I guess a specific example is in homebrew (sometimes even in premade modules, depending on the DM), the DM can often incorporate part of your background into the story. Find your lost lover, avenge your parents, reclaim your birthright, introduction of an NPC that is from your background, etc. This greatly helps me, at least, to rp my character and feel like they're a real part in the world.
Obviously, I don't expect BG3 to have this type of thing due to the vast amount of work/permutations it'd require. But there's some happy middle ground between headcannon-only Tav and ^.
Of course, Larian could already plan to do something like this in Act 2, in which case great! ^_^
I see what you are getting at, most characters I play do not have some driving goal but their background is definitely incorporated somehow by the DM. I guess I am used to games where you are one thing (prisoner, soldier/lawyer, etc) and your background details are all headcanon, pretty much like what we have here. In these games, the goal is determined by the game ("I have to find my...." being fairly common), there are of course side quests, but background doesn't play any part.
Originally Posted by Sozz
I'm sorry I made this confusing, I didn't mean rolling your background, the impartial third-party I'm talking about is the game, our "mechanical DM", making a headcannon around the scant particulars given us in character creation is one thing, but only what is in the game can be observed, reacted to, and incorporated into the story, which is what I'm after most.
I'm also for a more robust system of traits, or similar, to customize our MC with, for the same reason.
Traits and similar stuff would be nice.
Originally Posted by Firesnakearies
I've seen a bunch of people playing BG3 who don't even play this type of RPG, it's literally their first isometric party-based RPG, their first game based on D&D. They are mostly lost, but also having fun. Because it's a fun game. Those people are never going to come onto these forums and post feedback. They're fine with how it is.
I don't usually get into isometric games at all, prefer TPS, survival, and open world rpg types. I was actually surprised that I enjoy this one as much as I do, only got it because my DnD group were also getting it and we planned to play our characters here to see what they would do, which hasn't happened yet ofc. I don't mind testing though, so will post feedback and other stuff, and will definitely play it a few times once released.
Originally Posted by Wormerine
Perhaps, simply lack of companion content didnt lead to question, why they would follow PC - just another meat bag to add to your squad.
From my limited play of this (I got to BG and stopped, can't really get into it) I agree about the meat bag companions. I didn't feel like a leader, more like an observer. The game pretty much directs you to go to places and if you have characters of different alignments going to the same place, you can't even get them to cooperate long enough to get there. Then they make snarky remarks about how you do things instead of you being able to have an adult conversation with them about why. Dorn feels the least like a meat shield, probably because he actually had a quest line. Imoen is like the pesky younger sister I never had, the rest are pretty much forgettable except wanting to shove Minsc's morals up his arse. Got rid of him as soon as his miniquest was done.
Originally Posted by Warlocke
I have just as much fun playing with 4 custom characters as I do with companions, no matter how well they are written. I’m perfectly content to schizophrenically headcanon multiple backstories, party banter, campfire discussions, inter-party dynamics, and even party member rivalries.
This is something I tend to do as well. Probably why I made so many custom followers in Skyrim. I do like the option for having fully fleshed out companions like we have here though.
