Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Where the positive companions?

I am OK with the current set of companions but overall them seem more negative / focused toward an more evil playthrough?

I wish Larian would tell us more heroic companions are being added later.

I am worried that because of the voiceover work needed that least may be the majority of companions that we'll get.

Nonspoiler answer; they are coming later.

We're a bit short on flower boys companions at the moment.

Wyll and Gale tend to lean toward the positive direction. Shadowheart is looking in that direction but seems hesitant to go there. Astarion is a bit of a self-centered ponce. Lae'zel is....I like her as a character....but she's a terrible person.

I keep hearing "Gorion would have none of this! 'Tis shameful!" with the current companions, even Wyll & Gale.

For my evil playthroughs I have been using Shadowheart, Laz'ael & Astarion.

Gale and Wyll are far from evil and Shadowheart is more selfish and rude then actually evil as far as ive seen...

I would argue that Shadowheart is more evil then neutral due to worshipping an evil Goddess, Shar.

Something about Wyll & Gale is just making me uneasy about them also.

Gale did something to turn himself into a necrotic bomb. That probably was not a good act.

Wyll hinted he was worse in his youth and I feel the whole "Blade of the Frontier!" stuff is for him to hide horrible things he did in the past.

These companions all come off to me as too much from the edgelord school of roleplaying. None of them seem like classical heroic types.

Wyll has no eye, i bet Boo took it out, hence Wyll is evil

I had this argument before, but tagging shadowheart only because of the Shar worshipping thing has it's limitations. Once you explore her character for a bit through character interaction, you'll find out the story is more complicated than it seems initially. I can't say more without spoilers though

Wyll made a pact with a cambion for his powers. Thats the entire list of things that I can add to the 'bad things Wyll did' list so far. If that makes him evil every warlock is evil 😂

Gale his 'bad thing' can be summed up with hubris. And biting things off that are larger then he can chew. And hes paying for that mistake. His god made him lvl 1 again man. Take some pity on the guy

She just wants to be cured and return to Baldur's Gate without being entangled in all the drama or people in the area. Sound like a neutral character to me.

And you need to win a hard DC to know about Shar, without that meta-knowledge, there is nothing evil about her outside her opinion that Selûne sucks (and you don't need to be evil to think that).

Well, every fiendish warlock anyway. You can't be a fiend without being EVIL. Though the Fiend pact warlocks can be good (Warlock and Patron trying to kill each other is semi-frequent story arc.

The other pacts aren't necessarily evil patrons (though Undying and Great Old One patrons are dominated by evil types with a fair speckling of Neutrals and almost no goods outside certain campaign settings such as the Undying Court in Eberron.)

That you patron is evil doesent male you evil though...

Shar has historically had a lot of success at luring in people with promises of a place they will be accepted. And it sounds a bit like Shadowheart was brought up in the worship of Shar since she was a child.

Shar is, without a doubt, a heavily toxic, abusive, and evil person...goddess or no. But it is entirely possible to be even a good person who unknowingly loves, supports, and is utterly devoted to someone that is just using and abusing you.

I'm certainly not saying Shadowheart is Good. She's probably on the very shallow end of evil, if not just flat neutral.

D&D "evil" covers a LOT of territory and some of it is behavior and personality types that we would call jerks or assholes but not really evil.



Check the post, I did say that.

In my opinion Wyll is almost more abrasive than the others because you constantly have to reign in his dumb plans or get in really tough fights. Looking at you, windmill. "Let me threaten the goblin while we're standing in a crossfire kill box with goblins surrounding us with elevation advantage, it sounds like a great plan versus just ambushing them and knocking him out for later". Idiot.

And I love him for it. It's such a high charisma, low wisdom thing to do. Classic warlock.

But anyway, shadowheart may not actually be evil if certain theories pan out, Gale is probably good actually, Wyll is likely chaotic neutral, Lae'zel is one evil bitch, and Anaerion is pretty boy murderhobo.

The only problem I have with them right now is that the rogue (whom you want for traps) the cleric (whom you may want to heal) and the fighter (whom you want to tank, not that this works in BG3) are all evil or borderline. They can fix this if the added companions have the ability to pick locks, but....

I'm confused by these posts. Gale and Wyll are clearly good, Shadowheart is neutral with good leanings, and Astarion and LAezal are evil leaning. Gale and Wyll in particular are chipper, fun loving guys. What the hell are you people doing to piss them off?!

Good people can do bad/shortsighted/wrong things. It doesnt mean you're all good all the time.

Also, you dont seem to understand what the term edgelord means...

You did say that. And I disagree with it. Warlock patrons are a means to an end. Warlocks crave power and found sources outside of gods or arcane magic to supply it to them.

They generally have a price associated with it though. Which if you have talked a little to Wyll you will find out he clearly doesent want to pay. That in itself doesent make him not-evil but the fact that he wants to do good, be a hero and help those in need would make him non-evil.

Unless he suddenly goes full murderhobo when you go outside of EA area but I dont see that happening tbh.

+1

Want to know if I can put together a BG2 like party.

I'm confused.... I've said that Wyll leans good and that an evil-patron does not mean the warlock is evil.

You say you disagree and then you say the same things I did.

Isn't that an agreement.