#i didnt really speak on the gale thing because hes not really a character i think much abt but it was definitely cruel and uncalled for

[timothylawrence]

it is a little sad that the game writers and the fandom are so blatantly in favour of astarion as the Designated Woobie, and then wyll, and even gale to an extent, get less content. and their stories get framed as jokes, or like they weren't ~really~ harmed because the person manipulating them was a hot woman... imagine the screaming if cazador was also a romance option and hung out unkillably in your camp? but somehow it's ok for mizora, and the writers themselves can say that gale is the most annoying companion and deserves to blow up. i feel like i usually get attached to the companion characters in rpgs with the least content, which is fine, but it's a weird energy when the writers themselves seem to dislike the character.

i think that's one thing from the writers that like. didn't surprise me at all in regards to them calling Gale annoying or that he deserves to blow up lmao. like, these are same writers who rewrote wyll based on racist ass fans feedback and gave final version Wyll his unfinished and weak story, with the least amount of romance scenes + dialogue of any origin characters. the writers also failed to give him a storyline that was strictly about him, not his father, not mizora, and not balduran lmfao. top it all off with the fact you can 'romance' his abuser and then be incredibly cruel and vile towards him afterwards... like the writers are racist as hell idk.

I'm not surprised they said these things abt Gale either when they have a very obvious favoritism issue going on with their writing and how they treat their own characters

[wizzardhat]

you know i had a feeling i would end up having to break my oath to make an in-character choice, and it would have been cute and gay if it came as a consequence of something to do with gale, but all things considered im like, of course it would end up being related to astarion. an oath of the ancients paladin cannot just become besties with an undead vampire without enduring at least one major moral dilemma. gonna add a readmore for spoilers and rambling

i released the 7000 spawn. of course i did. the alternatives were to let them rot in cages for eternity or kill all of them. im curious if letting astarion complete the ritual would have broken the oath as well. It would be painfully ironic if the answer was no. but when it came down to make a choice between protecting the innocent and destroying the undead, my paladin chose to protect the innocent, and that was apparently the wrong answer. But really, it was the only answer that didnt prove them to be a complete hypocrite.

i like this a lot as the logical conclusion of their friendship with astarion, extreme opposites meeting in the middle. specifically im thinking of a line you get from him early on, when he tries to convince you to take control of the cult of the absolute. if you say "that is evil power" he says something along the lines of, "power is just power, its the people who use it who are good or evil." Damn if that isn't almost exactly the same sentiment you get form your conversation with the oathbreaker knight.

i have an imagined backstory for my tav that is related to the character they're based on--which is, ironically, also an oathbreaker paladin. That character broke his oath because he refused to give up on someone he loved past the point when they were dangerous to keep alive, and betrayed another paladin to protect them. But for my Tav, I let the opposite be true--they did give up on that person, because their order had convinced them it was the right thing to do, and as a result they had to watch their loved one die. So my Tav carried a deep sense of regret their whole life for that one mistake, and made a personal conviction to never give up on someone who needed them, or who they loved.

That conviction is what I imagine lead them down the morally dubious paths they had to take to complete the various companion quests, and on some level, i think they knew that eventually the oath they made to their god and the oath they made to themself would split. this backstory tidbit also adds a lot of extra layers to the line you say to gale (if you are romancing him) when you confront the elder brain at the end of act two, to "choose the one who loves you." because thats exactly what they failed to do, and it was a mistake they refuse to make again.

And in a game where gods are generally not to be trusted, my paladin abandoning an oath in favor of their own sense of justice thematically makes a lot more sense then being like, rip to you guys but my god is different lmao (although i guess selune is shown to be unambiguously good but thats only because shes standing next to shar, the bitch of all time.) also when romancing gale theres something kind of extra gay about "lets abandon our gods together." im sure gale would have a LOT to say to a distressed paladin with a freshly broken oath given everything with mystra being just as fresh.

mechanically though, idk if i can keep this change lmao. i rely way too much on misty step to give it up as a spell. Unless i dual class in to something else that gives me misty step. or i can just stay next to gale every fight and rely on him dragging me around with dimension door lmao--i do have at least one item that gives me one free misty step per short rest. also not having speak with animals will shatter my heart lmfao. i guess ill decide tomorrow if i want to reclaim my oath for purely mechanical reasons and just hc the oath staying broken, or actually commit to the practical consequences. I could also just like. try it out for awhile and talk to the knight again if i change my mind. at least i fucking hope thats the case lol.