Baldur's Gate 3: Should You Side With The Squatters Or Kill Them?

screenrant.com:

One of the first conflicts to appear in Act 3 of involves a trio of squatters and an angry homeowner, and it's a uniquely difficult situation to resolve. Arriving at the outskirts of the titular city of Baldur's Gate makes it clear just how much the problems caused by the Absolute have spread, as the city is dealing with a refugee crisis that has its citizens divided. Although the squatter trouble is only one small part of that struggle, it presents a uniquely personal situation for the party to involve themselves in if they so wish.

frequently presents situations with an obvious victim in a way that makes it possible for parties seeking to do good to champion an underdog, but it's also no stranger to moral complexities. The squatter situation is one such example, where both parties are presenting themselves in a generally poor light despite having some sympathetic aspects to their situation. That being said, it's still possible to treat the dilemma in a lesser of two evils manner, particularly when a number of extenuating circumstances that aren't immediately clear are taken into account.

Related: Baldur's Gate 3 Review In Progress

There are a number of reasonable ways to approach the homeowner's crisis in, but attacking and killing the interlopers isn't one of them. The couple squatting in the house has a child, and their crime isn't one that's worthy of death by any means. Even attacking with the nonlethal passive feature turned on isn't a particularly optimal way to resolve the situation, although it's certainly better than showing no mercy at all. The homeowner himself — a man named Arfur — doesn't present a particularly compelling case for the party to take aggressive measures. Even when failing an Insight check,