancerBladeDancer Member Posts: 477
    edited September 2013
    Madhax said:

    I think it's a missed opportunity that Viconia isn't bisexual. Given the power level of females over males in drow society, I'd expect it to be more common, the same way it was in Greek society between men.

    Madhax said:

    I think it's a missed opportunity that Viconia isn't bisexual. Given the power level of females over males in drow society, I'd expect it to be more common, the same way it was in Greek society between men.

    It is not a missed opportunity, it is an atrocity that deserved to be missed. Yeah, sure, females look down on males, but that doesn't justify that there should be lesbian drow, it only means that they treat male drow like tools or consorts, that sort of thing, they don't see the need to develop a true romantic relationship with their mates because of their evil nature. As servants of Lolth, the drow focus more on their lust and try hard to avoid developing feelings of love and affection, emotions that a chaotic evil deity like Lolth would despise, understand? After a drow couple mate, they immediately break up to avoid affectionate feelings.

    It's the reason why Viconia behaves this way too when your charname romance her in BG2 SoA, as a drow, she is trying not to give in to her true feelings to your charname, she tries to encourage your charname to reject her after your charname's first night in bed with her but if your charname persists, she gives up and your charname gets an opportunity to "sleep" with her again.
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,212
    edited September 2013
    Did you just imply that lesbian relationships are never lustful? Why wouldn't a passionate girl like Viconia find a strong, powerful demigoddess like CHARNAME highly delicious?
  • KidCarnivalKidCarnival Member Posts: 3,747

    Did you just imply that lesbian relationships are never lustful? Why wouldn't a passionate girl like Viconia find a strong, powerful demigoddess like CHARNAME highly delicious?

    If it's only lust, it's not a "romance". And demanding FWB NPC paths... I don't know, can we say "ridicolous" and just drop the topic?

  • OzzyBotkinsOzzyBotkins Member Posts: 396
    Personally I would like to see the established romance options in the game stay as they are.
    But any new NPCs romance options if the developers want to make that NPC
    " Anybody's Anything " that is fine too
  • MadhaxMadhax Member Posts: 1,416

    Madhax said:

    I think it's a missed opportunity that Viconia isn't bisexual. Given the power level of females over males in drow society, I'd expect it to be more common, the same way it was in Greek society between men.

    Madhax said:

    I think it's a missed opportunity that Viconia isn't bisexual. Given the power level of females over males in drow society, I'd expect it to be more common, the same way it was in Greek society between men.

    It is not a missed opportunity, it is an atrocity that deserved to be missed. Yeah, sure, females look down on males, but that doesn't justify that there should be lesbian drow, it only means that they treat male drow like tools or consorts, that sort of thing, they don't see the need to develop a true romantic relationship with their mates because of their evil nature. As servants of Lolth, the drow focus more on their lust and try hard to avoid developing feelings of love and affection, emotions that a chaotic evil deity like Lolth would despise, understand? After a drow couple mate, they immediately break up to avoid affectionate feelings.

    It's the reason why Viconia behaves this way too when your charname romance her in BG2 SoA, as a drow, she is trying not to give in to her true feelings to your charname, she tries to encourage your charname to reject her after your charname's first night in bed with her but if your charname persists, she gives up and your charname gets an opportunity to "sleep" with her again.
    Why wouldn't a society that encourages females to only see each other as equals not have a higher rate of lesbianism? It's hinted at in the War of the Spider Queen series, and it's a theme throughout both real history and fiction. Heavily restricted views of who is "worthy" of one's respect due to societal or familial constraints often manifests in romantic pursuits along those same lines.

    If you're familiar with the Game of Thrones/Song of Ice and Fire series, it's the main reason for (book 1/season 1 spoiler)
    Jaime and Cersei's relationship. The two were raised to consider all other houses as inferiors and enemies, which makes their incestuous relationship a lot more understandable. It also explains why, in Jaime's absence, Cersei shacks up with Lancel, rather than somebody who isn't a Lannister.

    I've never thought of Viconia's romance to be particularly believable.
This discussion has been closed.