Talk:Astarion/Romance

Romancing other characters - Mizora

The guidance for what happens if player romances Mizora is out of date. In one of the updates they changed the positive outcomes to apply to ascended Astarion. Non ascended Astarion will act betrayed by you and may end the relationship. See the conversation extracts on reddit Devify (talk) 23:49, 16 October 2024 (CEST)

Fixing it now. AFrigidDoor (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2025 (CET)

Do we really need animation dev notes?

Seems a bit extra, given how bloated the page already is and how little info it actually adds. While some of it contains writer's devnotes (many of which are not that useful to begin with) most of it are animation instructions. Not sure how that is of substance to the article. AFrigidDoor (talk) 22:22, 7 September 2025 (CEST)

I agree those animation dev notes are really not necessary. If they really should be kept then on a separate transcript like page but not on this page. Hawkeye (talk) 01:17, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

I was wondering the same thing when editing it, but in general I'm reluctant to delete user added content and thought if it was enough of an issue, someone would bring it up - and you have. Raelin (talk) 05:12, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

I muted this section until a decision is made on what should be done. Raelin (talk) 05:34, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

Good work! Hawkeye (talk) 07:57, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

Erm. Raelin, it seems you've tossed the baby out with the bathwater. You've commented the outcomes synopsis along with the devnotes. I think the muting should start around line 107 ;) As for the devnotes themselves, they seem to be written either for the early access or for the lower patches. As for now, they contain much that has been changed since then Arikel (talk) 14:31, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

I can fix this when I get home (about 7 hours). If it needs to be done sooner, I ask someone else please do it. Raelin (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

Many thanks both of you. Hawkeye (talk) 21:30, 8 September 2025 (CEST)

Hello! These notes are written for the game’s release - they are metadata such as approvals and dev notes that the writers work on directly with the Larian team, especially when it comes to key scenes. For example, I found two more texts in Patch 7 when the new evil endings were added.

In other words, this is literally the text the game is built upon, plot and narrative.

I’ve also shared this in other social, and the audience responded very positively. If I didn’t already know about it, I would want to - and seeing this information on the wiki would make me glad. Wiki is the best way to save and show it.

I understand why, in the main article, this might get lost or feel too large for someone who just wants a brief summary, for instance. But for those who want to see the meta side of things, it would be very useful and interesting.

That’s why I support having a separate section for such material. LimeQ (talk) 00:52, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

Even for a separate page, I would still suggest separating (collapsing? what's the right word?) the writers' devnotes from the animators' devnotes (those under 'CinematicNodeContext' in the lsj files) as more often than not they're just describing the scene without adding much value, IMO.

Example: A regular writer's devnote could maybe clarify the meaning of Lae'zel's words or what she's referring to, while the animator's devnote is going to describe what we can already see in the scene, such as a shot going over her shoulder and the blocking of the scene.

Another more specific example: in the datamines you added, we have info from the animator devnotes such as 'His left hand touches the top of the gravestone while his right hand starts carving onto its surface. (Note: Astarion starts off standing. Then he kneels down) The player character stands back and watches.' Which I feel is pretty inconsequential. I'd agree the tombstone inscription, however, is of interest, but that is a writer's devnote.

I'm unsure what the approach is on this wiki, though, so other voices are welcome to chime in. There certainly is some complexity, as a lot of the writer devnotes are just as trivial and picking and choosing important tidbits doesn't feel right. AFrigidDoor (talk) 02:16, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

I agree with AFrigidDoor. Notes such as these could be included but start in a collapsed form. The reader can decide if they are worth perusing further. Raelin (talk) 02:19, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

I would like to add that for me, it is important how such texts are written initially. I’ve loved studying the tags even and the way they’re written in the game. It kind of conveys the mood, the aesthetic - if it’s just a couple of words.

That’s why I don’t really want them to be edited for easier reading; I prefer keeping the original look.

Also, as I said, I have 4 texts - 3 of them would fit into the romance section. 1 wouldn’t - that’s Astarion Origin. So if they’re added again in a collapsed form ofc, then Origin should go into the main section?. But that would scatter them across different places, which might be a bit messy or it's okey,

So I see three options for how this could be added to the wiki all in a collapsed form:

1 – A section in Overview, like a Game Script section and add everything

2 – A section in the top part.

3 – Split: one text in Overview and three texts in Romance LimeQ (talk) 02:42, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

I understand what you mean, and I agree that there’s a lot of descriptive action there, but it’s interesting from the perspective of creation. And also just… perfectionism regarding the original, I suppose.

I don’t think it’s necessary to pick out something from the text. Just show enough, and then everyone can find what’s interesting for themselves. I also agree that even on a separate page they should be in a collapsed form. LimeQ (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

We're talking now, as I understand, about four pieces of animator/editor devnotes concerning Astarion, three of them his romance ending. A most interesting and alluring theme for many players, ok. I might suppose that for other characters (even if we take ten companions only) there are huge amounts of text placed in devnotes. If we just start to place them (even in collapsed form) into appropriate places in their pages, IMO it will turn wiki into complete chaos.

I am not against placing it all into a separate page, providing it has appropriate structure and all, but agree that even there these pieces of text should be collapsed.

And again. This information has not been updated since the game release, which is two years of improvements now. IMO the wiki content, if it has been changed throughout game development, should first and foremost cling to the actual state. Therefore, animation devnotes (even from P7) are now a history long gone and should be treated as such. Preserved and cared for like babies' photos, but kept in an album until next batch of new guests come. Arikel (talk) 10:37, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

This is also what I had been pondering. Almost any scene with dialogue in it has devnotes -- how do we pick which to add? There are so many. Previously it seems what we had done was add interesting tidbits from the devnotes to the notes section -- see Astarion's tombstone inscription.

If we are to keep track of the devnotes, I'd either argue for a devnotes page in general (which would end up considerably long, even when we're picking and choosing) or a tab same as Party banter, romance, etc.

A proposed format would be to add a devnotes tab for at least each origin including each relevant scene starring them. So act 1, 2 and 3 romances, important quest moments (Shadowheart's moment with Aylin, for example) any unique origin scenes (Gale and Tara's act 1 meeting?) the evil origin endings mentioned. How we determine which quest moments are important for each companion, I'm not so sure. For example, Karlach killing Gortash has extremely barebones cinematic content, but is very important for her plot-wise. I'm not sure what those devnotes would look like. Issue is a lot of these are just not of interest. Perhaps a datamining page explaining how to do it in the vein of our modding pages, providing the tools to do it yourself? Teaching a man how to fish instead of giving him the fish, so to speak. AFrigidDoor (talk) 15:56, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

I agree with Arikel and AFrigidDoor for the reasons they mentioned. The devnotes don't belong on this page. This would end in chaos and probably lead to endless discussions on which things should be added and where and how this all should be formatted. And as they are old now, the devnotes would provide only little substantial information if any, especially if they are presented in the form they are now. If we ever make devnotes pages then they maybe could be put there, better sorted and formatted, but not here. Hawkeye (talk) 18:58, 25 September 2025 (CEST)

Well, If I truly wanted to learn about Astarion’s canon and story, these would be the scripts used to create the key scenes for release and for Patch 7. Not subjective interpretations disguised as summaries. Canonical texts are far more useful for fans.

I’ve already spoken about the audience’s reaction - that's interesting.

I also want to point out: no, this is not “old now”, not “history long gone” – this is how the story was written, the way it was made. The differences are minimal, the artistic and narrative value the same. Where exactly is anything “old” here? Especially when Patch 7 was the last major story patch.

Two years of improvements don’t erase the foundation.

If “old” is the reason to keep them off the wiki, I completely disagree. The game itself is nearly three years old - does that make the whole wiki unnecessary? Of course not. And there information full of details worth preserving.

They are not quick notes we usually see, but fully written, author-checked key scenes. This process was mentioned in an interview (which could be cited as well) - that is precisely why it is valid and deserves attention.

A generic “notes” page could exist, but this is a more fully developed thing that is not suitable for general small notes.

I could add the instructions as a separate section so people can verify things themselves, but showing only instructions... Well, then no one will see it anyway.

Some canonical texts don’t create chaos. Sadly, though, it seems we’re at a dead end about where they could be added.

I wouldn’t mind working on companions in general - I wanted scripts for all of them. But it’s unlikely we’ll find texts this large for every location in Act 1, and I haven’t seen anything comparable for Act 2.

Fandom was lucky to find these for Astarion, but very few people will ever know - they’ll be lost in the noise of social media, and even the wiki may not allow them.

So how do we decide what’s important?

The romance outcomes and the endings. For each companion. This is the main thing.

Instructions on how to do this, quote how the writing process of this works - deserve their own page.

If an enthusiast appears who finds and compiles a script for other scenes (because it is scattered throughout the file), there will be no problem adding it to the Game Script section. The problem is when no one wants to share information.     LimeQ (talk) 02:33, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

Why only the act 3 romance outcomes and the endings specifically, though?

The thing about games is that they contain a vastness of information -- it is normal to omit what one could easily consider negligible details, because the game is just full to the brim with them. The gold standard, Wikipedia, while at times lengthy, still does not contain the entirety of the studies or articles it references, even though it might at times contain more information than what we're discussing here.

Summaries will always be necessary for narrative media. Otherwise, one would argue that the solution would be to just attach a video compilation of all the scenes involving the character, and that defeats the point of the wiki IMO. I believe subjective language has been adjusted to the best of our ability here. I also disagree that an audience reacting to the devnotes means it should go here, because the wiki is not trying to gather engagement. AFrigidDoor (talk) 11:36, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

At this particular moment, the summary on the wiki is good.

Unfortunately, that wasn’t always the case - I’m talking about that specific period, just to be clear. That’s why canonical texts can help prevent such situations. They help fans see how the story was created and form their own opinions.

There were claims that these texts contain uninteresting or unimportant information, and therefore don’t deserve a place on the wiki - but the audience’s reaction proves the opposite. If it were truly uninteresting or unimportant, there wouldn’t be so much attention or bookmarks saved for it.

The wiki doesn’t strive for engagement, right -it strives for canon, which is worth preserving, and that is exactly what the audience has been doing.

Also, is there an administrator or moderator in the discussion right now? LimeQ (talk) 12:10, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

We have seasoned contributors chiming in (not me specifically, to be clear) but I have notified them now.

I do not think fandom engagement is a good metric for substance. For example, the fandom also fixated on the canonical 'Astarion leg hook' thing (which would coincidentally line up with wanting to add animation details to the wiki) and it still isn't of substance. AFrigidDoor (talk) 12:25, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

Interest in Astarion's leg hook and interest in the text of the key scene in the cinemagraph are two different interests. The first does not devalue the second. LimeQ (talk) 12:36, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

Please take a look at the Karlach page - I added a single line and linked it to the main cinematic page. You could do something similar for the other companions.

If placing it as a subsection in the Overview doesn’t fit the wiki’s style.

However, I would like something like a general line for each character that directly draws attention to this cinematic section; otherwise, it will be buried across different lines in the text. LimeQ (talk) 15:08, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

To be honest, at this point, I don't think we've come to any solution.

Some people like graphic descriptions; they also show the tone of the scene.

They mirror each other, a deep reflection on life and undeadness - important to Spawn's romance story.

They look at each other lovingly, he is powerful, he is free, and they enjoy - important to the AA romance story.

Both are important for Astarion's story.

- The process of creating Act 3 and the key scenes was meticulous on the part of the animation team and the character's author. The most important themes for the character could not be changed drastically in Act 3. That’s narrative and storytelling.

- The author confirms this in an interview.

If someone wants to think, treated differently, that's okay. But depriving others of the opportunity to decide and think for themselves is already chaos.

I stand by my opinion that this deserves a place on the wiki. I have placed the Game Script section after Quest Rewards in Overview.

There you will find: two texts for the romance, an evil ending with romance, and for Evil End Origin.

In addition, I show the content that I have right now.

Everything is in a collapsible format.

Instructions as a YouTube link, if necessary, it will be in text format.

In the same Game Script section, I have also added a full transcript from the interview, with timing, and so on, explaining how such scenes were created.

I am open to adding scripts for other companions. Which scenes will be added is a matter of fan enthusiasm - romances and endings will be the starting point.

I ask all participants in the discussion to refrain from deleting this.

I am open to placing this in other locations that are more convenient and suitable. Not to hide it, but so that people can see it. I would be delighted to hear your suggestions. LimeQ (talk) 13:59, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

First and foremost: nobody here argues that the devnotes can have their place in wiki. The only stance we're all here dancing about is actually where do they belong to be placed, and most discussion participants (as I can see) are generally against only installing them, even collapsed, in various respective articles throughout, preferring to put them in a single separate page.

Second thing I would like to clear up. Are the four devnotes which are posted for now - meaning, all concerning Astarion - the only ones we are discussing here? Is there a sure-go mechanism which can drag similar info from *.lsx files concerning other cutscenes and other characters throughout the game? If these are the only ones available, than IMO it's not worth making an issue. Even if it's Astarion's leg hook, whatever.

Third. Like AFrigidDoor, I seriously doubt that Fandom audience is worth to be a pristine lighthouse in the night on this issue. At least I have experienced several times trying to find/verify any facts I have not been able to emulate in my own walkthroughs - only to find info copied from this wiki. An esteemed authority, no doubt.

Fourth. If so sure that devnotes are important to preserve, I would suggest you creating a Sandbox and collecting there all that can be found. Personally I prepare all my edits in my sandbox, including all links and images and bells and whistles, before posting them. And even then there's always something to be checked, or added, or corrected. The result can then be discussed, always.

Finally, the term of "history" precisely encompasses things that have happened and are not going to change (or to be changed) any time soon. Old or not old, this may differ on personal time feelings - for example, for my daughter anything a month ago is "old" already, let alone two years. These devnotes, IMO, are hence indeed "history" now, but that cannot be the ultimate argument for placing them wherever a contributor wants.

P.S. If you want to contact a moderator, I believe Hawkeye here can be to your service. Arikel (talk) 14:04, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

Yeah, devnotes should not be added these pages. If we ever create devnote pages this info could be added there. But imho those devnotes are interesting if you want to write an essay about the developement of this (or another) game and want to use the devnotes as sources for how the developement went and why. But that's not something that is need on this pages.

And: I outcommented the new "game script" section on the Astarion main page and protected the main and romance page for while now. Imho, it's not nice to discuss on one page and create facts concerning this discussion on another page at the same time. Hawkeye (talk) 17:07, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

Well, I warned about this before that, I had all four texts and additional information that would not be suitable for the romance page, so I switched to another one. And showed the content I had. In my opinion, it looked neat as additional facts after the main brief retelling of the story.

So the Overview option didn’t work. Although, imo, the section looked quite neat, considering that it implies a collapsed summary of everything.

The next suggestion is to create a separate section at the top. This would be a distinct section called something like “Cinematic Scene Scripts.”

Although this would fit better in Overview, this is still additional information, albeit importantion.

I also think a separate page on the wiki would be useful to place the author interview and information about the creation of cinematics - which would be generally useful and could be referenced without being tied specifically to Astarion. After all, this approach applies to all cinematics if we are talking about character writing.

These notes have direct narrative value relating to how the story was written and the game's development, which fans would find useful to see. This is confirmed by the author's interview.

"You narrow your focus basically, you become a bit more restricted in the things that you feel that you can do and you can’t do.

But it also means that when you’re crafting the scene and you’re thinking "okay I’m actually going to able to show this, this isn’t just going to be something that’s going to be told".

The audience is going to see this look, this expression on their face or whatever... It very literally brings the camera from way up here writing and it gives you that an intimacy that you could never otherwise craft"

"Whereas for BG3, you write the line, it gets sent off, it gets recorded, it gets mocapped. You have to kind of give people instructions for

mocap. It comes back, you're talking to the cinematic artist because they need to know how the scene is meant to play out. Sometimes stuff is sent back kind of like for re-records".

Again, I ask that suggestions be substantive regarding how to organize the information - if that’s the topic of this discussion. LimeQ (talk) 17:23, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

> If we ever create

Aren’t we looking for a place for this kind of content right now, at this very moment? Because I already have canonical texts and interviews where the role of cinematics in storytelling is explained. These texts contain important information about the character and their journey.

And I would really prefer not to "put this on the back burner" — it should have been here two years ago already.

Besides, I can already start working on other companions, adding the texts of cinematic scenes there. As soon as we figure out where exactly this content should be added. LimeQ (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2025 (CEST)

Sorry for being impatient. I really wanted to show what I had, and I thought that just seeing how it looked in the article might bring us closer to a solution.

I don’t see why a script that shows the character’s main themes through cinematics cannot be placed on heavily trafficked pages. This isn’t cut content but the actual creation of the story, directly supervised by the author.

The issue is that reducing it to a brief feels wrong - wrong to pick out only one thing from the whole context - people interested in the meta should have access to the full text to form their own opinion.

@Hawkeye

If adding it to heavily trafficked pages is not possible, my suggestion: Slightly adjust the wording in some places (if necessary, because I will try to find a spot in the current text) so it can link to a separate page. That page could hold all the texts in collapsed form, along with the author’s interview on how to approach cinematics.

But I'm confused about what would be a good place for such a separate page.

I hope we can reach consensus. LimeQ (talk) 07:21, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I'd agree with Raelin's addition below, particularly about a devnote guide.

As for the interview excerpt, in its current form I find it to be un-wiki-like (context for other editors, check the recent history of the main Astarion article). I am not sure what it is trying to communicate or add or why it belongs there, it feels extra, so to speak. Maybe there is another way to reference it, but as is it does not feel like it is in the style of this wiki. We should not need to explain much about an animation script, I think. AFrigidDoor (talk) 11:39, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Well, in my view this is very important information, which, even though it contains dry details, remains significant. Since the game is highly cinematic, with painstaking work directly tied to the writing of the characters’ stories, I think it’s also worth giving this attention on the wiki.

I agree that another page would be useful for details on creating cinematography. Texts could also be added there. It could be referenced via descriptions on the main page, thus avoiding changes to the wiki style; it would serve as an additional source.

Let's say page

https://bg3.wiki/wiki/cinematography

Important for the Astarion story:

"They mirror each other, a deep reflection on life and undeadness"

"They look at each other lovingly, he is powerful, he is free, and they enjoy"

The author's explanation of the meaning and process of creating a cinematography:

"The audience is going to see this look, this expression on their face or whatever... It very literally brings the camera from way up here writing and it gives you that an intimacy that you could never otherwise craft".

"Whereas for BG3, you write the line, it gets sent off, it gets recorded, it gets mocapped. You have to kind of give people instructions for mocap. It comes back, you're talking to the cinematic artist because they need to know how the scene is meant to play out". 89.188.179.159 12:15, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Not to be redundant, but, to go back to earlier points -- how is it not obvious from the finished scene itself that the scenes contain 'reflections on life and undeadness' or that they're 'enjoying it' ?

If it is a general cinematography page, Rooney's perspective should not be singled out. There are a few talks from actual Larian cinematic artists. The quotes as is still feel un-wiki-like and hmm, a bit obvious regarding what the animation process implicitly entails, though maybe our more seasoned contributors would know how to format it better. AFrigidDoor (talk) 12:26, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

What the author emphasized, and the way he did it and the words he chose are of particular interest. Some may consider approvals unimportant or broken - yet a page for them exists. Everyone decides for themselves.

I also know how at times fans went against canonical sources in other parts of Astarion’s story, while it was impossible to add reliable sources. Now, fortunately, that possibility exists.

So yes, sometimes even obvious things need to be openly demonstrated. I don't see any harm in that.

Stephen Rooney should be cited as an example of the character’s actual writer and how the process looked for him, likely in Astarion subsection. These are already details of the placement. LimeQ (talk) 12:42, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Oops, let's stick to this thread after all.

Please take a look at the Karlach page - I added a single line and linked it to the main cinematic page. You could do something similar for the other companions.

If placing it as a subsection in the Overview doesn’t fit the wiki’s style.

However, I would like something like a general line for each character that directly draws attention to this cinematic section; otherwise, it will be buried across different lines in the text.

In addition, photos from the game can be added more freely within the text of the cinematic than in the main sections. LimeQ (talk) 15:19, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I feel like I've seen a different way to redirect to other pages, one under the heading. I'm personally still not big on integrating it into the summaries.

Maybe a See Also section, like in Wikipedia, or putting it in the notes and references section.

But I'd stick to sandbox-ing it for now as Arikel suggested. I helped clean up to the best of my ability because I'd rather mods see what the best course is, but we shouldn't be making new articles while the matter isn't settled. AFrigidDoor (talk) 15:25, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I really big on people to see more canonical information and important details about the creation process, rather than having it hidden somewhere. I wrote in that discussion a few ways to achieve this.

For now, the information about Astarion has been protected for a few days, so I will focus on the other companions. LimeQ (talk) 16:59, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

That's what I'm saying, a mod protected it because we're not supposed to move forward in any direction until we have reached a consensus. AFrigidDoor (talk) 17:09, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Trying to bring this back on track -- After a brief deliberation on Discord, I think it's best to keep the discussion to this place.

It seems that so far we have brainstormed the following options:

1. No devnotes on the wiki, period, citing a lack of substance.
2. The devnotes having their own section on the main overview article.
3. Dividing devnotes between Overview and Romance depending on the topics of the devnotes.
4. Tab in the character pages such as Party Banter, approval, etc.
5. Just a guide teaching you how to use the parser to access said devnotes, in the style of our modding pages.
6. General cinematography page, which is already partially in progress.
7. The bottom of the character pages containing a link to 5) or 6) either via the Notes/References or a 'See also' section.

My own personal take is to exclusively go for 5, and I'm most against 2 and 3. AFrigidDoor (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

At the moment, most agree that this may be present on the wiki in some form.

There are already links on simple devnotes, so there is no reason to devalue and disregard cinematic devnotes. Considering the process of creation by the author directly.

No 5. I would like this to be relatively easy to find, because it contains narrative and important canonical details. So no 7.

I started with 6 because 2 was received worse. Although I disagree with this in terms of it not deserving to be there. From a stylistic point of view, maybe yes, but again, it will all be collapsed, so it's a matter of how we think it fits the wiki style or not.

But number 4, though — I'm not against it. LimeQ (talk) 20:06, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I'm for 7. This way, those who are interested (few, I imagine, but not none) can be made aware and access some (hopefully) curated information, while the rest of us can move on.

That being said, I'm OK with 5 as well. Raelin (talk) 20:16, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Bringing in the suggestion I've made on Discord:

I'd say we make pages like Astarion/Cinematics for each companion where there is sufficient interest for such a page. This seems like a better option than a broad Cinematography page which will either 1. become very bloated over time, or 2. end up only having info about some companions and thus be perpetually incomplete.

The alternative title Astarion/Devnotes has been suggested as well, but I guess "devnotes" could just be a sub-section of a more generic Cinematics page. Unless, of course, there are devnotes that have nothing to do with cinematics... In which case having both a devnotes and a cinematics sub-page would be acceptable IMO. After all, sub-pages are neatly "tucked away" under their parent page, so I guess it's OK for them to be highly specific.

Either way, these sub-pages could be linked to from Romance or other places.

(pinging all who have been involved) @AFrigidDoor, @Arikel, @Hawkeye, @LimeQ, @Raelin, @Yuvixadun

Thoughts? Taylan (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I am alright with a cinematics tab in the style of Romance, Approvals, etc (if I am understanding correctly). A devnotes subsection could also work, there are a few devnotes that I think are of interest (though I'd have to put some elbow grease into it to not pick and choose). With regards to author statements, as the ones already added to the (soon to be defunct?) cinematography page, there are a few interesting Larian talks both from writers and animators alike, and that could be of interest as well, though some of them might be out of place on a 'cinematics' page. Unsure, but that can be workshopped.

The tabs are visible enough at the top of the page, so I find linking them a bit redundant, but I suppose a "see also" might still work. AFrigidDoor (talk) 21:35, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Sounds like a good compromise, we could start with the Astarion/Cinematics and take it from there, e.g. add devnotes there. As a rookie, the terminology 'devnotes' is not something I was aware of. Like I said in a different comment, my assumption is most people who find the wiki only know the game and might not know these specific things so maybe something to keep in mind when creating this section. Yuvixadun (talk) 22:33, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I agree, A separate Cinematics section like Astarion/Cinematics linked in the tabs at the top of the page, would be the best way to add those pages to the wiki. It's not necessary to link them in another section (See also, Notes, etc.) on the same page.

And on these cinematic pages it should be made clear which texts are quoted devnotes and which are not. This is imho not (yet) the case on the Cinematography page. And highly subjective descriptions which are not quoted devnotes should be removed or not added to these cinematic pages. Hawkeye (talk) 03:37, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

Thank you for sharing your opinion. I think we can write for Astarion that the romance and the Evil ending will definitely be cited. Unfortunately, as I said, not all scenes contain such text, but it’s good that the concluding scenes do.

I’m glad we found a less controversial solution for how to best present this information.

In that case, I’ll be setting up a sub-page - apologies if it’s a bit clumsy at first. Thank you. LimeQ (talk) 11:07, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

An Astarion/Cinematics page sounds like it could work, as long as that's the content which actually ends up there (i.e. not devnotes, as per AFrigidDoor's comments, unless brief, informative and relevant). Other content may be better served in another tab (if there's sufficient interest, but how does one gauge that?), notes at the bottom of such a page, or linked to outside source(s).

I prefer not to stifle content, but how it gets dealt with is then where real editing framework begins. Raelin (talk) 03:39, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I have no objections as to add another tab on a personal page. After all, the question of "where to place" was the actual stumbling block to agreement. However, I would watch these pages' content thoroughly, as our contributor also tried to add some interviews (or pieces of interviews, correct me if I'm wrong) in order to prove their opinion. As I understand, the tab is actually a link to a separate page, which indeed is the solution we all have been suggesting to them many times (to no avail, mind, until the page was protected).

The other thing which bothers me is the possibility of leaving these pages empty for the sheer reason there's nothing to add - as I recall, the initial materials were claimed to be taken from Fandom. Arikel (talk) 08:40, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I believe there has been a misunderstanding here, as I used the word fandom a few times. I meant fandom as in a group of fans, not the wiki pages known as Fandom.

I made edits to the best of my inexperienced ability for the interview excerpt (check the cinematography page for reference) , but I still don't think it looks appropriate, personally. AFrigidDoor (talk) 09:14, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I see, thank you for clearing it up. Still, I cling to opinion that interviews are not devnotes. If we start to add every piece of public engagements or revelations of the crew, just imagine the volume. Arikel (talk) 09:35, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

The page is called cinematic, and the process of creating it is important.

I would be interested to know what it looked like for the author and for the Larian team from a technical point of view, and to see the process of the importance of the cinematograph for story. Great for anyone interested in cinematography in BG3 LimeQ (talk) 11:35, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

> I think this is more apt wording. We're missing the specificity that at least most of the script here is written by cinematic artists, currently it gives off the impression that they were written by Rooney.

Regarding your comment in the edit history, let me just clarify. I think the interview gives a clear explanation that the main, plot parts were written by Rooney himself. This is not something that misleads. And if some parts were written by the cinematic artists, they still worked directly with the author. Being misleading would rather mean claiming that the author had nothing to do with this text, didn’t write anything, and so on. LimeQ (talk) 16:08, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I unfortunately cannot cite this because, well, it happened privately, but I have talked to cinematic artists at Larian in the past because I'm an animator myself and was interested in the process. They said the Cinematic notes are written by the cinematic artists, and the talk with Greg Lidstone on YouTube does corroborate it a bit, regarding the job title.

That is to say, if the reason that quote is being cited is to affirm that Rooney wrote those, we cannot know for sure, and it is almost certain that the majority of it was not, also in part because at least one of those scene's writing credit seems to be, in its majority, Baudelaire Welch's. It is also noteworthy that the devnotes in the main files, which are the ones we know to be by the writers, also contain cinematic instructions a lot of the time, hence this could also be what the quotes are referring to (as you said, the 'main plot parts'). We don't know the specifics.

The language it was corrected to is more vague and thus more appropriate, and does not mislead one into thinking Rooney had necessarily nothing to do with the scenes, without implying that he might've written the entirety of them.

However that is very offtopic here, so if you want to continue this discussion I suggest doing it over that page's discussion section. AFrigidDoor (talk) 16:19, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

The process of creating scenes was described several times by Astarion’s main writer, who was directly involved in shaping the key emotional themes. It was a coordinated effort, not something separated from the writer.

It is good that Baudelaire Welch was brought up, because I will clarify my position on this matter.

Baudelaire Welch, a narrative designer at the time of release and writer of the Dark Urge, made statements about players’ motivations in choosing certain endings, particularly in connection with sexual themes.

>and it is almost certain that the majority of it was not, also in part because at least one of those scene's writing credit seems to be, in its majority, Baudelaire Welch's

Where does this almost certain come from?

Because later, it also became clear that Welch was not fully aware of the details of a specific scene (which contained sexual themes). I can provide a direct screenshot.

First, they made assertions about player motivation, and then they didn’t even know how the scene was created or what emotional themes it contained.

Rightly so, because that was part of the work of Astarion’s main writer.

What I do know for sure is this: nonsense that deserves attention as a guide on how to create an unprofessional scandal. In general, in any field, I would very much prefer not to create a scandal by discussing this here - which unfortunately is impossible given the subject matter. LimeQ (talk) 13:45, 29 September 2025 (CEST)

After all, Devnotes are different from Cinematic scripts.

Devnotes are known for being very short and scattered throughout the content. Devnote is also very diverse: emotions, movements, voice intonation, even jokes

Cinematic scripts are larger and more cohesive, describing actions, and sometimes emotions and thoughts of the character during a specific scene.

Calling a cinematic script a devnote might be a bit confusing, I think. You expect something small, and instead you get long texts.

If there is going to be a devnote page, I think it would be more neat to make it separate. LimeQ (talk) 11:47, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I'm with AFrigidDoor and Arikel the new page is not approriate yet. It still needs to clarify which texts are descriptions of the editor and which are devnotes. For example this looks like a devnote: "Might not need a huge psionic pulse on netherbrain, feels like a simple one on player with their eyes glowing might be sufficient." If it is then it should be marked or formatted like one, like a quote or so.

And the page should say and explain in a summary at the top at best, that and how devnotes are included, if they are. Hawkeye (talk) 12:22, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I think I'm in part guilty for the confusion here, so I'll try to explain to the best of my ability.

A devnote is generally a small tidbit included by a writer after certain line or event clarifying things such as emotion, pronunciation.

As seen on this page, the things included under the "Expand" button are all part of the game files. While a few of what's included is simultaneously a devnote, most of it is part of the "CinematicNodeContext". Basically, an animator script. A written storyboard, more or less. The notes could be put in "small" but within the file all the text actually looks identical, though scattered.

The term 'devnotes' is used as a bit of an umbrella term (and I do it as well) but, more strictly, devnotes are short notes from the writers. The cinematic script we see in the new page is relegated to a different file than the devnotes, though some bits of regular devnotes bleed in. AFrigidDoor (talk) 12:35, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

Ah thanks for the clarification. What I wanted to say is, that quoted texts (whether they are game scripts or devnotes) should be - in some way -marked as those to differentiate them from texts written by wiki editors. Hawkeye (talk) 12:54, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

And if they're devnotes and game scripts are mixed up from different files then that also should be clarified on the page. Hawkeye (talk) 12:56, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

I updated the formatting and structure of the page to clarify the contents a bit Hawkeye (talk) 13:44, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

Looks nice. This whole issue is starting to get resolved, so maybe we can collapse this discussion to make the talk section here a bit nicer? AFrigidDoor (talk) 13:46, 28 September 2025 (CEST)

With the length of this discussion, I think it's important to remember what the Style manual and Editing policy have to say, as I believe these pages set the groundwork on this. I've referenced what I think are key ones below:

• "Bg3Wiki articles use clear and easily understood language that prioritises readability over flair. Editors should strive for clarity, consistency and conciseness – less is more."
  • Put another way: do longer contributions, especially in consideration of others on highly trafficked pages, earn their keep, relative to what is already there?
• "A single editor's personal preference or opinion about what goes on the wiki should not override all others."
  • When a contributor's items get edited or deleted, it's almost always the case these things should not be taken personally. Like most, I've been on the receiving end of these, so I get it. However, if an edit (or a series of them) proves to be mistaken in some material way, it's usually corrected later by someone. When I think of the Heavy Lifting editors here (my words, not theirs) it's almost always a good idea to give deference to what they say or allude to.
• "In the case of disputes and conflicts, it is always the goal to reach a consensus to improve the wiki, rather than to follow a list of arbitrary rules."
  • This point is, IMO, more important than any other here.
• "Do not intentionally go against wiki consensus without discussion."

With all the above, I'm with Hawkeye on this one: devnotes can show how things came to be, for those who care to go down that rabbit hole, but they probably don't belong on heavily trafficked pages, unless they are brief. I read all the content in question here about Astarion, and didn't find it to be particularly essential or relevant, given what's already been provided. If @LimeQ really wants these for Astarion, they can make a personal devnote guide on the subject, and this guide could be referenced in the notes at the bottom of Astarion's page.

Raelin (talk) 03:07, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

Just chiming in here, not a long time contributor to this wiki, but just want to add that I agree with this sentiment. The wiki is probably mostly used as a reference guide for people actively playing the game and looking up certain paths / companion options. Adding development notes on how things came to be (in this case a character) don't seem overly relevant for a page. Perhaps a small note or reference, but otherwise, like Raelin mentioned, you could create your own user guide on the topic. Yuvixadun (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2025 (CEST)

I would like this to be relatively easy to find, because it contains narrative and important canonical details, and there should be links to it from popular pages.

Sometimes the wiki already refers to certain Devnotes on the main romance page. So I think this could also be an option for the cinematics for a romance or for the ending. LimeQ (talk) 19:19, 27 September 2025 (CEST)