‘Baldur’s Gate 3’ can be a fantastic experience and a bad game at the same time.

  • Floey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    The monastery one makes sense if you are going into the game blind, but it makes no sense in the context of knowing what >! going into the prism and then refusing to kill your guardian!< results in. How come not going along in the first situation gets you killed but not going along in the second situation doesn’t? What circumstances have changed?

    • Ashtear@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      Refusing to go in doesn’t necessarily get you killed, it just puts you into a fight. We’re talking about the third option, where

      spoiler

      you’re not only refusing, but you’re also insulting and outright provoking a quasi-god with predictable results.

      Spoiler markup is different on Lemmy, by the by.

      • Floey@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        So you’re telling me the difference in whether or not someone chooses to kill you when there is no question or not of whether they are capable of doing so is a provocation? That ignores the material reality that you are in possession of an artifact that the person has made their main focus and you refuse to give it up peacefully and you are in their territory. Vlaketh has the ability to smite you right there and take the prism but just doesn’t for… reasons? That’s bad writing in my opinion. Either don’t allow Vlaketh to encounter the player at the creche, don’t give her the ability to insta kill the PCs, or make the deadly mistake to march into the heart of the creche against your guardian’s wishes.

        I love the game, but it’s not without it’s flaws in the writing and I think this is an example of that.