Larian Studios Forums Divinity: Original Sin 2 Divinity - Original Sin 2 - General Thoughts on single player experience

I like the way of D:OS1 character creating. Two with my Ideas and two with there own story but if I have only one it is also ok. But I wan't to "Balance" all characters myself and I like the books with the extra points in D:OS and the demon's help in the vault.

I liked that as well, and would be glad if the possibility would be there again.


As for the overall discussion, my take on the companion topic is that we'll get to chose all of them in the prison (as all 4 are supposed to be Sourcerers). I'm not sure if I'm interpreting the available information correctly, though. At least I hope not.

For one, this would mean that whomever we pick at the beginning, we're stuck with them for the remainder of the game. In D:OS (and most other party based RPGs), I can swap out companions if the need arises or I get fed up with some of them. D:OS was already quite low on companion choices, and I ended up with only one and a hireling, but at least I had that choice.

If, in D:OS2, all available companions are those 3 that escape prison with me, I'd be pretty disappointed.


As for the concerns about the companion backstories, that is something I don't see as critical. To me, companion origins and elaborate backstories should go well together and I'd expect D:OS2 companions to be much richer and exciting than any of the D:OS crowd. I also would hope for longer and more involved companion quests. Honestly, I fail to see how a origin/race/class/gender combination would prevent writers to come up with complementing personality, backstory and character arc for that companion. I can't imagine that all this is left to the tag system alone with no specific writing tailored to each possible companion.

Sure, the available companions may be dictated by race and gender (which would already give us more choice than the meager 4 from D:OS), and instead of chosing the Mage from the Inn or the Archer from the Cage we'd have the Mage from Cell 1 (who happens to be a female Elf) or the Archer from Cell 4 (male Dwarf). Doesn't mean they have to be bland or more generic than Jahan or Bairdotr. In fact, I'd think with the number of writers working on D:OS2 they should be way more interesting instead.

I play Age of Decadence now and it is the best single player RPG so far (single player means without companions in this case). Some things to be learned from this:

- Ignore any alignment system (good vs evil, order vs chaos, . . .). You can also ignore most descriptors (I mean things like cruel, stoic, passionate, . . .). Choice and consequence is enough.
I said something like this before, but I give an example again:
Some people do not like. Maybe they attack you on sight or they send assassins after you. This is not because you have a reputation of being cruel or evil. They hate you because you slaughtered an entire town and they know some people from there.

- I like how the skill/stat system is used in AoD to allow several possible solutions for quests. But it is not perfect. This is the worst case: You build a char who focusses on talking. But you have one skill point less than needed in persuation to solve something peacefully. You do not have enough points to raise your skill so you are forced to fight a battle you cannot win. This can mean that you have to restart the game and change only a few skill points to get past this point. This is realistic (which is a main goal of AoD) but not always fun.
The best quest I had so far was the first one in D:OS1: Solve the murder. The game did not tell you what to do next step by step, you had several ways to approach it and several skill were useful to solve it (convince others to give you information, find hidden things, pickpocket, talk to animals, . . . ).
But most importantly, every char could solve it. Thogh some chars may have it easier than others, no char was unable to solve the quest because he did not have a specific skill.

- Of course, some things need to be different. D:OS2 will be a game where you cannot avoid combat completely the entire game. So even if a char puts some points into social skills, this should not prevent him from being useful in combat. But the game should reward you somehow if you chose to use your social skills (or thief/sneak skills) instead of just bashing everything in your way.

summary: Everybody (players and developers) should play AoD. Many good things can be learned from it. I do understand that many people will not like this game (very hard, If you do not have lots of experience with RPGs or you read guides, you will die a lot until you create a char that fits your play style and does not die every few minutes.

I guess if I can finish AoD with a combat focused char, D:OS will be a piece of cake. I found D:OS1 not very difficult. For me it was just right. You had to think about what you do in combat, but the main focus was exploration.

In theory, there could be safe havens in the world where you can meet other sourcerers, but they would need to be designed to fit the plot (potential replacements wouldn't be hanging around public places like bars or libraries).
I don't know how the Hall of Echoes is being implemented, though. If party members can be changed, whatever the reason you'll be able to enter and leave the HoE alive, it will need to be transferable or extendable. For example, you couldn't be specifically chosen by the gods, but you could acquire 4 talismans they created that only sourcerers can use, or something.

That's the obvious problem.

Though I do wonder if the limitation (to a fixed set of non-changeable companions picked at game start _and_ to a party full of Sourcerers) is somewhat misguided.

Sure, for the MP case, 4 characters that all start in prison seems the right thing to do, i.e. one for each player. And no player would expect to switch his "main" character during the game, so no alternative companions needed. Also, every player probably wants/needs to make use of the cool Source talent, as it is inherent to the main plot that each player might persue on his own in competitive mode.

But for SP? Does my party really have to be all Sourcerers? Why not pick somebody up along the way that may be sympathetic to my cause? Or another that's not so sympathetic, but good at hiding his distaste and following his own agenda? There are practically limitless possibilities here.

Come to think of it, this seeming fixation on a full SP party escaping from prison grows to be my biggest gripe right now. Lets hope that this is given some more consideration further down development.

I suppose it doesn't HAVE to be that way, but Larian wants to make use out of their new Source Point system and source skills, and those only are useful for Sourcerers. The main characters also have a story goal to get to Black Ring territory, and non-Sourcerers wouldn't share that goal.

I can't really see any good reason for someone who is not a Sourcerer and hates Sourcerers to be hanging out with a party of Sourcerers who are heading for the territory of the Cult of Mustache-Twirling Evilness (you must be this evil to apply).

That's certainly a point, as in D:OS all companions had the potential to learn every skill. OTOH, you'd rarely have 4 Marksmen, Hydrosophists or Scoundrels in your party. So, barring extra special sourcerer mechanics, not the whole party would end up becoming master sourcerers. Instead you'd strive to have a broad array of skills at your disposal, ideally by building upon the inherent skills of a companion you like or by picking your companion based on the skills that complement your party. So a potential companion would be useful even if unable to perform sourcery.


What reasons do the other prisoners have to head there? Why shouldn't they leave the player once they made it to safety and
return to their loved ones, or go into hiding, or start their own Evil Empire in a galaxy far, far away?

I say they'd have the exact same reasons that a non-Sourcerer would have: either it's something personal or they somehow feel attached or indebted to the player. The writers shouldn't have problems to come up with something that's plausible.

Besides, I doubt that players would walk up to a potential companion and go something like "Hey there, I'm this escaped Sourcerer on my way to the Cult of Mustache-Twirling Evilness and I want you for my party!". Instead it may start pretty innocently, through a random conversation or a small side quest perhaps, and by the time it is clear what you are and where you are going, it's too late to turn back.

All right, then think about this: In a world where being a Sourcerer is feared and hated and basically a death warrant on your head, what reason would the Sourcerers have for recruiting a powerful fighting companion of unknown allegiences?'

If they do not trust this companion enough to say that they are themselves a Sourcerer, why would they trust them enough to travel with them? Such a companion could become a threat or an enemy if the truth were to be discovered.

Until the events leading up to the game, though, sourcerers were the good guys (at least in recent history), fighting with and in the Divine Order against the Black Ring. It was only after the Black Ring was defeated and the Divine One absent (Rift Running; see the Beyond Divinity novella) that there was a change in leadership within the Divine Order and sourcery declared illegal. Even with sourcery having a history of being forbidden and seen as corrupt / dangerous, there would be some sympathy and support for sourcerers.

Not all soldiers for hire would care about the moral position of potential employers. If a job involves going against the Divine Order (which some might be inclined to do anyway, even if not being particularly sympathetic to sourcerers), it would just need a payoff corresponding to the danger.

Thanks Raze. I'm not that versed in the Divinity lore, but was also under the impression that persecution of Sourcerers was a recent thing at that point of time, and not everyone would hate them.

Even if this wasn't the case, there would be many ways for unsuspecting NPCs to become a companion: having the same short-term goal, or being in a bit of a predicament where the player helps out (I'm deliberately trying to generalize here, but specific examples for such situations should be easy to come up with).


So my point stands. From a narrative perspective, and with some restrictions (i.e., no source skill) also gameplay-wise, additional companions to replace the initial ones should be feasible. And I find this fairly essential if Larian wants to improve the companions over D:OS. What good will it do for SP if I have to lug around a companion I come to dislike (and I don't mean dislike in terms of the love-hate stretch goal, but on the meta level), just because he seemed a good choice initially. Should I have to restart mid-game, just to try a different one?

The only positive aspect I see in this is that this would make a good example for choice and consequences: you pick your party and then there's no turning back. I just don't think this is the kind of consequence players would cherish.

Actually ... this are good starting situations for a really good SP - Campaign. Stabbey already wrote some good points, why not-sourcerer-companions wouldn't work, but think about the drama in the group itself.

You could deepen the concepts of the Obsidian Games: A bunch of misfits, who can't stand each other but have to work together. Only this time there isn't a glorious leader around, who keeps them inline, so the other members of the group are the only friends you have left in a world, where you only can count on your own kind and maybe not even them.

This could be awesome, if the writers give their best.

There is no reason that all party members must be sourcerers.
I am sure there are many people in this world who do not like the divine order and/or have a very good reason to get away from them. Some people would surely think that it is better to join sourcerers than to fight/escape the divine order alone.

Just because somebody is not a sourcerer does not mean he is weak. (Many enemies, including bosses will be non sourcerers I guess.) It looks like your source powers depend also on your background and race. So a non sourcerer companion could do some things you cannot.

about obsidian: I played KotoR2 recently. The main char and several companions are force users and that is importent for the story. But you have also non force users in your party (people and droids) who can do some things you can not.

some random ideas for D:OS2 non sourcerer companions:
- A barbarien who has some special enrage abilities. He slaughtered many members of the divine order (there can be tons of reasons for that) and now he wants to get away.
- A cursed mage. She is able to see/hear things other cannot. Like visions from other places/worlds or see the past/future. Somebody has cursed her (or her ancestors) and her gift is driving her insane. She is not a sourcerer (I have no idea what the source is at all) but I am sure some fanatics do not like her as well.
- A fanatic heretic who hates the divine order. He is absolutely convinced that the gods do not exist and the divine order spreads only lies. Maybe he is a satanist (gains power from demons) or a nihilist (gains power from the void).

There can be tons of reasons why somebody joins sourcerers, even if sourcerers are hunted by the divine order.

PS: The cursed mage often has one vision that drives her crazy. Somebody in another dimension is staring at a flat object and pushes buttons on an alien machine and this way he controls her entire life. Her vision tells her to pull the plug to free herself, but she does not know what it means or how to do it

True, but in this case, it works quite well.




Yessss ... but the other faction is the Black Ring, Devilworshipers and Babyeaters. Many people would still consider the Divine Order the lesser evil. Or fleeing to another continent.



We know that, because we played non-sourcerers in the first game. And every skill they used, could be learned by everyone.



For example? Everyone still uses the same skill-set.




They had also a lot of them and not everyone was as deep, as they could have been. That's for me one major problem in games with a lot of companions. There often isn't enough time to flesh everyone out (see for example the otherwise very excellent Arcanum).



The last companion sounds like an origin, they mentioned in the playsession. All of them sound like extreme characters, I wouldn't want to have in my group, while fleeing to the land of the Black Ring. In a "realistic" story, I mean.

But that's the question isn't it? Are we going for a "realistic" (like the "grounded narrative" would suggest) story or still for a classic D&D - Campaign, where everyone meets in a tavern and I take "Basil Babyslayer - Bloodcrazy Halflingfighter" with me, because I think he is cool and I need a good fighter?

Although I have to say, I love the idea of the female wizard. You could build a whole campaign around this (looking for the pluck ).

Well, to me it currently looks like that everyone meets in prison and I take "Basil Babyslayer - Bloodcrazy Halflingfighter" with me, because I think he is cool and I need a good fighter. Only to find out later that his skill set does not fit my playstyle and I'd rather have "Caruso Cabbagepiercer - Crossbow champion" in the party.

In the classic case I return to the Inn and pick him up instead, in D:OS2 I restart the game. Which do you prefer?

Since all the Divinity-games had a free skill-system and we probably will get a chance to reset old skillpoints (like the demon in the D:OS), I don't really see a problem gameplaywise (not like more recent games like Age of Decadence, where you are really f***ed, if you chose one skill unwisely).

I already said my piece about possible conflicts in the prisoner group and I still think, that there is enough room for interesting conflicts in the group, but until then I just will wait how it will work out. It could be possible, that we just get an stock-character for each origin and then D:OS2 will be played as every CRPG since Ultima VII.

Still: What is more realistic? Travelling with persons you already knew from your days as a prisoner or a random Joe from the sidewald, who could be an agent or assassin? Doesn't help, that you could ask yourself about the other prisoners.

I know the option existed (and will likely be added again, as many people seem to cry if they cannot respec their characters at least once), but I usually avoid it. Simply doesn't feel right that Basil our muscular fighter with his backstory of singlehandedly beating a gang of trolls into pulp should suddenly be a nimble and agile marksman with otherwise unchanged origin.


No doubts here. I'm not saying that anything is wrong with a group of prisoners from a pure story perspective. There are endless backstories and possibilies for party interaction, regardless where you pick up your companions. From all the info we have, I'm confident that Larian will come up with handcrafted and elaborate story arcs for each companion. With multiple outcomes even, since we got the love & hate stretch goal.

I can only repeat myself: the narrative is not my concern at all. But for a good SP experience it takes a bit more than greatly written companions. They also need to fit in gameplay wise. And usually, party based RPGs allow picking the companions that fit to my gameplay style, and don't pin me down on my initial choice.


Well, in all prototype gameplay I watched, I did not see the players keep a low profile or show distrust to random NPCs. They were freely talking to them, doing their quests and errands, etc. ...

I don't see it as unrealistic or even far-fetched if one or two of those NPCs would turn out to be a potential companion.

Whether they turn out allies or enemies in the end is another thing entirely. Even your fellow prisoners may have a nasty surprise in store for you, depending on the way you treat them over the course of the game.

@ka1man

Fair points. I have nothing to add .