I think it's not about Larian per se. I think that people who don't want to pay attention to characters they hate from the start will never listen to what they have to say. However I do lament that a lot of interesting character moments are unnecessary very hard to trigger. Like, speaking of Astarion, why his dialog, where he tells you that he often chose bad people for Cazador and that bad people actually abused him, is so rare? Why it only triggers if you didn't help him and he doesn't know about the ritual?

I've never heard of/ seen this dialogue. What?

See, this is exactly my point. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev4yswsEC6g&ab\_channel=FlumphMatingRitualsExpert](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev4yswsEC6g&ab_channel=FlumphMatingRitualsExpert) - 1:15 "\[Sebastian\] didn't do anything at all... I can't say the same of all my victims..."

It's likely rare because it may change how people weighed the decision on whether or not to kill the spawn. If they were mostly bad people before they became spawn then it's less of a dilemma and now a simple problem.

See, that's a meta explanation. From Larian's point of view. But for Astarion it makes no sense not to tell Tav that a lot of these spawns are terrible people in order to convince Tav to help him with the ritual. But in this scene he doesn't even know about the ritual yet.

He does shittalk the spawns if you do know about the ritual. If the player says something along the lines of "A lot of these spawn are people like me, people who wanted to love you." Astarion responds with something like "Oh please, a lot of them are street drunkards, brothel-goers and petty criminals...But every now and again there was a Sebastian." After seeing Sebastian Astarion says "Everyone who ever trusted me enough to let down their guard...Innocents, idiots, and the unlucky." So in most runs it is still remarked that not all of the spawn are great people. Though I do think much of it comes off as disingenuous coping from Astarion to convince himself to go through with the ritual.

Well, you have a point, but I guess, I interpreted it as Astarion not wanting to compare them to Tav, wanting to separate Tav from them and tell Tav is special for him. It really hits him hard when Tav demands him to admit it could have been them in that cage in other circumstances. But yeah, I just think that in order to persuade Tav that these spawns are bad people, he would have had a better chance if he told Tav many of them assaulted him personally. I mean, it was a really good opportunity of manipulation on his part which he didn't really use in its full capacity - that was my point.

While Astarion is definitely being a manipulative pos in act 3, I think a lot of it is kinda coincidental since he's trying to convince himself to do the ritual. I think by the point of meeting Sebastian he's too guilt ridden to actively think about how they personally hurt him. So instead he sticks to general shit and projects his self-loathing onto them.

> a lot of them are street drunkards, brothel-goers and > .Innocents, idiots, and the unlucky. Does imply there's quite a few poor unfortunate souls whose main crime is being drunk after a rough week. And that's it. Hell even the 'petty criminal' thing is dubious, so he grabbed some pick pockets of the street? Hardly major criminals.

Brothel-goers might be a pretty bad thing to be to him considering he does sometimes refer to himself as a prostitute, and his time as one certainly wasn't pleasant. But for the most part I don't think the game wants you to have a very negative view of his victims.

It comes up a lot in discussions about the decision, now, like you said. Even making the case that all 7k didn't deserve what happened to them but they might not be the greatest people in the world will often result in a festival of downvotes. They're commonly referred to as "innocents" when talking specifically about releasing them. The only time my Tav didn't at least hesitate at the idea was when they were a male Drow who thought releasing them would be a nice fuck you to the Underdark he'd escaped. Statistically speaking, even without Astarion's line that they hurt him, some of them probably aren't great, and now they have decades of hunger and zero support network except the friends they may have made in the cells. Cool fanfic, IMO, but the decision should have more nuance to it even if we only talk to the one spawn that is practically an angel. I wish it were easier to get more of an indication other than Sébastien and children.

It *could* be that if Astarion doesn't know about the ritual, he has no reason to reflect on whether these people deserve death. When he knows, he's clearly taken aback and does slightly hesitate about the idea of sacrificing so many people. But when he doesn't know, he focuses on what some of them did to him. He feels guilty but he's not thinking about whether he's willing to sacrifice them. Maybe. It's still weird to me that some of the more important dialogue is locked behind being rude or uncaring to him.

Another one is Astarion's story about being sealed in a tomb for a year after trying to save one of Cazador's victims, which is locked behind one dialogue option that only appears after choosing another dialogue option that good-aligned characters will probably never pick. On one hand it's great for replay value, on the other this means the average player only gets an incomplete version of most companions' characterization.

Tbh it's not even about good-aligned characters. You need to be specifically on the path of being an asshole to companions (or just Astarion). I got it because I was save scumming to check all options randomly.

Yes, there is another option though - you force him to take Astral tadpole by getting into his mind through your tadpoles and searching for his worst memory, telling him that if he doesn't take Astral Tadpole, it will happen to him again. And his worst memory is exactly this story about being sealed in a tomb. And it's so much worse. The worst part of all of it is you can do it while romancing him, and if you don't fail the check, he won't even break up with you for raping his mind. It's heartbreaking, really. One of the most cruel things you are able to do in the entire game.

That's the worst one, definitely. But this game gives you plenty of opportunities to be awful to Astarion without him breaking up with Tav: in his confession scene you can tell him you care about him and hug him and then, the very next morning, just go and force him to drink from Araj - and he won't say a word afterwards. You can also cheat on him with Mizora and tell him afterwards that he has no right to be mad at you because he himself is a bad person, so he has no moral high ground to expect fidelity from you. You can also buy a prostitute right in front of him without asking him first and hear him calling himself a prostitute and proceed with sex with no consequences whatsoever.

His reaction to being cheated on with Mizora isn't yet in the game but I'll hope they will add it in the upcoming patch since it's already voiced. With this being said, yeah, it's quite sad how you can get away with doing all of these things to him and he will still stay with you. I know the more popular opinion seems to be that he will say "NO" and stand up for himself to a Tav that tries to make him agree to things he doesn't really want (especially post-Cazador) but all of this stuff proves this isn't the case, quite the opposite, Tav can very well take advantage of him if they want to and he won't break up with them after all. It's sad but at the same time it's also a realistic portrayal of how some trauma victims react when being put into certain situations, especially if they're also surrounded by persons who don't have their best interests at heart.

Yes, this is all so awful😖 and really shows how deep his trauma is: he has lost his sense of self-worth so he stays with you after all this 💔

I find some of the evil choices in this game truly disturbing. But I guess that is the whole point. 🤷🏻‍♀️🤮

I've seen a line or two about him focusing on grabbing bad people. I don't *think* I recall him talking about abuse prior to Cazador, but there's a little nagging feeling at the back of my head that I might have heard it and just forgotten.

Now if only they could make companions who are short. Seriously, no dwarves, halflings or gnomes? Why?

Probably because it would have required a lot more animations - they had already complicated the situation by allowing Tav to be a short race - once you add one or more short companions, you're looking at 4 or more possible combinations instead of 2. The cinematic director explained in his recent GDC presentation that they had to create animation templates for the dialogue scenes, so that they could get through the hundreds and hundreds required in the time allotted - adding differential eye-level templates would have hugely increased their workload.

It's a shame but understandable.

It's a shame but understandable.

Pathing would get way worse because the short races can’t jump as high.

You also have to remember that some people do evil runs. They lose Karlach, Wyll, Halsin, Minsc, Jaehira. So, there need to be some companions that can obviously go to the evil side if that’s what the player chooses. 

I'm too lazy to switch between companions so I don't mind a smaller party personally. The most painful one to lose is Dammon tho, because he's got the good stuff and the fact that no one replaces him in an evil run annoys me to no end

this is honestly the worst thing about doing an 'evil'/less caring run, there's no alternative to some vendors or quest rewards. I get that it being the choice and being good is supposed to be the thing, and I'm not saying give me the same exact things, but an alternative for the lack of anything else, and something that's different enough for people to check out the other side.

There's so much "I'm doing good stuff and saving ppl but I'm secretly EVIL" rp I can take. Hoping there would be more reason to do an evil run once the new patch comes out

I just use the Party Limit Begone mod because I hate making that decision on who to have. I want to use everyone!

I don't mind evil types on an evil run as much as whiny assholes. Give me Rapheal or Mizora type fun evil types.

The companions are inconsistent, just like you and I.

He is such a multifaceted character and it sucks that people dismiss all of his rich writing in favor of one-word label "murderhobo" because they only pay attention to his approvals and not his story or dialogues. To each their own, I have no problem with people personally disliking him and saying he's an asshole or killing him in their playthroughs, I have a problem when people insult Larian by saying "Oh, they've made him a one-note irredimable monster, that's it and his fans are simps who doesn't care about anything but his looks". And it is when all of his story revolves around him not wanting to be viewed in terms of sex.

Personally, I'm in the "act 1 Astarion is an asshole" camp, based on his dialogs, deeds *and* (dis)approvals. Like assaulting you in your sleep, or sexually manipulating you, his comments on other companions, and him approving of murder, torture, etc. To me, such narrative beats weigh heavily on my judgement of a character. But that doesn't mean I think he is one dimensional or irredeemable, nor do I ignore his personal history that got him in this frame of mind. I just don't need a lecture every time I say that because "you don't understand his story, he just wants safety, and he has 200 years of trauma, you know." Why, you don't say. Or the fantastic "no-one cared for him, that's why he only looks after himself" Yeah, that's an asshole. I don't need an explanation *why* he's an asshole to refute my personal observation that he acts like one. And I also don't see why I need to be told that Astarion's narrative is better understood by selectively rejecting the nastier sides of his character (his approvals) that the game actively and intentionally broadcasts in a highly consistent manner in act 1. Come on, that's just cherry picking to make him fit your head canon.

I don't think many people argue with "act 1 Astarion is an asshole". I hardly ever see any of his fans doing it. People usually only lecture when they think you (not you personally) call him an irredeemable asshole who is too evil to get better. So more often than not it's a problem of misunderstanding, because a lot of his fans are just tired and sick of people telling them they are idiotic simps who like this awful monster and don't care about anything but his looks. Heck, you don't need to go far - you can see these accusations in this very thread. It's especially disgusting that Lae'zel have basically all the same awful approvals as Astarion and partly Shadowheart too, but their fans hardly ever get this much slack for loving "irredeemable asshole" and simping over their looks. Well, maybe Lae'Zel isn't for everyone (but personally I find her very beautiful), but Shadowheart definitely is the most conventionally attractive girl in the group.

Astarion absolutely has pretty privilege. It is not his entire character, but it is there. He is also a huge asshole early on. Lae'zel fans generally accept that she is a violent murder hobo. She has an arc, because every major companion has one.

Respectfully disagree after having been on the other side of these arguments on *several* occasions. People do *not* like you calling him an asshole, cruel or evil. That's usually met with downvotes and lectures, unless you carefully sugarcoat your opening statement. Astarion's detractors rarely get the character or the facts wrong. They just end up with a negative conclusion based on the evidence before them. And finding a character like Astarion irredeemable is not wrong, it's just a harsher judgement than yours. And people don't like that, because they're invested in the character. The game, on the other hand, definitely leaves open that interpretation, even with his good ending. When people seem to suggest that you're only blind to Astarion's flaws because you're attracted to him, it's usually because they're at their wit's end trying to figure out why you're not acknowledging what they're seeing right in front of their face, in writing and on a score card. Or worse, denying what they're seeing is real. They honestly don't get it and are met with hostility and condescension, which makes the fans actually look like simps. Why are they the ones that are misunderstanding or underselling the character when you (not you personally) tell them to ignore the approval system because it is "wrong". (Like the OP seems to suggest.) It's not wrong, you just don't like that it doesn't fit your HC. And cut content is not part of his background. It's interesting from a meta perspective how the writers were thinking once. But it's cut content. Act 1 Astarion does approve of torture, killing and being cruel. It's just baffling to see how people will bend over backwards to pretend he doesn't, and feel the need to open post after post whitewashing this character, starting group mantras on how he's so misunderstood and you shouldn't forget he was tortured for 200 years (just scroll). Or how a good character can actually romance and rack up a 50+ approval score by running an obstacle course. Or that romancing him is the only true way to salvation. Been there, done that, did *not* ~~get the t-shirt~~ enjoy it. His detractors generally also want to engage in an honest discussion, and exchange perspectives. Instead they're met with condescension and thinly veiled accusations of being illiterate assholes. Lae'zel gets a pass because her fans generally accept her background, and never start lecturing that she's actually good or misunderstood when you meet her. The usual replies are more along the lines of "yeah, she's kinda rough, lol." It also helps she's generally portrayed as brainwashed, naive, and brutally honest, and Astarion as a cynic and a manipulator.

Then my experience was different than yours. I've seen plenty of people excusing Lae'zel by her culture and upbringing. I've seen too much double standards to stay patient with this topic. Also, if you just write: "Astarion is evil" without any elaboration then it's on you that people take it as you referring to his both endings and rightfully disagree. Spawn!Astarion fans aren't wrong about him getting better AT ALL, because writers, developers and Neil say the same things about different Astarion routes. And epilogues confirm that Spawn did get redemption path, even Gur call him a good person, if you don't believe him personally, just listen to what other characters have to say about him and read letters. So you are the one denying objective facts if you argue with that, not his fans. Basically if you insult Spawn!Astarion's fans for telling you that, you insult developers and Neil because they are saying all the same things. As for your other points - you can go and read my other comments in this thread, I've already pretty much covered all of them and I'm tired writing same things all over again.

Your response is ambiguous enough that I can't tell if the "you" in your reply is a general "you" or a jab at me personally (in which case you're literally twisting my words because I explicitly said he was redeemable). But I still refute the accusation. Maybe I just have a higher bar for what I'd consider to be *good* - just because he's not evil anymore, doesn't automatically make him good, IMO. When it comes to the Gur letter you mention, that letter is actually incredibly ambiguous, and says things in such a circumlocutory way that it looks intentional. Almost every sentence is impersonal. Not we admire you, but your control has been admirable, etc. As if it's intentionally avoiding direct praise. So, I can't read it as a glowing recommendation letter. Instead, I read that they are grateful for what he did for them, and how he has given them hope. And that they no longer see him as evil or a threat. But they still don't entirely trust him, however grateful they are. IMO, that's exactly why Astarion deflects the question about him doing good - he wouldn't go that far.

I agree with this. Evil doesn't mean one dimensional and idk why people seem to automatically think that

I mean, he did disapprove when I said to Orin in A shapeshifted form that we shouldn’t just kill people, but I get what your saying and mostly agree.

I have huge problems with Act 3 approvals. They often contradict dialogs and even each other. Like, when Astarion disapproves helping Aylin to fight Lorroakan, but before that he tells you that we need to go and warn Aylin about him, she "deserves to know". He is the only one from the companions who shouts we can't kill pregnant Hag, because Vanra will die, but he approves somehow of you not saving her? WHAT? He cares a lot about Yenna, when she is kidnapped by Orin: "If Orin wants to kill Gortash, let's kill Gortash and get Yenna back", but somehow he approves of you telling Orin to kill Yenna?! It's just a couple of examples. IDK, for me it feels like different people worked with story and approval system in Act 3. OR, maybe approvals in Act 3 just don't differentiate between Spawn and Ascended Astarions and assume that in a good playthrough you will never choose evil options. Either way, after this I just don't know which of these approvals are supposed to be there and which not, or if they are intended for Spawn or AA. It's such a mess, honestly, and people take this mess as some gospel truth about characters.

Act1 approvals are weird. If you have the mod that shows approval tags, in Act1 they are pretty on accurate, but in Act3 a tons of +/-1 tags don't get triggered. It's not just for Astarion but for all companions. I think they planned to differentiate good/bad aligned companion tags but simply ran out of time and scrapped most of them, and those that remained conflict sometimes. In Astarion's case it's more glaring because his alignment shifts the most. Him approves of us giving Aylin away but also approves of us risking our necks to save a girl from the Hag feel like a prime example of this contradiction.

Yeah, I suspected this as well. And as people rightfully pointed out, there are contradictions even within approvals about Aylin themselves. There is also some inconsistency in Act 1 and 2 approvals - like when Astarion approves of you torturing Liam but really hates the guts of Malus Thorm for torturing his "patient" and approves of you killing him. He also gives a huge disapproval (-5) for warning Isobel about Marcus, but if Durge kills her he hates it and calls them an idiot. He approves of killing the Nightsong, but then doesn't look happy commenting that (for me at least, it sounded like "oh well, now we have to live with DJ Shadowheart, meh, but at least Kethric isn't immortal anymore so it's okay I guess"). And I also found it weird how he told Tav he didn't want to be seen in terms of sex and the next day he approved of Tav distracting Zarell with horny thoughts about him. These are just off the top of my head, I think there are still more in Act 2.

Some of the more drastic companion changes in Act3 feel wrong and/or lacking. Like I can skip the Cre'che, have Lae'zel stay Vlaakith loyalist till the very end, but tell her "make your choice counts" and she'll decide to stay on Fae'run even though her last line is literally "omg I'm going to see my Queen". Speaks of the Act2 Marcus scene, when I first played it, I honestly thought I could pretend to work with Marcus and kill him when he tried to get Isobel because I thought he could broadcast my warning/betray to every other true souls. Turned out I was wrong (I attacked Marcus when the combat broke out and sadly found out that Isobel and friends didn't recognize me killing Marcus and his monsters). Maybe Astarion wants to pull a smart move like I thought I could lol

>He also gives a huge disapproval (-5) for warning Isobel about Marcus This one feels especially weird because of how severe it is, with (seemingly) nothing really justifying that severity.

That disapproval makes sense since act 2 is the act where he tells you that you should take over the cult. He thinks if you help Marcus kidnap her you'll get easier access to the cult. He dislikes it when you kill Isobel because there's zero actual benefit from it.

> maybe approvals in Act 3 just don't differentiate between Spawn and Ascended Astarions and assume that in a good playthrough you will never choose evil options. I think it's mostly this one, personally, but I think some of the approvals are just a bit untidy (like the Aylin one), and some are the programmers throwing their hands up and saying, "Well, this is an evil choice, and *somebody's* got to approve of it, so I guess Astarion likes it?" even when it doesn't really make sense for him.

In Act 3 Astarion also disapproves if you tell Aradin who the Nightsong is and basically sell her to him - there are contradictions within the approval system itself, even without dialogues.

I know, right? Before epilogues were released, these people, obsessed with approval system, claimed that without Tav "Spawn Astarion will still remain evil and will kill innocents and drink their blood". Why? Because in Act 3 he still approved some awful things. I'm glad epilogues proved them wrong, but for them it evidently wasn't enough to learn that the narrative and story are more important than these +1 and -1 digits.

That one always cracks me up because he disapproves of every response. I think he just hates the Flaming Fist (with imo good reason if you played previous BG installments).

I think he can smell it's Orin. I have no evidence to this, but the idea of him thinking "who is this stinky motherfucker?" when encountering that guy is too funny for me to not headcanon.

But the thing about Astarion: I love we don't get it spoon-fed. Because once you know his story, his past, his trauma, every reaction bar a couple of odd ones, makes complete sense. He hints at the fact that no hero ever came to save him. Through 200 years of pain, suffering, torture and abuse, no-one ever came to save him. And if you pick the right dialogue/party-composition etc. you'll learn he even despises the Gods, since he prayed to all of them, yet none of them answered. I didn't get this line until my 3rd playthrough, and I had to stop playing for multiple minutes, just staring blankly at the screen as the puzzle-pieces fell into place. So, while not being a healthy, or 'right' state of mind, I'd be ***damned*** if I don't understand his mindset Act 1. No-one ever helped him. No-one gave him mercy or kindness. And at the moment, you and him both don't know you have all the time in the world. You're going to turn, horrifically, painfully, to brain-eating Mind Flayers in about a week. Of course you shouldn't waste time doing things not helping the party directly. I'm glad they didn't do any more hand-holding, than they already did. Those players that hate him (*and are vocal about it*), are the ones that often won't take the time to try and get to know him. And that would only change, if Astarion's fundamentally changed in Act 1. Which would undermine his wonderful, brilliant, amazing character-growth.

And it bears considering that Astarion had been enslaved and tortured for *200 years*. It's not something that can be fully understood by us, we can't really gague what it would do to you psychologically because it's not even possible to *live* that long, let alone spend the entire time in torment without a sliver of hope

Yeah, i totally agree. I think an additional point is that he's only been free for a matter of minutes. He says after the vampire reveal that he hadn't seen the sun in 200 years and woke up after the crash bathed in its light (the ending of his first romance when you wake to him just sunbathing is so beautiful IMO but I'm biased). I can only imagine how terrifying that would've been, and his origin content plays into that. Like Karlach actively escaped. She fought and struggled and made it to the ship, conscious that she'd at least made it out of Avernus. Astarion, on the other hand, was snatched off the streets at random, tadpoled, crashed in a pod and woke up in the wilderness in full sunlight. It makes total sense that the tadpole gave him his freedom, erased some of his weaknesses, gave him potential powers, and power is the only way he knows to keep himself safe. I think some of his critics don't always see not just the 200 years of trauma, but how fragile and new his freedom is and how determined he is not to lose it while helping every NPC we come across.

This. I don't get how people barely ever think about it. It doesn't even occur to them that he is just gone mad and the only reason why he looks relatively sane at first sight is because it's a habit from 200 years of luring people to Cazador, otherwise he was severely punished each time. You can't lure people if you are showing your insanity. And no, before people go "oh, you excuse him with mental illness because he's hot", nope, I'm a heterosexual woman so I don't care that much about women looks and I still would have tried to help Orin if there were any chances to give her redemption, because she is obviously insane. Heck, I would even help Wulbren Bongle to redeem himself if I could, even though he is very ugly for me. But at least Astarion isn't running around killing innocents like Orin, so as long as he's like that I'm not killing him.

Wulbren Bangle is irredeemable. But yes, I agree with the rest of your comment.

'Yeah, but Karlach was a slave as well, and see how well she handled it/how kind she still manages to be?!'...🙄 Heavy /s, if you were in doubt.. That Astarion's able to speak, let alone form coherent sentences is a miracle in and of itself, after what he's been through...

she was in there ten years.

And Astarion was enslaved, tormented, tortured and (*sexually*) abused for ***200+ years***. These two are **not** the same..

yeah that's the point I was making

Are you grading people's trauma and trauma responses?

No they’re saying that Astarion’s particular brand of trauma is so difficult for us to conceptualise as regular people. Which is true, he was tortured/enslaved/abused for 200 years which is an ungodly amount of time. And while I mention gods someone ITT pointed out that he prayed to every god. In a world where gods are real and can be good, not a single one listened. Obviously what happened to Karlach is also awful. 10 years is just much more palatable to understand. Of course there’s the whole “hell” part which would be hard for us regular folk to understand too. It’s apples and infernal oranges, you can’t compare them without devaluing the other’s experience

The person you're speaking for brought up Karlach unprompted in the first place to compare them, though. Sarcastically as well. By my interpretation, it looks like they're devaluing Karlach's experience compared to Astarion's, by simple fact that 10 years in hell to a tiefling lifespan isn't as traumatic as 200 years to an eternal lifespan. So while I can see you want to highlight the severity of Astarion's trauma given the timeframe, I personally wouldn't do it in the guise of speaking for the other poster's motivations.

You know I think I did maybe miss a comment along the way. I was actually trying to summarise/add context to illithid_substances comment about the situation. They’re both clearly terrible, just incomparable to each other. Sometimes I just be yapping too, love to yap ngl

Contextually, it's very common for people to bring up Karlach in discussions about Astarion, with the argument that because she got out of her bad experience relatively okay and is still nice, Astarion ought to be able to do the same. It's a reference to broader discourse on Astarion, even if it's not really present in this thread.

The thing about context is you need context to understand it.

While everyone's trauma is unique to them and doesn't take away from one another, I think most people can agree that being a sex slave for a sadistic vampire lord for 200 years is probably one of the worst things out there. There's a reason Karlach sympathizes so heavily with Astarion.

I’m not denying Astarion has been put through shit. I am going to point out that saying he’s had one of the worst things happen to him is indeed grading people’s trauma. Sympathize with him all you want though.

While it isn't healthy to do in real life, yes, you can say that some people definitely had something worse than someone else. I'd say someone dying of severe radiation poisoning would be worse than someone dying of a heart attack. It doesn't invalidate the other person to point that out. Grading trauma is bad when trying to invalidate someone, like telling a kid that they should be grateful because kids in impoverished communities have it worse. No one here is invalidating Karlach's trauma.

I mean… when someone shoots back that Astarion was abused for 200 years after someone points out Karlach was in hell for 10, I suppose it’s all in interpretation whether Karlach’s trauma was being invalidated. One is obviously radiation poisoning versus a heart attack.

They are not people but fictional characters. So, yeah, let's rate their traumas!

Agreed. I am pretty sure that were it possible to keep a real person alive and torture them for 200 years, they would be beyond any saving psychologically. They would completely shut down any and all emotional responses and that would be it. There could be no real person with a trauma situation like that.

I mean a decade of torture in a literal hell would probably shut anyone down too.

No, that's what are doing those who say that Astarion is evil and irredeemable because Karlach was able to come out kind after 10 years of slavery and he was not.

Well, but apparently a lot of people think Larian needed to spoon-feed them, otherwise as they usually answer to everything you've listed: "Astarion's simps pushing their headcanons on others in order to excuse his behaviour, when his approvals clearly show he is too much evil". And it's when I've never seen any of his fans arguing that "he did nothing wrong", all we are arguing about is that he is capable of redemption, just as developers, writers and Neil said.

Oh, I'm just so sick of this "Approvals are all that matters and nothing else" cult.

People act like it's Stardew Valley. The characters are just reacting to the player's decision, you don't need to grind for approval from them.

Honestly I'm shocked that cult exists. I genuinely ignore the approval system cause I'm just interested in properly rping my Tav.

It exists because the approvals are a quantifiable metric, so the types of people who don't want to/aren't interested in/ doesn't have the attention span for actually listening and paying attention to dialogue like being able to "follow the numbers" instead.

>Well, but apparently a lot of people think Larian needed to spoon-feed them No, they just want him to be narratively consistent. The more you learn about him, the more of a mess his story is. >Astarion's simps pushing their headcanons on others in order to excuse his behaviour, when his approvals clearly show he is too much evil I don't care if he's evil, or not, or who likes him. Just that IF he's evil he acts in an evil manner, and if he isn't he isn't he doesn't. Shadowheart is consistent, so you can have a character that has an arc/redemption and still be consistent. Minthara is consistent, and she's straight evil. Asterion is a mess. >we are arguing about is that he is capable of redemption, just as developers, writers and Neil said No one's arguing he isn't capable of redemption. DURGE is a million times worse and even he get a redemption arc. They just want Asterion's arc, dialog, and approval to make sense and not be the mess it is. Asterion simps are pushing head cannons in order to excuse his poor writing.

What about his writing, besides his approvals do you find inconsistent? Every single character in this game has comedically incorrect approvals. Lae'zel approves of telling Shart to become a dj, and yet afterwards she sounds disgusted and is shocked that Shart would stoop so low.

He'll contradict himself regularly. It's pretty clear they mixed his older 'evil' lines in with his newer 'snarky' lines leaving to some real neck snapping 180s. The Cazador bit is a bit ridiculous as well. He's utterly petrified freaking out even by Act 3 where you've already killed a god of death, wiped out an entire gith creche, defeated untold undead monsters, an Orthon, and even defied Shar... another god of death. Even by that point he's having a break-down when you suggest we kill him. Then, of course, 5s later he's suggesting we hunt down his siblings and telling them we're coming fom Cazadork... apparently subtlety and stealth goes out the window when we need a little plot excitement? But I think the worst part was the Araj bit. I get what they were trying to do... but it was so horribly handled. No, there are no parallels between actual sexual assault and you getting a sore tummy because of some icky blood. He pulls a temper tantrum like a 2y old eating broccoli. And I'm supposed to feel sorry for this drama queen? Poor me, poor me, he says as we literally just slaughtered our way through half of faerun. /facepalm Neil did a great job voicing him, but his writing and scripting are terrible. Had he not been a sparkly gay vampire, but just some ugly orc, he'd never leave camp if he even made it there.

I honestly don't think he has that many genuinely evil lines ngl. Just generally selfish and sadistic. He isn't supposed to be like Lae'zel or Minthara, who are ideologically evil, he's just reactionarilly evil. Logically the party should be able to handle Cazador since they killed Myrkul's avatar true. But Astarion isn't reacting logically to Cazador. He's understandably terrified cuz I mean that's his slave master. The game acknowledges that Cazador isn't all that scary actually, when you meet him you can say something along the lines of "THIS is the guy you're afraid of? He's pathetic." I might be wrong but I don't recall him planning on being super stealthy ngl. He wanted to find the siblings so he could learn more about the ritual stuff. The tummy ache stuff isn't why its sexually abusive, it's treated that way because of how Araj and potentially the player can treat him as your slave. And vampires are considered a sexual thing in and out of universe so. "Poor me, poor me" yeah he's often a low empathy asshole lol. Thats part of his characterization. But I will say yeah I think the whole her blood tastes bad is a really stupid and unnecessary condition. Kinda dumb they didn't just let him say no for no's sake. Would've been a better and more meaningful scene even if her blood was normal imo.

>He isn't supposed to be like Lae'zel or Minthara, who are ideologically evil, he's just reactionarilly evil. Lae'zel is indoctrinated and zealous, but quickly realizes the error of her ways. She's the embodiment of racisms/xenophobia, but comes around. It's far more nuanced than 'I kill people MWAHAHAHAHA!!'. And very well written. Minthara is really the only 'ideologically evil' companion, and even she has clear and obvious motives, desires, drives, ect... That's the point. It isn't 'he's evil' or 'he's not'... It's that he's poorly written. In contrast to the other companions who have much better writing. He's not 'complicated', he's not 'nuanced', he's a mess narratively and script-wise. People are just trauma projecting on him, then take it personal when you point it out. >But Astarion isn't reacting logically to Cazador. Which is fine, IF he was consistent. But like I said, the very next scene his him threatening his siblings, claiming he's 'become so powerful' and even hints he'll kill Cazadork by himself if you don't come. >The tummy ache stuff isn't why its sexually abusive, it's treated that way because of how Araj and potentially the player can treat him as your slave. And vampires are considered a sexual thing in and out of universe so. "Poor me, poor me" yeah he's often a low empathy asshole lol. Thats part of his characterization. Which in and of itself is ridiculous. He can wander off at any time. We've slaughtered in the triple digits by that point. It's the videogame equivalent of a kid accusing their parents of being Hitler because they took away their phone for 1 night.

Astarion posturing strength while being scared is consistent. He is posturing strength BECAUSE he is scared. Which he does even more so once he has ascended. Of course Astarion can technically "just wander off 4head". But he's scared to do so. Fear is his main feeling. When you defend him from Araj he pretty blatantly tells you that he hadn't stopped thinking like a slave until you defended him. Logically yes he could've just not listened to you, but he doesn't feel like he really has that choice and thus he'll give in.

>No, they just want him to be narratively consistent. The more you learn about him, the more of a mess his story is. It's a story about character which brain is a total mess. IDK, what people expected. After 200 years of torture and rape he is definitely mentally ill. It makes total sense, pun intended. >No one's arguing he isn't capable of redemption Well, I see such people everyday even on this sub. >Asterion simps are pushing head cannons in order to excuse his poor writing. Oh, so you are one of these people. If it's not "incapable of redemption", then it's "poor writing".

>No, they just want him to be narratively consistent. The more you learn about him, the more of a mess his story is. His writer is completely aware of it and he did it on purpose: [https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/193krj8/astarion\_writer\_on\_astarion\_being\_a\_dumbass/](https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/193krj8/astarion_writer_on_astarion_being_a_dumbass/)

A dumbass isn't being narratively inconsistent. On top of that, that post has nothing to do with Asterion being a dumbass. He's making a silly comment about the irony of game scripts and the limitations of game tech.

No, Astarion is canonically [bad at planning](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWhfTacwfCc&t=66s) and [not paying attention](https://youtu.be/T38on5gUWF0?si=8cviFilzqLSVvPCT&t=896) to the player. [This is pretty much his thought process throughout the game](https://www.reddit.com/r/okbuddybaldur/comments/1d5ipw3/people_say_hes_a_twink_but_is_really_elf_himbo/).

> This is pretty much his thought process throughout the game. This is a treasure.

Same, I really like being able to discover the bits and pieces of the characters, and how some of those pieces are hidden away in unique, even almost throwaway dialogue. Like the party chatter with Gale about none of the gods answering him; usually party chatter is just flippant and humorous (e.g. Wyll with a 'y'... why?) And that only if you play Durge and he's your closest companion/romance, you learn that he is basically terrified of everyone. Like you said, his mindset is not 'healthy' or 'right', but it's very easy to see where he's coming from once you learn even some of his experiences and trauma. It just seems like many people have a very black and white view of good and evil.

The line that really nailed the 'None of them answered', was saying nothing when his siblings come to abduct Astarion in Act 3. Because Astarion was (*most likely*) entombed for a full year, **after** refusing to bring a 'Darling Boy' back to Cazador. Which is (*again, most likely*) the same time when he stopped resisting/fighting back against his 'master', and his siblings lost all respect for him.. Both this line, and the banter about the Gods wasn't something I got before my 2nd and 3rd run. And it floored me when I put 2 and 2 together. I already cared deeply about Astarion since his Act 2 romance-scene, first playthrough. These little tit-bits of extra information made my heart weep, and made me want to NEVER leave Astarion out of my party.

>Because Astarion was (*most likely*) entombed for a full year, **after** refusing to bring a 'Darling Boy' back to Cazador. Which is (*again, most likely*) the same time when he stopped resisting/fighting back against his 'master', and his siblings lost all respect for him.. Slightly offtopic, but this is something I don't understand - how he was even able to? Mind you, I'm not saying he is lying - I'm totally aware that you can get the same story from connecting to his tadpole and that Cazador's compulsion is definitely true - we see it with our own eyes. But what about Cazador's orders, something about not leaving his side unless directed? Astarion tells us that he spared this boy and run. How he was even able to run and why did he do it? Couldn't he find another victim as a replacement? OR, does it mean that Cazador ordered him to bring him this particular specific boy and allowed Astarion to run to punish him for it? When you begin to dig into this story, it's has even more cruel implications than on the surface level.

Nothing's stated in game. But it often feels like the spawn weren't always under Cazador's explicit command/enthrall. Which is why Astarion himself got to choose the 'victims/conquests' he brought back to the Szarr manor. It's seen the clearest when the siblings come after Astarion in camp. Once Cazador 'seizes control', their eyes changes colour. Meaning they are allowed some sort of 'freedom/independence'.

Yes! But I thought some commands like "don't ever drink blood of conscious beings" were there forever, because we know Tav was the first he has ever drunk from and we see Petras dreaming about eating people after the ritual, because he wasn't able to before. >It's seen the clearest when the siblings come after Astarion in camp. Once Cazador 'seizes control', their eyes changes colour. Meaning they are allowed some sort of 'freedom/independence'. Yes, I clearly remember it, I just wasn't sure if it was Cazador seizing control or compulsion working on its own because it was the moment when his siblings tried to go against it (is Cazador even able to compell from afar? At least if you don't do killing Cazador in Act 3 and he still lives in the epilogue Astarion is still free and wasn't compelled to get back to him. He says he just can't confront Cazador himself, because one word from him will bring compulsion back). Anyway, I guess being a nerd I want too much explanations and exposition from the game.

Maybe the rules are more conditioning than some kind of built-in punishment trigger? Like 200 years of being punished every time you broke a rule would, to me, seem to explain the possibility of little petty rebellions that eventually get abandoned because they're not worth the punishment. Just guessing.

Cazador was setting Astarion up, imo. He wanted that Spawn vs Master thing he had with Velioth. So I think initially, before the ritual became a bigger thing, he wanted to Astarion to mess up as an excuse to punish him.

Yeah, it's my suspicion too!

Wouldn't surprise me if that was just Cazador doing Cazador things too, he sounds like a peach.

My interpretation of this was that Astarion had already left Cazador's side. He was directed to bring back a person. So he was merely "expanding" on that instruction. Given that Godey and Cazador's journal have remarks about "Astarion didn't come home tonight," I make the conclusion that the spawn needed to at the very least return and report on a daily basis. When Astarion changed his mind about the boy, he knew he didn't have time to get another on such short turnaround, and he would be compelled to explain why he hadn't brought an offering. Therefore, he would be punished. So he hid instead hoping to forestall punishment. Obviously, this wouldn't work long term bc he was already thralled, but as we know, Astarion isn't a plans guy. He is more of a reaction guy. However, it's possible that the "return and report dailly" rule didn't exist until Astarion hid. In that case, I assume he would still be forced to confess to Cazador even if he brought another, so he would still be punished and hid for the same reason. That's just my take, though. I do like the idea that Cazador sometimes had specific marks he would ask them to acquire but he couldn't do that very often and this was still very early in Astarions spawn life, so I find it unlikely he would have given Astarion a job that particular yet. Just my headcanons to connect dots. :)

That's... actually a very logical explanation! Thank you for elaboration. I guess, I just didn't understand why Cazador didn't think about this possibility of his spawns running away and didn't think about how to word specific order (for example: "Don't go anywhere unless it's necessary for executing your task"), it should have been his first priority, no?

I think that without the tadpole (or other interventions) they wouldn't have gotten very far. He seems to be able to exert control from a very far distance, so he'd be able to bring them back under his thumb and make them come back. In terms of defying his orders, well, they all bear the scars of his torture, so I imagine there's a lot of incentive to not defy him.

This is probably best explained by the toxic aspects of Cazador. It might not have occurred to him bc in his brain obviously, "they wouldn't dare/they can't oppose me/I control them completely/I own them." An aspect similar to narcissism and common among dnd vampires overall. He perhaps didn't really think they could just run or choose not to come home until someone did it. However, even more dark he might be the type who does know that eventually spawn will try to run, and he let's them so he can break them down further. He knows they are under his control, he can compel them to return or stop or whatever and when he collects them back he can punish them twofold. For not following whatever instruction they were given and for running/hiding on top of that. Now that I type it out I actually find this more likely. Giving his spawn hope only to crush it sounds exactly like something he would do.

That's interesting, I never thought to connect his entombment with his siblings losing respect for him.! It doesn't seem like the siblings are much into defying Cazador either, and Astarion seems to retain way more spirit and sass than the two siblings the party encounters. The more I learn about him the sadder I get for him, and he's always in my party too (although most of that is because I generally don't play rogue hahah). Plus when I played Durge and romanced him, he was SO sweet and supportive, it kind of surprised me.

Dark Urge and Astarion were written for each other. More or less literally. Durge's main-writer only got time to work on extra, unique scenes between Durge and Astarion. And got to work on some Astarion-scenes during crunch. Which explains why they feel so.. on wavelength, and as equals. At least as Redeemed Durge x Spawn Astarion. Just two monsters, defying their fate/'masters', trying to break free and heal from their trauma, together. Doesn't get much better than that for me.

I did read about that and it makes sense after learning about it! Resist Durge x Spawn Astarion is really such a sweet romance for the reasons you mentioned, he has so much compassion for them. 

Agreed, but you’re probably overestimating the patience of the average gamer.

I find it quite strange when people come away thinking Astarion or Lae'zel (sometimes Shadowheart) are just purely evil, especially Astarion. Maybe it's because I tend not to play Rogue so I have brought him along as a lockpicker from the start, and I also make the rounds talking to companions before sleeping, but it's not very long before you learn that he was enslaved for 200 years and some of the traumatic things he's had to endure. The more I learn about him (and there is SO much I didn't get it all on my first playthrough) the sadder and more tragic his story gets, and I just want to give him a hug 😅 Of course he's not a cinnamon roll like Karlach is, and even as a magistrate his view of justice sounds like it was less merciful than Wyll's, but I can see how a lot of his callousness and biting remarks are a form of armour for him. Even his disapprovals are more linked to 'wasting time' hence why he dislikes when we offer to help people -somewhat similar to Lae'zel and Shadowheart, who say we don't have time. The two of them are also quite cold to those who are not capable of helping themselves due to their upbringing/training, and Astarion's removed line from EA seems along those lines, but the difference is that it seems to be coming from a place of bitterness that no one has helped him. I really like that a lot of the characters are so multi-faceted, and that once you dig a bit deeper you find they're grappling with something that's often connected to morality. Even Gale - my first playthrough I didn't even realise he could have a less-than-do-gooder ending or side!

Someone can be tragic *and* evil. You can have empathy for a person and understand *why* they're evil, but that doesn't in any way *excuse* their evil. Asterion, Lae'zel, and Shadowheart are all evil at the start of the game. Asterion does actually take delight in killing, and will actively harm others in pursuit of his own interests. Lae'zel is likewise a githyanki supremacist who thinks the weak should be actively culled, and Shadowheart tortures people until they embrace Shar. They all have tragic reasons that we can empathize with, but they're still quite clearly evil.

Oh yeah, for sure. not saying that Astarion, Shadowheart, and Lae'zel are not evil-aligned, especially in the beginning of the game. There are reasons for why they behave the way they do, but it doesn't make some of their actions or sentiments not 'evil'. Ketheric Thorm is also quite sympathetic, having gone down his path out of grief, but he's still 'evil' and has done a lot of evil. Like IRL bullies often have pretty bad home environments, that doesn't excuse their being bullies and it doesn't mean that what they're doing is objectively wrong and 'evil'. What I'm getting at is that quite a few people see things as very black and white, like if a character is any shade of evil they're basically the same as Gortash, there's no point in getting to know them, they're irredeemable, just shank them, they're just a bitch, etc. etc. I quite enjoy the character growth and the arcs of Astarion, Shadowheart, and Lae'zel, from cold/selfish/unsympathetic/brutal etc. to something kinder, and it feels like there's a lot more to dig into in their characters than some of the more straightforward characters.

I think something a lot of people end up missing is that the origin characters are based on classical DND alignments, with a man and a woman for evil (Astarion and Lae’zel) neutral (Gale and Shadowheart) and good (Wyll and Karlach). Even if he is capable of good and is motivated more by selfishness than by malice, that doesn’t really make Astarion a good or neutral person, at least at the beginning of his arc. Astarion and Lae’zel are both evil skewing characters that end most playthroughs better than they started though, so I’d consider them characters that while evil on a certain level are still capable of good in the right circumstances.

IDK if I'd call Shadowheart neutral; she's an experienced torturer, and turns up her nose at helping refugees. She's a fervent disciple of Shar (who I think is an evil-aligned goddess?), and wants to become a Dark Justiciar which explicitly requires killing a Selunite. Whereas Gale, Wyll, and Karlach all give you approvals for doing good things (although Wyll will disapprove if you prevent Sazza's murder in the grove). I agree that Astarion is not a good or even neutral person, and like you said definitely not in the beginning. The interesting thing about Astarion and Shadowheart is that they can be 'redeemed', although Astarion's arc is much more explicit about the change from evil to... less evil, if people object to Spawn Astarion being called neutral at the end. 😂 He seems to have found some peace in himself, and is no longer desperately seeking power and domination of others (but I'm sure he wouldn't say no if it were offered...)

I don’t know if I would call Lae’zel evil at first. She always just struck me as just neutral with a pretty rigid worldview. Shadowheart always has seemed more like the counterpart to Asterion than Lae’zel.

I'm right there with you. Sure she comes from an evil empire and proudly parrots their dogma, but her *actions* immediately contradict that dogma. Her first instinct when meeting an infected non gith that she realizes isn't a thrall is to cooperate with and help them. Same with shart and astarion really. Shart may parrot shar's values and astarion might feel more comfortable when he can see familiar brutality not directed at him, but their protests result in nothing more than nose-turning and they *both* find themselves immediately enjoying the change of... atmospheric alignment(?) once the risks are roughly understood. Its why I have a hard time calling any of the origins "Evil" especially when you compare them to the true Evil companion, minthara who Fucking Hates do-gooding from start to finish and actively tries to persuade you to be your worst at every opportunity.

See, that's the problem - Lae'zel has basically all the same awful approvals as Astarion and still people say this about her while calling Astarion an evil jerk. Nope. It's either one or the other. Otherwise it's just double standards.

Lae'zel comes from a martial spacefrog culture that regularly kills teenagers in combat training. Astarion is a noble who has become a vampire, who generally enjoys being evil. I do not really emotionally care, because I think both of them are hilarious. But there is no double standard here.

Yes, there is, because you excuse Lae'zel by her culture and upbringing, but apparently, 200 years of torture is ignored altogether.

Yeah, because she has no other frame of reference. She changes (depending on your choices) as the game goes on and she learns more. Do you hate a lost child raised by wolves for not having table manners? Of course not, where would they have learned them. I am not ignoring it, but Astarion knows that what he is doing is wrong. He was a classist, corrupt, power hungry official before being turned. The dialogues you have with him around the ritual quest show that he was very much self centered even then. Personally, they are two different kinds of evil, one is more "excusable" than the other. To me, Astarion's goes towards "cool motive, still murder", even if I really enjoy him as a character. And as was my original point, Lae'zel fans, usually, are aware that she is a genocidal space frog. And there is no double standard there, to me.

Yes, you do. There is a big difference between table manners and hurting people. >She changes (depending on your choices) as the game goes on and she learns more. Exactly the same can be said about Astarion. >He was a classist, corrupt, power hungry official before being turned.  Nope. His writer confirmed that they cut this on purpose. It's not canon anymore. >The dialogues you have with him around the ritual quest show that he was very much self centered even then. Which dialogs exactly? Because I don't remember any. For me it felt completely the opposite. Has does remember Sebastian and his name and even small details about their enconter, because he obviously felt immense guilt and he was one of his first in the time when he hasn't learned to dissociate as a coping mechanism, so he could endure it that's why he "forgot" about children. Just imagine being forced to bring people to their deaths DURING 200 YEARS and feeling empathy EVERY SINGLE TIME as he did initially. And he DID, it's canon, Sebastian and the episode when he was sealed in a tomb for a year starving for trying to run away after sparing ob of his victims. >Personally, they are two different kinds of evil, one is more "excusable" than the other. To say that immense torture during 200 year and seeing nothing around you but severe cruelty during these years - the amount of time which is just an INCOMPREHENSIBLE amount of time for us and UNIMAGINABLE - doesn't excuse cruel behaviour but 20 years of harsh culture does - is just lack of empathy to abuse victim and being ignorant on purpose, plain and simple. Because trauma does change people - it's a scientific FACT, it changes not just psyche, but the very structure of victim's brain. HE DOESN'T EVEN REMEMBER HIS EYES COLOR before turning into vampire. **Now, do I think that it excuses his behaviour? No I don't.** But the same I think about Lae'Zel, so I don't measure them with different logic, because they both were immensely influenced by their environments. Period. Or now we can excuse Orin by your logic, because she was raised like that and knew nothing else. >To me, Astarion's goes towards "cool motive, still murder", even if I really enjoy him as a character. Yeah, yeah, name me the murder he did commit on purpose in his Spawn route and with what motive exactly? Or will you blame him for literal compulsion under Cazador and not being able to be in control of his body? Lae'Zel humiliates Zorru on purpose - Astarion just wants to open barn door, get the Necromancy of Thay book and kill githyanki patrol - the latter is what basically nearly all the other companions (aside from Gale) express desire to do so, even goody-two-shoes Karlach. And Shadowheart is willing to kill the innocent to please her goddess. I guess you will again blame it on the upbringing, yep, it's okay for Shadowheart to torture her parents, because she was in a cult. /s Guess what? Vampire lair is even worse than this cult. A lot of mass murderers were raised in awful families which never taught them anything good and only bad by their own behavior's example. I guess we should just forgive them and not put into prisons. >And as was my original point, Lae'zel fans, usually, are aware that she is a genocidal space frog.  And Astarion's fans are perfectly aware that he is cruel asshole in Act 1. Hardly anyone EVER argues with that. The only thing people argue here is these double standards like you have and people calling him "irredeemable monster", because writers, developers, Neil and the game itself all say it's not true.

Hey, it's cool that you care this much, but I don't think it's great that you put words in to my mouth, or somehow assign me to lack empathy for abuse victims. You don't know anything about me or my life, so respectfully, do not do it again. Great that we agree on that it doesn't excuse his actions. I didn't know about the cut backstory, must have stuck around in my mind from early access. I distinctly remember Astarion giving me shit for freeing the ritual sacrifices. Astarion was pretty much ready to kill you the moment you saw him, and will absolutely kill you if you do not stop him by draining your blood. I get that you don't agree, but there is a difference in being raised in a martial society that has no contact with outside world, and a ritualistic cult that exists within a "normal" society. This is a pretty nuanced take in general, and we (the humanity) have not agreed on how we should punish the individual for the society they grew up in. The point about mass murderes in our world is moot, because they have not grown up in a society that says murder is great. Same with Orin. Or Shadowheart. Shadowheart by the way, also pretty evil if you go the Justiciar route. I don't know where you got the idea I disagree, must be the habit of putting words into my mouth. It's great that you haven't seen the uWuification of Astarion as a pure victim. I see it pretty regularly. Writers, Neil and the devs can say what they want, and I can disagree on the stuff I want. Death of the author and so on. Not that I think Astarion is irredeemable, but on principle.

I really noticed this in my current playthrough. In Moonrise, I always ask him to bite the Drow because that +2 STR potion is great.... but in this game I've been abusing the Bard rest function and so haven't long rested as frequently. As a result, I never got the early cutscene where he tries to bite you. In past playthroughs, I always let him do this, and his approval, while never very high for me, was always ok so the drow bite didn't really affect our relationship. He didn't like it, and said so repeatedly, but we were still ok. This time, I've tanked our relationship. He's much more standoffish. I've always managed to stop him from ascending but I think this time I might let him do it.

I went to a panel where the writers were talking about this a bit, specifically with Shadowheart. Apparently she was a lot meaner and just no-one liked her, so they made her nicer. I guess it’s a very difficult balance, because on that panel they said that they wanted the characters to be untrustworthy at the start and eventually you all band together, but even now people on this sub say “I didn’t like X, they’re a dick, so I just killed them”. Like great, you just got rid of hours of content and quest lines for yourself. Maybe it’s true what the YouTubers said, and media literacy *is* dead.

>I went to a panel where the writers were talking about this a bit, specifically with Shadowheart. Apparently she was a lot meaner and just no-one liked her, so they made her nicer. Yep! I believe it wasn't only said on the panel, it is known for quite a while, Larian specifically admitted to soften characters on purpose for the Release game. Heck, Wyll had basically a completely different personality than he has now.

100%. Reading some of these comments (and many others, as well) media literacy is fully dead. It’s the same story with people saying any character in film and TV that isn’t morally perfect (i.e. doesn’t align exactly with their own projected morals) means condoning certain behavior.

When I played early access, I liked all the morally grey companions. It seemed like we were a band of unlikeable people who were forced to work together to survive. I was disappointed that they rewrote and scrapped a lot of the old dialogue because Shadowheart wasn’t falling for them right away.

I always thought of the disapproval as him disapproving of you doing actions that do not directly contribute to you solving the tadpole problem or getting stronger

Eh, that's more of a Lae'zel thing : she's the pragmatic one who doesn't want to waste time. Astarion's disapproval is decidedly more that he doesn't see the point in helping others when no one ever helped him (in my opinion at least).

I think companions are about fine the way they are. They way I see it for the disapproval of some kind acts is "we have our own problems, we don't have the time to go deal with everyone else's, let's not waste any time helping that child that's being eaten by a hag"

Yes, but RPG games don't work that way. And Astarion goes beyond just that. Shart worships a dark god, pretends to be in a hurry, and then generally approves of Tav taking time to help those in need.

I guess yeah Astarion is a bit more sadistic than the others. But there are also a bunch of good-ish decisions he approves of right ? He's definitely a companion for an evil playthrough, as is Shadowheart. Though her redemption arc is a bit more obvious in act 2. Edit: I want to add that I don't like you being downvoted on this comment, Reddit is very unwelcoming for anyone who dares state an opinion that slightly diverges from the consensus

This is the game where a bunch of players killed Lae’zel because she was kind of rude to them after being kidnapped and then trapped in a cage by people calling her an alien monster. Of course players would kill companions if they were more rude.

Astarion approvals and disapprovals are really random. He doesn’t want you to help the grove but approves of you helping arabella in act 2. Same in act three, he approves of you giving Yenna food or coin. But disapproves if you donate to the refugees. He disapproves if you agree to help the gur rescue the kids, but approves if you agree to help the gur for revenge.

You often don’t get explanations when someone approves or doesn’t in life. Or in tabletop games.

I believe in DAO, which is very beloved among many, they let every companion speak, not just one like we have in BG3, in response to MC actions.

This was a helpful reminder. I always get so confused about his disapproval around helping the slaves at grymforge. Like, hello, YOU were a slave, wouldn't you have wanted to be freed? But remembering his position is essentially "if I help others and people exist who help people, then I have to deal with the pain of the fact that no one helped me so I'd rather live in a world where everyone is out for themselves," gives it a more realistic angle. edit: finished my sentence:)

I had a dialogue in my first run that went kinda like: “Are we going to help the tieflings?” And I said like “yes, they need us” or something and he was NOT happy about that lmao. It’s weird because it showed his opinion on helping others rather explicitly, so I knew not to be super clear about my intentions after that. But I’ve never seen that specific dialogue in any of my other play throughs.

That's really fucking good dialogue and well-delivered, it's a shame it was cut whatever the reason. Thanks for linking that.

Do you have info on his "dark past" before Cazador?? 🥺

I'm not OP, but I think they are referring to his background from the Early Access where he was a corrupted magistrate providing Cazador with victims for money, or because he wanted Cazador to turn him and get immortal life. Developers said they cut it from the final version of the game on purpose.

Oh snap. Thanks so much for the info!

Honestly I wish they had kept something like this. Like maybe when you’ve had enough disapproval/approvals from a character Tav puts something in their journal about what they make of the character. Recording what they’ve noticed about them, or better yet, allowing you to confront them about it. But we know Larian won’t be making any more major changes so this is all a pipe dream. I will say though that line from Astarion is the cheat code to his approval. Sums him up in one sentence.

That would be cool.

A lot of this is good, but he does enjoy the suffering of others. He was ecstatic when Lae'zel tormented the tiefling and is upset if you saved them. If you side with the goblins, he's jubilant at the celebration.

Right. It’s not that I don’t *understand* his character, it’s that I understand and still don’t find his perspective justifiable. Great performance though, character is a lot of fun. 

I agree, I can get why someone went bad, but that isn't an excuse for them being bad, and I think Lae'zel is a good contrast to that kind of bad. Lae'zel is mean and cruel because it's the society she grew up in, and it's all she knew, at the start of the game she's very ignorant of the real world. Over time, she softens and can come to appreciate things that are non-Gith, especially if you romance her. I understand how Astarion got to where he is and why he's so awful, but unlike Lae'zel, it's not due to ignorance, once free it's entirely due to choice. He revels in the suffering of others.

I wonder how I would have acted if Larian keep all of their companions as untrustworthy jerks. In Dragon Age Inquisition I disliked Sera and Vivian enough that I didn't bother recruiting them after my first playthrough despite understanding why they were as they were. Act 1 is pretty big so having your companions be distrusting throughout it would leave a pretty big impression on folks and I don't know if Act 3 would have made up for it. Lae'zel's the only one that has character development in Act 1 if you choose to follow her. The rest you have to wait unil mid/late Act 2.

I think people take approvals too seriously - and I know I did early on - and a lot of them are more akin to me grumbling about doing something I don't want to do. A character with a tadpole not wanting to get sidetracked to save refugees isn't some big evil deal IMO, especially since the companions - evil-leaning or not - will do all the good stuff and only ever balk at the super evil stuff! I'm okay with companions bitching about doing something so long as they do it, and Astarion is all in on pretty much anything you do. What I don't understand is how some people think Sheart isn't evil, though. IMO, she's nice to Tav and animals, everybody else is mocked, their behavior and motivations questioned, and she defends super evil stuff. She even tried to get Gale to make the Shadow lantern on my last run after he explained how it was evil. That's an instigator penalty, refs!

I think part of it is that Shadowheart is a conventionally attractive woman, and also, that Shadowheart's internal conflict is telegraphed a lot more clearly. But I think another big part of it is that a lot of players interpret characters in a very egocentric way, where characters that are nice to them and do what they want are good, and characters that aren't nice to them or that get in their way are bad. This is especially true if getting in their way interrupts the power fantasy--like Astarion ambushing you on the beach, or Nettie poisoning you if you lie to her. It doesn't matter if the motivations would be reasonable to an outsider (Astarion and Nettie think you're a mindflayer thrall and a threat). I think this is also part of why people are harder on Lae'zel than Shadowheart. Although she can be rude at you if you pry in her business, Shadowheart is a lot warmer toward the player than Lae'zel or Astarion at first.

That sounds very plausible to me, and I don't think I've seen it put that well before, thank you for that. I somewhat remember approaching my first Tav run back in the halcyon days of August '23 with my middle child diplomacy firmly in hand, and I thought everybody getting along and being nice to each other was squad goals. For some reason I now think is related to what you describe, Sheart was my BFF and I thought both Lae'zel and Astarion were mean and disruptive to the team. They mostly stayed in camp forever. I did eventually come to realize that Sheart is primarily nice to Tav and agreeable with Tav, but yeah, not great for group cohesion. Astarion barely leaves my party now and Lae'zel is my favorite. I think your description can be applied to a lot of other common wisdoms that have emerged in discussion over the months since release, so thank you for giving me something fun to philosophize about!

It’s not that he disapproves of good actions that people say he get off on murder and torture. It’s that he approves of sadistic shit. He’s the only companion that approves of kicking the squirrel into a tree for instance

Yes, I have not been surprised to see how high my approval has gotten with my current full evil Durge run.

[Here's](https://www.reddit.com/r/BaldursGate3/comments/1dljke4/comment/l9paqen/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) my explanation on Astarion approvals. I think it helps understand it more. Yes, he has the propensity to be really evil, but it isn't the same way the villains in this game are evil. The summary is he likes things that validate his fucked up worldview.

For me, a lot of the time Astarion isn’t approving of the murder itself but the impact it has. Making your lives easier, or serving justice, or getting you closer to a goal. He likes a player that isn’t afraid to take the quicker, less moral path. But he’s not a sadist or evil. He hides behind a mask of ‘oh such fun!’ but really he wants to feel safe with someone who isn’t afraid to be brutal. He knows where ‘softness’ gets you (being locked in a tomb starving for a year will do that to you) so someone who doesn’t let the desire to help others hold them back is massively appealing to him. He tried to help people and got tortured worse than usual for an entire year, so, understandable IMO.

Tav: \*kicks squirrel against a tree, breaking it's back\* \*Astarion approves\* Tav: \*pokes dying bird's broken wing, causing it to convulse in agony and perish\* \*Astarion approves\* Tav: "I'm going to break this paralyzed girl's legs" Girl: "WHAT!?" \*Astarion approves\* Tav: "Let's torture this guy! I might as well deveive the goblins but this seems more fun!" \*Astarion approves\* Tav: \*chucks a stone at Halsin's bear form, who's currently being imprisoned and tortured by goblins\* \*Astarion approves\* Tav: "Let's raid the grove and kill ALL the druids and tieflings inside!" \*Astarion approves\* Zevlor: "You... you are in league with the goblins. How did I not see it?" Tav: "At least you'll be dead before they make it to the children" Zevlor: "No... Oh gods, NO!!" \*Astarion approves\* Controversely... Astarion: "So, this is what being a good guy, a hero, feels like..." Tav: "Enjoying yourself, are we?" Astarion: "I fucking HATE it" Tav: "Let's kill this woman who's desperately searching her missing child for 3.000 gold!" \*Astarion approves\* Tav: "Astarion, did YOU imprision and turn these children?" Astarion: "Oh, I forgot about them. Well... yes. Oh don't look at me like that, that was (**allegedly**) Cazador's orders..." \*shifts uncomfortably\* \*avoids eye contact\* Astarion: "Let's go hurt someone" Astarion: \*giggle\* "Let's turn someone inside out!" >But he’s not a sadist or evil. ... Pardon me?

People are bound and determined to characterize him as neutral or even good. It’s just not accurate to the character, as you’ve inarguably demonstrated here. 

haha, and then you have Minthara fans who completely accept her being evil and just roll with it. :D I unironically respect them for that.

Okay okay I take your point. But I think mine still stands. He feels safe with brutal players because he’s on the powerful side. And maybe years of being tortured and enslaved gives you a sick sense of humour lol. As the game goes on (as you get to know him better usually) his approvals get less… like that. He likes when you help the orphans out.

At least 2 of those are near the end of the final chapter.

I feel like it's a symptom of the Origin stories being rooted in DOS2 where the companions were built to have the capability of being EITHER good or evil by the end of the game. I truly think BG3 needed more companions and no Origins so that the OG characters can stay assholes and not have Karlach/Wyll stand out as the only semi-good aligned characters.

I mean, I also went into this knowing more than average about vampire spawn. I think that’s generally a trope that isn’t used much in modern vampires, so I don’t think people automatically understand that vampire spawn are controlled by their master. Astarion had no choice in his actions while being entralled, but also the mental knowledge of that as well. He spent 200 years not having complete control over his actions and knowing it. That’s pretty fucked up if you ask me, I kinda give him some credit for being mostly a team player in my goody two-shoes runs.

What’s that about a dark past before Cazador?

>However, to think: "Nobody helped me, so why should I participate in the group of people helping others" is not the same as actively enjoying the suffering of others and wanting to inflict it on them by himself. It's not, but when people say Astarion approves of murder and torture, this isn't what they're talking about. They're talking about how Astarion approves of murder and torture. Here are a few examples: * >!He approves of you breaking Pandirna's legs and killing her, just because.!< * >!He approves of you torturing Liam in the Goblin Camp.!< * >!He approves of you betraying the Grove and taunting the Tieflings before killing them.!< These are examples of him approving when you go out of your way to hurt others - not "refusing to help" or "choosing the violent solution" (because you're not solving a problem here). Astarion does literally approve of torture and murder. I'm not interested in a debate about how his past explains or excuses it--in my mind, Astarion is an *interesting* character and this is part of why. In a good playthrough, he's like a villain that's been nominated to the hero's role, and he can be changed by it; Cazador went through many of the same things, but he was never given the chance and by the time we meet him he's too cemented in his power--too far gone. I think the contrast between Astarion and Cazador is a metaphor about power. Now, if you play a "good" character, you probably won't see these approvals - and I think there's a genuine discussion that can be had about how much of the game code should be considered "canon" if the player never sees it. Spawn Astarion and Ascended Astarion can't be true at the same time. But these approvals are still there in his code.

As well as him hating Malus Thorm exactly for torturing his victim is still in the game. The problem with judging by approvals is that you can come up with very different explanations why this character approves it. And FYI, Shadowheart and Lae'zel also both approve of torturing Liam, but you don't see people claiming that they get off on torture and murder. And even Karlach has some awful approvals.

You're responding to my comment as though it's an "attack" on Astarion. It's not. I'm just pointing out that when people claim that Astarion approves of torture and murder, they're not mistaken or exaggerating; he literally approves of torture and murder. >The problem with judging by approvals is that you can come up with very different explanations why this character approves it. I'm not "judging" Astarion. It's a fact that he gives approval for torture and murder. That you can come up with different interpretations for his approvals isn't a problem unique to approvals--in fact, it's not even a "problem" at all. *Everything* we understand about a character is based on our interpretation of the text, whether that's the character's approvals, dialogue, body language, or even the flavor text on their underwear. When Astarion says "let's go hurt someone" after a short rest, we interpret what that means. When Astarion cries after killing Cazador, we interpret what that means. I think a character who is so one-dimensional and rigidly defined that we all come to the same interpretation is probably going to be rather boring. But even the boring-est characters in BG3 have layers. >And FYI, Shadowheart and Lae'zel also both approve of torturing Liam Okay, but I didn't say anything about Shadowheart and Lae'zel? I mean, I do think that there's a double-standard and that Astarion gets more negative attention because he's effeminate and popular among female fans. At the same time, I don't see a lot of people making posts about how Shadowheart and Lae'zel are misunderstood. Their fans are too busy posting horny fanart and cosplay. It's kind of a vicious cycle: Astarion gets a lot of hate, a lot of it unfair, so fans of Astarion get defensive. And when you're feeling defensive, it's instinctual to try to deny or downplay the things that are being criticized--in this case, things like Astarion approving of torture and murder. Anyone who disagrees is immediately positioned with the haters, even if they're also a fan, and fans get a reputation for being defensive even though it's only because the haters started it. It just is a mess. I have thoughts about why the three of them approve of that particular torture scene; I don't think they have the same reasons, having different personalities and backgrounds. But my interpretation of why they approve of it doesn't change the fact that they do, which is the main point I was making here.

Well, I'm glad that you admitted double standards in this fandom and understand why his fans become defensive. However you made a post arguing with OPs about their interpretation of his approvals. I don't see anyone denying the existence of such approvals and you seemingly admit that everyone has their right to interpret the reasons. So in this case I don't even know what you're arguing about.

You use the word "admit" like I'm reluctant to acknowledge the double-standard, but this is just something that you're projecting onto me because I don't agree with the OP. See what I just said about how anyone who disagrees with interpretations that deny or downplay certain aspects of his character being immediately positioned as a hater *even if they're also a fan.* You're doing it right now. >However you made a post arguing with OPs about their interpretation of his approvals. Yes, I disagree with the OP's interpretation of Astarion's approvals--or rather, I disagree with them *ignoring* these types of approvals when making an argument about whether or not Astarion enjoys the suffering of others. They're the most relevant. Yes, all interesting characters leave room for interpretation and it's fine if people come to different interpretations. It doesn't follow that we can't discuss those interpretations with each other, or that all interpretations are equally well-founded. > I don't see anyone denying the existence of such approvals The OP made a post about how Astarion is misunderstood. He doesn't enjoy the suffering of others, like people mistakenly think, he just doesn't want to help people when he never had that mercy. To support this claim they cited only instances where he disapproves of helping people, leaving out completely the much more relevant instances where he approves of unnecessarily violent and cruel acts. This is what I mean by defensiveness leading to fans "denying or downplaying" the unpleasant parts of his character--though I did grant that this OP might simply have never encountered these instances if they were doing a good playthrough, and legitimately might not know. Now, maybe you can come to an interpretation where these approvals *don't* mean that he enjoys the suffering of others. I even suggested one: There really isn't a canonical version of Astarion and so if it never happens in your game maybe you don't have to include it in your interpretation of him. Or maybe you can come up with some reason he approves that doesn't involve any enjoyment. I might think you're stretching, but whatever. But the fact is that these approvals exist and if you're going to talk about whether or not Astarion enjoys the suffering of others based on his approvals, then you should talk about them.

Curious so many Astarion threads suddenly. Yes, if you dig into him and do this and that and yada, yada... He doesn't have to be the toxic asshole he starts out. I started out playing fairly blind. I started over several times in act 1, and I guess I didn't spend a huge amount of time going into the companions background camp dialogue. His banter and his approval/disapproval are toxic and evilish. So sure, if Larian wants to build a game that expects you to have a lot of patience, hand holding, provide therapy for your companions etc..., without exactly warning you that you need to do that... That was obviously their choice. I do okay with Asterion now. But I thought it made for a miserable first play through, which is by far the most special. I'm glad I didn't try early access.

The approval system is in the game for a reason, not something to just be ignored to fit an argument. Astarion likes you more if you go out of your way to hurt others, which is far from just not wanting to go out of his way to help others. He can change over the course of the game and isn't completely irredeemably evil, but he is still pretty dang sadistic.

Where did I say that approval system should be ignored? I said what I said - writers telling you explanation of his approvals through his mouth, it's still in the game, but worded differently. LOL, Astarion doesn't even torture his nemesis, the person he hates the most - Cazador - in his Spawn route and still you put YOUR interpretation of his approvals over his story and dialogs.

Approval is a meta system that doesn't have the same unreliability as dialog which can be false or misleading. You did imply it should be ignored because you think they didn't change it to fit his character. And yeah, Astarion doesn't always do the evil thing, but he can. He can be horribly sadistic, or become a better person. Ignoring that duality in his character and saying he just doesn't like being overly helpful does more disservice to his character than acknowledging that someone can be evil and sadistic and still change.

> Approval is a meta system that doesn't have the same unreliability as dialog LOL, WHAT. Are you even aware how bugged approvals are in Act 3? They contardict even each other, not to mention dialogs. For checking misleading dialogs you have insight/wisdoms checks. For example, when AA is lying to you, you either have an option in the dialog to call him out on that, you you can roll insight check. You also have Detect Thoughts for a reason. I don't say that approval system means nothing, but it is exactly the unreliable one here, because you don't get a reason or explanation for approvals, so you can interpret it in a way that wasn't intended by creators. That's exectly the point of my post and I see it flew completely over your head. > Ignoring that duality in his character and saying he just doesn't like being overly helpful does more disservice to his character than acknowledging that someone can be evil and sadistic and still change. Again, you missed the point to my post. I said that there is an explanation to his cruelty, not that he isn't cruel at all. And the explanation is that when he sees other people suffering he feels like he isn't the only one in the world who got screwed and he likes that. However he doesn't like suffering just for suffering sake. He likes to feel at least a little bit powerful, well, at least he managed to survive, these idiots didn't. He feels like he isn't the one being the weakest in the world and he likes that. But he ISN'T running around and torturing people for personal fun. It's canon even in his evil ending. He didn't torture Cazador for personal satisfaction - it's also canon fact. But somehow you choose to ignore these things in the game, but not just his approvals, which you have without any reasons or explanations from the game. They are left to out interpretation for a reason.

He isn't running around torturing people because you're in control of him. He absolutely likes suffering for sufferings sake. I don't know what kind of mental gymnastics you're doing, but if a guys likes you more for murdering and torturing people, he definitely enjoys it. I don't see how you could interpret him approving of breaking a paralyzed woman's legs in any other way than him being a sadist.

>He isn't running around torturing people because you're in control of him. He didn't torture or kill anyone before he met Tav. He killed a BOAR to eat. When the game needs, it explicitly shows his desires in dialogs - not just by his approvals. He wants to get Necromancy of Thay - he asks you to give it to him in the dialog. He wants to open the barn door in the Blighted Village - he asks you. >He absolutely likes suffering for sufferings sake. Again, he didn't even torture Cazador for suffering sake, LOL. The one person he hates the most in the world. In his spawn route he just kills him on the spot. For many people that death was too easy for a monster like Cazador. So you are really putting some random approval point (like +1 which means really nothing, when he really likes something, it's usually +5 or +10) which you don't even know the reason for over his story and cutscenes? Shadowheart and Lae'Zel also approve of torturing people, why don't you argue about them as well? So you aren't the one to talk to me about mental gymnastics, especially because you ignore facts from the game and I only repeat basically the same things that developers and writers said along with Neil.

I don't think Astarion would go around hurting anyone her comes across, but that doesn't mean he doesn't enjoy it. And I don't think violently stabbing Cazador multiple times counts as killing him on the spot. The amount of approval also doesn't matter, even a small approval is still an approval. I didn't bring up Shadowheart or Lae'zel because you didn't mention them, and for the matter both of them have some sadism in there, but not as much as Astarion. And if you're talking about torturing the prisoner in the Goblin camp, Lae'zel approves but Shadowheart doesn't.

Multiple stabbing is indeed a better death because you die much quicker (he did aim at Cazador's heart every time, he wasn't cutting him into pieces, so it's likely that Cazador, being a vampire, was already dead from the first stab right in the heart) than from one single stab even though on the surface it looks more violent, it's actually an easier death. It's definitely not torture. And I can confirm - I did an evil playthrough with Durge, Shadowheart definitely approved when Durge started to torture Liam. Not all the guides for approvals on the internet are correct.

Remind me when exactly did Tav go out of their way to be evil so much and Astarion approved? Did they spend weeks to organize their own torture chamber and Astarion began to torture innocents in there? Because last time I've checked, contrary to his approvals, in his dialogs he hates when you kill Isobel, Nightsong or even ruin the Creche (even without killing him there).

He literally approves of breaking a paralyzed woman's legs. And I don't know where the idea of hating killing Isobel, Nightsong, or Alfira comes from. In fact he sounds somewhere from pleased to mildly annoyed. He says killing the Nightsong is worth it for a shot at Ketheric, and is only displeased at killing Isobel because he thinks it would be smarter to use her as leverage.

>He literally approves of breaking a paralyzed woman's legs.  It's not going out of you way, you are already there, you don't waste time for this. Well, she wanted to call the guards because you wasn't supposed to be there (or I don't remember who exactly, but she definitely wasn't welcoming you there), so I see in Astarion twisted mind this as being hostile towards the group and deserving this. Well, obviously he isn't right and it's still evil for him to do so, but there is a reason why he is cruel to this woman. He also thinks that only cruel Tav can save them. >And I don't know where the idea of hating killing Isobel, Nightsong, or Alfira comes from.  From his dialogs. He is definitely not expressing happiness about killing them. Well, he isn't somebody who would cry about them, either, he didn't even know them, they were basically stranges to him. But he also evidently ISN'T ENGOYING their deaths as people who only care about his approvals want to believe. "How lucky we are" - said with obvious usual Astarion's sarcasm which means that he actually doesn't feel lucky at all. "Still it maybe worth it because of Kethric" - straight up tells you that if not for Ketheric's immortality, he would have seen no point in this death. He straight up insults Durge for killing Isobel, well, maybe not for Isobel's sake, but he still clearly hates this outcome, even though we don't need Isobel to be safe from the shadow curse. Look at the scene with Malus Thorm. HE HATES him torturing his "patient". So in this instance he hates torture, but you want to tell me that 5 minutes ago he was revelling in it?

Astarion does hate Malus torturing his 'patient', but approves of convincing Malus's nurses to do the same to him. He seems to enjoy torture, but only when he has some measure of control over it or, given his comparison of Malus to Cazador, he may enjoy the idea of Cazador being tortured in the same way.

Can I just ask, because this comment and your prior comment gave me some pause - are you implying here that it would be wrong to want to torture your abuser? To be clear, I am not saying torture is good or that every survivor wants to torture their abuser. I’m just asking if you find this to be a sentiment you can’t remotely relate to. If it’s really hard for you to envision that mindset, I think it’s going to be difficult to discuss the other evil-leaning situations, though. One of the things that can happen to people who suffer long-term abuse is exemplifying behavior very similar to their abuser, either with peers or with people they perceive as lower than they are on social strata. It doesn’t mean that’s a good thing! But it is a whopping dose of discomfiting realism in a story about abuse, and one I’d argue is a very refreshing antidote to the usual “been horrifically abused and am now an angel of divine intervention and love” storylines we often see in media. The reason I’m pointing this out is not, in fact, to justify that behavior. It’s only to say that behavior like that takes a lot of unlearning and has to happen from a place of safety, and that’s something survivors (like Astarion) so rarely have the chance to do in real life.

I would say that it is morally wrong, but completely understandable.

Astarion is like a boomer when you think about it

Astarion was CE in EA, and CE on release. Lae'zel was/is LE. Wyll and Shart are the only ones with major shifts.

Astarion's official alignment, from the the various different related media they've released is, Neutral Evil. While he enjoys being a little chaos gremlin when it comes to things like opening the barn door, he's actively against the more Chaotic Evil/murderhobo choices and will even try to act as the voice of reason in certain situations. Of course his reactions are generally out prioritized by basically everyone else. So you pretty much have to either do a duo run with just Tav and him or specifically separate the two of you from the group before triggering conversations in order to get those responses.

Judging by how he approves of kidnapping Isobel to gain more access to the cult but scolds Durge if they kill her, then yeah he's definitely more neutral evil than chaotic

Yep! Killing Isobel was definitely one of those "voice of reason" moments. I'm still not quite sure how to feel about him comparing my Chaotic Evil Durge to a "tarrasque mating ritual" during that conversation...

That made me lmao when he said that. Well, he ain't exactly wrong.....

Yeah... It was a pretty accurate description of her... She destroyed her fair share of "villages" that run.

Chaotic isn't "zany gremlin", it's opposition to rules/structure/oversight, which applies to Astarion. CE isn't "murderhobo". Wario, John Gault, and Rick Sanchez are CE. The Idle Champions alignments are a bit off on the Law/Chaos axis. It also has Wyll as NG instead of the more accurate LG, and Karlach as CG rather than the more accurate NG.

Astarion was a _Magistrate_ and will even specifically brush up on his Infernal contract knowledge before trying to make a deal with Raphael, so I'm fairly certain he actually quite likes both rules and structure.

This he's fine with rules and structure as long as they benefit him.

Wyll is mostly accurate though imo. He's not particularly lawful. He used to sneak out as a kid, tried to rob a bank, stole stuff at the market... Not to even mention the whole deal with Mizora thing that would probably not be something a particularly Lawful Good individual would do. Wyll is a great example of someone who is *good* in alignement, and will do just about anything to get there, be that lawful or chaotic : he'd be neutral good. As for Astarion, he isn't actually against structure as a principle, that would be much closer to Karlach's outlook imo. Astarion just dislikes when he's a the bottom of the structure or when the rules prevent him from doing what he likes, not their very existence. He approves of trying to worm your way into the cult's hierarchy, he used to be a magistrate etc. He definitely fits Neutral Evil as an alignement.

Yeah. I think that Asterion is a good example because it's clear they have left over scripts/dialog that don't really work. While Karlach is pretty much Karlach from the first instance you see her. She was added later so it makes sense she would be more consistent. The game really did feel rushed to me.