Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Does anyone like the Origin system?

I'm honestly not a fan of playing premade characters. Gripes aside, I'd most likely give Asterion and Shadowheart a try. Their stories seem interesting.

For a single player experience I think it is a bad design - having companions be “player’s equal” creates narrative issues. And while Bioware’s “chosen one the leader” trope got pretty stale throughout the years, so far Larian’s approach with vague protagonist didn’t work for me so far (mainly D:OS2. I am judging BG3 via gameplay videos due to my hardware limitations).

For coop though, it’s brilliant. Companions being playable means coop players can drop in&out.

I like having a well written character either as a companion or as the MC, playing a premade character means you have a better chance of getting that. The only issue that I see really arising from the multiple main character design choice is that it runs the risk of compounding either poor or uneven writing. There are some companions in the old Baldur's Gate games that were very underwritten compared to the others; same for DOS:II, not all the origin stories were as engaging as the others.

Why does having multiple important stories integrated together crate narrative issues? Is it because we are programmed to love and follow a single hero and there has to be a solitary leader figure that pulls everyone forward through the story? Why can't there be a team of equally important and different characters and the team as a whole is the "hero" that pulls the world through the problems and saves the day. I am loath to use this example because I think superheroes are played out....but who is the hero in the avengers? Is it Captain America? Iron Man? Thor? Dr Strange? Antman? Blackwidow? Hulk? Nick Fury? (not Hawkeye though..... :p )

This became a plot point and a struggle in itself, as the team dynamics had conflicts on what they felt was important. Hell even the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles had conflicts on who is the leader, but they heavy handedly pointed at Leonardo for the most part.

So in this game/story there are all equally important characters that can influence the story in various ways, and while you are the defacto "protagonist" that drives the story forward you are not necessarily the most important one or the hero, or the special. This is an acceptable story arc and has been used as the "bystander" to greatness before, but we are more than a bystander,

Yet we don't have to be the "lone avenger of super heroic manliness second coming of what ever deity figure destined to save the world and be revered by all and infinitely charismatic unifier of badassery"...yet it seems that is what people want to see in stories...which I feel is somewhat shallow (sorry).

Now are the companion stories compelling enough or just hamfistedly put in the game and ultimately meaningless? Maybe, we will find out. Some may be more interesting than others.

I don't have any problem playing a character who doesn't have some sort of amazing backstory, but is instead a more-or-less normal person who got caught up in typical FR craziness by accident.

It feels like an attempt to straddle the two kinds of RPG's we've seen over the last decade;

On the one side you've got Mass Effect and the Witcher series, where you have a main character that very much has their own identity and story.

On the other you've got Baldurs Gate 1/2, Dragon Age 1, where you're character is a blank slate to be filled in.

I think both styles of games can be enjoyable, but I do recognise you're making some pretty big compromises in story telling to put BOTH into the same game.

I think they're spreading themselves a little thin to be honest. It's going to be hard to try and make easy of the playthroughs unique and interesting.

They tried to some extent with DoS2, with each character having a few unique dialogue options and quest events that set them apart, but I never felt much desire to
play the game from their point of view. In fact, a lot of the personality and character was often stripped away when the player took control of the characters.

I understand what they're trying to achieve, but yeah.. I think it's a very ambitious feature and difficult to do well without spreading yourself thin.

This. I feel like more casual gamers like the origin system very much, because they are more used to it (especially if they play a lot of other genres of video games, which are mostly with one very distinct main character)

I could go either way on it tbh. I love making custom characters, but Astarion really speaks to me so ill definitely do q run with him.

To me it's really simple.

Why would I ever play as an origin character? I can have them as companions and experience their story that way.

This isn't the Witcher which is literally focused around a certain character.

I don't like the way origins characters make you feel like your created character isn't as interesting or cool. I would rather they just be companions and not be made to feel like I have to play an origins character (like in DOS2) because they got all the flavor and a bigger budget. If Larian gave as much love to created characters and didn't make them feel like empty-headed sex dolls, then maybe this wouldn't be a problem but that would take a lot of resources and I don't think they'll bother.

Most of the people pick origin, because it gives more "features", than making your own "main" character.

has larian posted somewhere that most ppl pick origin characters? bc my read on the forums is that most ppl will play origin characters 'if theyre there' but would prefer playing and making their own 'main' characters, particularly if the 'main' charactacter got some of the 'features' that seem to be limited only to origin characters, which i think is the core issue of the origin characters v custom pc in that the custom character doesnt have access to the same gameplay mechanics or have their own personal/unique plot hooks/storyline when compared to the origin characters.

admittedly im biased here bc i dont think its a good game design for a franchise (BG/dnd) that espouses unique/'create your own' character creation where you play your own story/adventure - why would i want to play as a dev written dmpc? if the origin characters were just fleshed out npcs i wouldnt have that much an issue, but i dont understand the insistence and writers/resources being allocated by larian for upwards of 8 origin characters and it just seems like a larian hold-over from dos1/2 (as is evident in other gameplay mechanics). frankly, the more time spent on origin character integration by larian makes me think its less likely that we will see 6 party slots or a large variety of 'fleshed out' non tadpole npc companions, but hope to be proved wrong

I had hoped not to be forced to play a premade char just to get some background and personality.
Especially as I don't much like the companions aka origin chars.

It would have been nice to have a couple of available backgroundstories of your created char that actually matter in the game.
Even MMOs like GW2 managed to get you some personal quests based on your background.

The whole point of a custom character is that you make up your own background and personality. 😊 But yes I agree it would be really nice if Larian would add dialogue options and a sidequest or two that relate to the Background you select in the character creator.

However an argument can be made that forcing ANY events based on preselected backgrounds/personality limits a persons role-playing options. Someone might pick the Noble background but what Larian does with that might conflict with what the player was imagining.

This sums it up pretty well for me. I would prefer a mix between character templates, for those who just want to get into the game, and possibly backstories like DA:O. Character templates was also found in the early Fallout games and Wasteland use them as well. As for the DA:O backstories they were also acting as tutorials and gave you more of a connection to your character then if you would've started your game in Ostagar.

In relation to what I've stated above, I could potentially love origin characters, but it would require a bit of work. Take Shadowheart as an example. Imagine starting her playthrough soon after her "amnesia" (trying to avoid using spoiler tags), and instead starting the tutorial in a pre-Nautiloid setting. The time on the Nautiloid will still be spent in her pod, in the shape of a cut-scene, and then you get to control her again at the beach. Wyll could have a similar prologue, but with strong focus on his background specifics and how he struggles with the choices of the pact. Lae'zel could be as is but instead jump down on a randomly generated character instead and chose to trust it or to kick it off the Nautiloid.

My point being: If I am introduced to interesting characters and if I'm also given insight in their backstory and motivations, then I can definitely seeing myself enjoying it plenty. Preferably I would also be able to make at least minor adjustments to their kit and stat points, with the exception of Wyll and with certain RP restrictions considering their racial background and backstory.

This is also where I stand on it. I enjoy both kinds of games but prefer blank slate protags for my RPGs. In theory, I don't have a problem with Origin characters but when I played D:OS 2 I kept feeling like having both kinds of protags present just limited everything. And so I fear it will be the same with BG3. Game development only has so many resources. I just feel like trying to make sure all of the Origin characters have their custom options and content is going to detract from the custom player experience.

But, I would like to be proven wrong. And with how much development has gone into the Origin system already, with the voice acting and coding that dataminers can find, it's not like it's going to go away. I've accepted that it's a done deal. So all that's left for the devs is to do a good job :P

I feel the main thing detracting from the custom player experience is that many people are not used to filling in all the details themselves. It isn't hard to make a backstory that is interesting, people just have to be creative. I am glad the companions are going to be unique, it is way better than Skyrim burden carriers and meatshields, and makes it a bit more like a DnD game.

Based on what I've seen there's still a large amount of dialogue reactions based on your class/race/background so I'm not too concerned about custom characters being too dull.

Are there actually background options/reactions? I remember Larian stating that they intended to do that but decided against it since backgrounds would be different for each player anyway (one noble from another noble).

Haven't seen any for Criminal, Urchin, or Soldier at all, pretty sure there are none for the rest. Glad they decided against it, there are hundreds of different characters that could be made from one background.