Originally Posted by Icelement
Originally Posted by Tuco
I disliked this feature in DOS 2, since it stripped down all the companions of of most of their identity.
I feel it would be an even poorer fit for the D&D ruleset and setting.

Not everything that is convenience for the player on the immediate distance makes a game better.


And let's be honest... The feature was in DOS 2 to compensate for the extremely low number of companions available, the mere suggestion it will be in BG3 hints at a similar problem.


As of now, my number 1 fear is an underwhelming number of companions. It's looking likely that aspect is not going to change.

Larian very clearly appears to be building their origin characters to provide a "few quality characters" instead of what I remember being much more a diverse party situation in the previous Baldur's Gates. It also appears that you're meant to "lock in" your choices by the end of Act 1 (sounds familiar... D:OS2) and then you're using that party for the rest of the game.

I want to be the focus of the campaign- my character. The rest of the party is just that- the party.

Why we need to change the class, outfit, personality, etc of these other characters boggles my mind. Instead of making an alternative Astarion, make an actual alternative to Astarion. Provide me another Rogue that I can party with. Curb their interactions to be limited and minimize VA needs. Get Jim Cummings to do a few random voice lines and make some shallow characters I don't mind losing in a fight versus the local goblins.

It simply feels like the goal is to push as far away from BG style gameplay as possible. Currently there is very little that feels reminiscent of BG.

So what happens when you're playing as Astarion? Shadowheart? Since you will be able to play the Origin characters at launch, at the very latest, any of them could, in fact, be your character. The "but my immersion" argument falls flat here, because it's an option, and from what I'm reading, one that only applies when you're playing as that particular character, since you can't do anything with them if you're not, nobody else would be affected, at all, if someone decides to make Astarion a Wizard instead of a Rogue. I always loved the logic of "players need more choices, but only the choices I think are good for the game".

As mentioned in this thread, this option existed in DOS2, but I frankly didn't even look at it until my third or fourth playthrough. I'm not sure it would be any different here, for me. I wonder how many others had the same indifference to it, despite it being available? It's a case of "much ado about nothing" as far as I'm concerned. What Player Y does in their saves has absolutely no affect on what I do in mine.