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

I feel like I just want to jump in here with a small aside related to character development and feeling of attachment and investment.

Our character does not need to be, and ideally, in the best case situation, should not be, a blank slate... they should be someone we can define the history of, to a reasonable extent, and play them forward from there with that investment taking root backwards as well as moving forwards with them.

I want to make a special mention of Varnhold's Lot, a side story that came as DLC for Pathfinder: Kingmaker. In this side story, you play a new character, not the character that your main game file is based on, in events that take place analogously to the main game - the two characters can even eventually meet, possibly. Now, you don't get very *long* with this character; the side story is only about equivalent to one chapter of the main game in size... but the story does some truly wonderful work to create a feeling of depth and history and involvement that you, the player, take a strong role in crafting and being responsible for.

At first, I was perturbed to have to make a new character that I knew nothing about, but who was apparently part of this group of other NPCs that she had history with... and yet by the end of that single chapter story, I felt deeply attached to the character, responsible both for her, and for her bonds and relationships with the rest of the crew. I felt their history, and it felt real... and it felt that way because I helped it to grow, even if what was growing was growing backwards into their past; I directed it and defined it, and so even though I'd only been playing the character for the space of a few days to a couple of weeks in in-universe time, the romance and relationship that occurred there managed not only to NOT feel rushed or forced, but to feel satisfying, close, personal, intimate and like it had been a long time coming. It was beautifully done, and it doesn't get enough credit.

It did all of this with simple dialogue and conversation, in a way that felt natural and flowed well... and moving forward, a lot of it genuinely had an impact; the game remembered how you'd set things up, and may of your future dialogue options were shaped by the details you'd defined about your past. There are many other ways I could have defined that story and history, too, with vastly different outcomes.

Other games do this to a lesser extent (NWN2, for example, gives you some options to define a few elements of your history during the harvest festival introduction as you talk to other characters), but none I've played has ever managed to evoke such a potent feeling of connection, over such a short space of time, than this one.

The origin system is deeply flawed and is actually inherently destructive towards the concept personal character investment, in many ways that have been discussed multiple times over by others, and I don't have the energy to get into that again, but I did want to speak to this other aspect of the conversation; There is no excuse, in today's game market, for our personal character to be a bland, blank empty nothing that serves no function to the story, cannot possibly be the leader of this group of superstars and strong-willed individuals, and whose existence is so categorically valueless to the game (even the other party members banter on the road... with each other, and never us, ever. We're never involved.), like it is now. No excuse whatsoever.

The Origin system prioritizes Larian content over the individual. Moreover, because they have an Origin system, the development and hours spent are invested heavily into a feature of the game that some may never use.

I played hundreds of hours in DOS2 over multiple campaigns and never completed an with any Origin character.

Already in BG3, I see that you are lacking content for things if you do not have them in your party. This was the same as DOS2. The Larian experience is predicated around having them in the party, you get a fuller game, more content, more cutscenes, more dialogue, more surprises.

But I should not have to take what Larian offers me in order to get the best experience. And Swen/Larian can say all they want that they are making it to where custom parties have the same level of quality, but I know that is not true.

For this, we have games like The Witcher. It's hilarious to read this here, when, in games with predefined characters it's "We're playing the dev's characters". Isn't that the basic premise of this thread, after all? "They're spending all their time defining these characters", which the post immediately following this one claims to be wasted time. Yet, the only difference between these comps, and Comps in Dragon Age, or Mass Effect, or NWN 1 or 2, or BG 1 or 2, is that we can't play as those characters in the listed games. Other than that, the same amount development time goes into writing them and fleshing them out.


I wonder how you would have felt about that character if you'd played an Alpha version of that DLC?


I disagree. If we ignore the fact that they can be the PC, they are exactly the same as any other comps in any other party based RPG, that defines these NPCs. Games like IWD didn't have that much in the way of party development, because you could easily roll the entire party yourself, especially in IWD 2. That's the only difference. We had some basic knowledge at the start, some of which, in the case of ME and DA Origins, we could do on our own during creation. Other than that, the exact same type of resources went into the comps as is going into them here. If, as you say, you prefer to have your character predefined, then arguing against this system is shooting yourself in the foot, isn't it? Because that's what the OP's concern is, that the development time spent defining the Origin characters could have been spent defining the Custom character. I guess my biggest issue is the definition of Custom. I have yet to see a version of the Witcher where I can roll a Custom Geralt. His history is established, barring what players do in game, from 1 to 3 and any DLCs. This would seem to be what you're looking for, and yet, you're railing against a system that delivers something approximate to that, in the name of a predefined "custom" character.

You're fighting a strawman. The most common argument I've seen is that the player character (if they're not an origin one) FEELS like they're not as important as the origin characters. Of course other games have npcs with backgrounds. No one is saying they don't. They're saying that the player controlled characters feels more personal to the player. Right now, the origin characters in BG3 feel like developer inserts and the actual player character just feels like a punching bag that has to earn the favor of the dev inserts. We get it, other games also have npcs with backstories, that's not the argument I've seen anyone put forward.

Also, you keep saying "it's EA" but the fact is, we paid money to participate in this EA, we're very much allowed to comment on the current state of the EA, and from my experience, EA DOES give a very close approximation of the developer vision and how the rest of the game will go. I've had very few EA experiences where the general feel of the game changed completely from EA to release. The fact that this game already feels similar to the first act of DOS2 lends more weight to that and the statements from the devs themselves about how we'll have to choose our companions before the end of act 1 is even more so.

That said, I respect your right to an opinion and I dont intend on this coming across as insulting to you (text sometimes makes things more aggressive than it was meant to be :))

This says perfectly how I would feel about playing a custom PC (which is exclusively how I would ever play BG3) in the face of Larian's Origin characters. My PC would indeed be superfluous and irrelevant, both to my party and to the game. So what would be the point of playing the game?

Playable origin characters are cool but when you create a custom one you miss out some of the lore of the game.

Dos 2 spoilers ahead.


As a custom character it would be cool to have a story as well, that you can select the background of and throughout the game you get some special things only for that specific background to that custom character. Sure we wont get geralt of rivia from a custom character but in your head your character could be geralt of rivia.

However, I am actually totally cool with other characters dying that you didnt select simply because of combat mechanics. People can bench gale the wizard at early levels when he is weak then use him when he gets strong. I dont like that to be honest. People should put effort into their companions, even if they survive they shouldn't Level up with others imo.

Why should I care what people do right ?
You can say the same about camping in game but it bothers people because why shouldn't you play optimally ?

I don't know - because it wasn't released to the public to be purchased before it was at least ready enough to be commented on fairly.


Very much untrue. The way they interact with the player character is substantially different - they have the limelight, they have all the harsh combacks and snappy comment,s they have all the final words on literally everything. they're the special ones - we, the player character, are just the dumb brick that serves as the fall-person for them to be awesome off, or to treat like a fool, or to condescend to, the vast majority of the time. Further more, they are placed pitched and acted far more like the various characters in an AVN - in that, you the PC interact with them one on one, and almost only every one on one. you have interactions with each one of them in isolation, and can be a completely different person to each of them with no repercussions. This is not the standard or the norm for party-based RPGs, and indeed, they don't feel like party, at all, as a result. Compare NWN2, where almost every major conversation that happens is a group and party affair, that is actually a conversation and a discussion between everyone, the player included and other party members included.


And where, pray tell, did I say anything even remotely like that? Please, by all means, point it out... because I certainly did not say anything of the sort.

I do bring up EA, and while it is, the point is more when players are comparing what we have to games they've finished. We're barely scratching the surface of whatever the full game's going to be, so I don't know where my character is going to go narratively, yet. I'm not insulted, we don't have to agree. Forums would be really boring if everyone always agreed on everything.

But more to what I'm looking at, in NWN I wrote a novella describing a character's backstory before it got into the module I was running it in. Fan fiction is cool, but when I wrote it, I was running a new level in the module with another player that I didn't know, and when they asked about why I was spazzing out about Drow, I had to write the barebones origin on the spot. I later fleshed it out, but if my character had had Geralt, or even Warden level definition, it wouldn't have been possible to do. So I really like that a Custom character is a blank slate, because if the spirit moves me, I can come up with my own, and make it more interesting, possibly. Some fan fiction is better than others, after all.

I am unsure what the issue here is.

You can choose to play an origin character, which by default, will have hard coded lore assigned to them. This changes interactions.

Depending on the characters you drag around in your party your interactions and situations change.

Making a custom character allows you more freedom, in some situations, to augment interactions and situations.

Kind of seems like they have something for everyone and the ability to have multiple, different, playthroughs.

Will something always be arguably better? Yes. This is also subjective.

Also, considering this is still EA and no release date announced... I would not be freaking out about perceived "wasted resources". Especially, if the resources go to something other people like. Kind of narrow minded and selfish.

Is it really fair to call those who disapprove of the Origins system and asking for a fully fledged custom character experience selfish and narrow minded? After all BG games have always been about the custom character experience. All of a sudden we find our lovely created protagonist taking a mute back seat to the most ghastly ensemble cast of OTT companions imaginable (that is purely my subjective take on the companions so far). Larian might deliver on their promises of making the custom character experience as solid as the Origins characters but they also promised a true rendition of a 5E CRPG and that is not really the case so far.

I very much enjoyed playing pre-conceived characters in other RPGs but BG have never been of that ilk. I didn't need Origins characters to motivate multiple playthroughs in BG2, I managed that just fine by playing a new class, race and backstory. Sure, the conclusions might have been limited but the journeys certainly weren't.

I'd suggest the inherent problem with trying to create something for everyone is that you simply cannot please everyone all of the time. A casual browse of the forums will show you words to the effect of: "Make it more like DOS", "Make it more like 5E", "Make it more like BG".

The issues with the "Origin system" are its implications on the overall production, the way it weights on other features (or the lack of them) and not that people feel forced to make use of it.

The thing is simple: would I prefer a large cast of characters, with a high amount of situational reactivity and interactivity, or would I prefer an incredibly limited selection of potential party members, because having to make each one of them also an "Origin character" makes them exponentially more expensive to create?
To each one his own, but I don't feel particularly conflicted in picking the former.

And even putting that aside, even taking the cast entirely out of the equation, I'd prefer to see that SIGNIFICANT extra budget expected to turn any companion into an "Origin story" written from an entire new perspective being spent on several other things, like that proper day/night cycle Larian dismissed from the get go as "not worth the effort".
Well, FUCK IT; it was going to be well more worth than "I can replay the whole thing LARPING as one of my former companions in the last playthrough".

Why? Because I'm perfectly fine experiencing the narrative of each companion just as... you know, a companions. Not just because "I want myself to be a blank slate" (not really something I feel particularly strongly about), but more than anything because it's also the version of the narrative where they actually shine and show hints of having a proper personality, because when you play as them, A) you skip their voice acting B) you take decisions in their places C) you react to events as you would and not a they would according to their writing, etc.

As I said months ago in one of the first replies in this thread, never once playing any of my favorite CRPGs of the past I've ever found myself thinking "Oh sure, the companions in Baldur's gate 2/Kingmaker,/Dragon Age/Mask of the Betrayer/whatever were great, but I mourn the lack of options to replay the entire game as one of them".
I stand by that claim: it never happened, and I'm fairly confident it won't happen in the future, either. More than relying on feelings: I put it to test with DOS 2 and guess what? It did absolutely nothing for me there, either.

The whole point of D&D is to create your own unique character. I would never play a character someone else designed. It's a weird fetish that Larian has.

Exactly, I would prefer to create my own companions and find them along the way. Solasta does exactly this granted you just all show up at once at the table in the inn. However Larian with its resources could write backstories for you and your manually made companions and probably make it GREAT. I am unlikely to play any of the Origin stories and that is fine NOBODY is going to make me and some folks will likely have a blast playing them, I just prefer to create my own so that I know I will have a Balanced party or an Un-Balanced party on purpose for role-playing.

It would be better A LOT if the were focussed on Origin Stories/Background rather than companions.

It would be cool if we could choose our background with custom characters (even with restrictions) but playing a character entirely builded, designed and written by someone else is not something I'd ever like in cRPG.

I just find the Origin characters' backgrounds and personalities so over-the-top that I have no interest in having them be part of my party. If I can hire mercenaries or create my own full party, the Origin characters can just hang out together at the wreckage of the ship.

"Different strokes for different folks."
Some people come to this game from a tabletop DnD background and enjoy crafting characters and back stories before playing. (well, you already kind of do that when you choose your basic background in Character Creation don't you?)
Some people come from playing the BG series in the past.
Some people come to this game from playing various other RPGs and MMOs and relate it to how other games worked in the past. (that's me)

Anyway, this game allows you to ignore the origin characters if you want, and have your own custom party. You just miss out on the character interactions/conversations, and have to have them all in your head - or with your friends on Discord while playing together in multiplayer. That is fine.

I personally have enjoyed playing my own characters, getting to know the existing Companions, and am now looking forward to being able to play as one of them and see their perspective on things. I feel that will make for a richer game experience as you can "get into their heads" and figure them out more. I particularly look forward to playing as Astarion and Lae'zel - who are both my favourite companions.

Point being - I don't think there is a "wrong" or "right" way to play this game! The system is flexible enough to allow all these different ways of playing, and none of them are wrong.

Larian puts a huge amount of time into writing pre-determined stories for characters that we won't ever play. It's weird that they put so much effort into a closed storyline, especially now that they are using 5E as the base of the game. So I think it's fair to complain that character identities and alignments aren't designed to be more customizable so that some of that story content will apply to all custom characters instead of only being delivered to people who choose to play someone else's character design...

so basically, you like the game as it is, therefore, it's fine

Will you, though? Remember, when you play AS one of these characters, you lose a lot of their voice lines, you lose all of their personal exposition, and on top of that, you are playing as them so the game will either A) give you fewer choices and take those choices out of your hands, because the origin character is their own person and would act a certain way, on B) leave you making the decision, in the full knowledge that there is a "right" choice - a choice that they would make without you behind their eyes, and that you are spending most of your time acting out-of-character for the character that you're playing... or a possible C) They'll let you make decisions, but will force you to pass high dice checks every time you act 'out of character', almost like a punishment... and we've seen some evidence of this happening already. So, are you *really* going to enjoy playing as one of your favourite companions, being heavily pressured to stick to their scripts, punished for going off it, and all the while missing out on a lot of the interaction that made you like them in the first place? Because, that is what it was very strongly like in D:OS2, and there is already strong evidence to show us that it's looking very much the same way here.

This feels almost disrespectful for how cheerfully it misses the point with the "problems" some people are stating with "Origin characters".
if it's something you like, good for you, but It's almost like you are PURPOSEFULLY ignoring everything that was argued barely few posts above.

"The game allows you to ignore it" doesn't solve anything, because "ignoring it" doesn't change the design/budget issues the subsystem introduces.

Personally I don't even strictly dislike the idea of playing an Origin character (even if I don't particularly care about it, that's for sure).
What I DO tend to dislike are the consequences it introduces, the "collateral damage" if you will:

- a main cast with good chances of being limited to 5-8 companions at most (because each one will need to be written from at least two points of views: as companion and as playable protagonist with multiple options).
- a narrative that basically forces all these characters to being introduced almost invariably in the same formulaic way: very early in the game, because they ALL need to come from the same premise as the protagonist of being "tadpole owners" that share the same exact situation and go through the same exact major steps of the adventure.
- lack of other "expensive" features that I would without a doubt prioritize over it (once again: no scheduling, no day/night, no proper rest system and sense of passing time, but "yes" to rewriting -and at least partially even voicing- each companion both as MC and as party member?)
- if DOS2 is the reference, how fundamentally inconsequential (if not even harmful) to the quality of the the core experience it will be compared to its cost. Or to word it differently: how little it actually adds to variety compared to playing with a custom character and seeing the same subplot played from the companions perspective. I'd be curious to hear ANYONE willing to argue in good faith that playing a Ifan or having Ifan in party and doing his side quest made a massive difference on what type of narrative they served in DOS 2.


Not making use of an Original character in your playthrough on a personal level does not address any of these issues. It's like saying "If you don't like that half your neighborhood is burning just stay at home and you won't notice it".
Ok? But all the stores/places I wanted to visit are not available anymore and I liked having friends in the area?