Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Does anyone else really hate this change...

No solution is perfect, but I think I prefer the old solution, even if occasionally conversations were initiated by the wrong character.
Switching midway will not always work, as sometimes the pertinent dialgoue options are in the FIRST screen. All my characters apart from the Tav (because reasons :)) are Branded but I do not get to say "see? brand! we BFF!" to cultists.

I was one of those in EA who thought this would be a good change but now I’m not so sure.

I think its fine, it adds variety to how your campaign would unfold.

Wasn’t there an option in early access to choose whether Tav or the controlled companion would initiate dialogue? I gather that option wasn’t part of the 1.0 release, is that true?

In EA automatic dialogue went to whichever character was closest with no option to pick Tav.

Huh, funny how memory works; I could've sworn there used to be a toggle in the options menu. Thanks for the info!

Hi, it’s just been pointed out to me that there were two identical threads by the OP on this topic (almost certainly as a result of forum timeout issues), both with some replies so I’ve just merged them and deleted one of the duplicate original posts.

I guess my immediate answer is that pigeon-holing the player character to be the charismatic party leader mechanically restrains our choice of classes to Bard, Paladin, Warlock, or Sorcerer. Almost any other class would require manipulating ability points and skill proficiencies in ways that could bend or break whatever non-Cha class you picked. As it is, I'm resigned to playing my Paladin and Warlock, not because they're the classes I want most to play, but because of their charisma and "face" skills. In the meantime, I've shelved my attempts to play rogue, ranger, and monk characters altogether.

True.
As to "breaking" other Classes - let us not exagerrate. 12 CHA plus plus lavish use of Inspiration Points (of which there is Million), and an Absolute Brand will get you through many dialogues.
Also, an example being e.g. Githyanki Patrol - IIRC none of the tests is CHA based, but INT or WIS. Even if there is a CHA test, it is one of several, hence a charasmatic halfwit can easilt blow it and lead to battle.
Also - Eagle's Splendor (you do have a Cleric in the Party, don't you?).
I admit that CHA 16 and Proficiencies in Persuasion/Deception and/or Intimitation make the game MUCH easier. I play Bard hybrids for a reason :P

BTW - as "advertised" by Larian, "TAV always the speaker" works "most of the time". I just had Shadowheart stammering through a dialogue with some Friendly Duergar TM :P

"Always TAV" and "always nearest partymember" - neither is perfect, switching does not always work, and I'm leaning to "nearest PC" as the Lesser Evil.

The one time I really, REALLY was happy with "Always TAV" was the Hag fight - I did not have to do crazy character positioning to have the Face be nearest to her when she was at 10HP.

I know that I am rpeating myself to large degree

Honestly I think that this argument is actually another argument for having Tav always being the talker. It means you get more variety from one playthrough to the next. If you know you're not playing a talker then you have to approach situations differently, which is the point of picking different classes.

Also, there was a toggleable option to make surprise dialogues default to Tav since launch, it just was never fully conssitent.

For me, the point of picking different classes is to, well, explore the different classes - what they can do, and, just as importantly, what they can't. For instance, I'd like to play a Ranger to determine whether the class is a struggle to play, as some claim, or if I can ferret out some "tricks of the trade" that would help the class to stand on its own, maybe even excel (in the context of this game, anyway).

However, the game as it is now isn't very Ranger-friendly, at least by my conception of the class as wood-wise survivalists.

I'd further argue that forcing "Tav" to be the talker just demonstrates that one character just isn't going to cover the bases, even with high Charisma. Religion, Arcana, History, Insight, Medicine, Animal Handling - these have all come up as dialogue options, whether Tav has the appropriate skill or not. I'd love to see Shadowheart chime in on religious matters, or Gale on matters of the Arcane, etc. I don't know how difficult it would be to program that, but it would go a long way to making my team feel like a group of people with complementary skills - in addition to taking the weight off our poor over-worked Tavs.

You know, I've played this game from the beginning of early access, and I can't remember this toggle. Although you're the second person to mention it recently.

It must have been there, and I must have missed it.

I recall back in the day there were tons of people begging to make Tav the default speaker. Folks were getting upset that companions were sort of stealing the spotlight, so to speak.

That's the point, one character is literally not supposed to be able to cover all the bases. So you play again and see new stuff. I have a lot of issues with this game (companions engaging in dialogue instead of the main character was a big one in fact) but I think that making it so players have to deal with not being able to pick everything is a perfectly fine choice, creatively.

At the risk of repeating myself, my point is that your Tav is just one member of a team of people who have different backgrounds and diverse skills, and Larian is telling us that we can't tap into that skill diversity (aside from passive checks). In a tabletop game, we definitely would be doing so; why can't we aim for that here?

From the examples you listed, the first approach seems more suited for combat and exploration focused games while the second is better for games with strong stories and characters like BG3! I definitely prefer the second approach!

Not really ...
But it would be much better if they keep it optional, rather than decide for us ... i mean, old system was there ... new system is there ... would it be really too hard to make a toggle? :-/

The <more options for the game menu> dev. team has been on leave since game release. Actually, since year one of EA. Barely any changes.

So much stuff that should be in the gameplay/UI/ options thats not there.

Solasta, Pathfinder, Obsidian and most RPGs are two decades ahead of Larian in that department.

I don't hate it, just annoyed there is no option to change it.

Disconnect Avatar from the chain, keep him tucked away in some corner, run the rest of your party into the encounter with a high CHA member as the face - problem solved.
The only issue with this solution is that it requires metaknowledge of the encounters, so fresh players are going in blind.

After playing with this for a while, it still mostly simply does not work for me. What I mean is, that in situation when you really have very little control over who gets picked unless you know how the game chooses (at the end of Ethel's fight for example or when talking to Flind) the game still picks the character closest to the NPC in question for the conversation - which makes sense, but is still unfortunate if it means the incredibly charismatic Lae'zel has to deal with the situation. ^^

Yes, I had the same thing happen with Flind (and Gale). I wonder if it's a bug with this new system (which I like, even though I'm playing a Ranger/Cleric.)