Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Do you think Minsc will be playable?

That's a good way of putting it, yes

I have some doubts, it is not that this data is analyzed by a random person in the company (at least I hope). When analyzing such a large amount of data, they certainly employ specialists in this field. They would have to be terribly removed from reality for the team not to take into account such an eventuality. Especially since it is not a far-fetched theory.
Of course, there is a chance that it did, but I would say it is quite small.

From the Pre-EA footage where they always played as an Origin character to the old narration style, I don't think there's ANY chance they would scrap the Origin system. I think it's very much integral to their vision of the game. There's a reason why the promotional art of the game has all of them and no "default" character among them.

I'm not really concerned with the ability to play Nice'zel or Evil Wyll being farfetched. One of the most fascinating things I like about BG3 is that depending on what scenes you get and how you respond to the companions as Tav, you will have a different experience with them than other players or even your own previous or later playthroughs. Imagine a playthrough never learning Shadowheart's secret and never opening up to the player (many of us experienced this pre-patch 3). Or for a more interesting example, compare people's opinions of Gale for those who play good and distrust him and those who play evil and don't suspect anything from him. And for me, after prioritizing Lae'zel's dialogue over all others, she's already pretty nice for a gith and pretty restrained all things considering.

My point is, we are already intended to have a certain range of interpretations of the characters. Being allowed to play them with options within that range as Origin characters is no different to me. I do think the options offered will be within reason of course. "Nice'zel" might always be narcissistic and still always want whatever it is she might want, but might have a range in how domineering she can be to get it. There's an example of this already in the Origin Unlocker mod in how you go about the Zorru scene pictured below: So I assume Minsc would also have options within a certain believable range as well.

In response to the datamine spoiler text:

None of the original companions should be companions in BG3.

They can't possibly do them justice considering these characters already went through an epic campaign and are real epic heroes or villains as such. You can spin a silly tale about Gale and Wyll being archmages who got depowered to level 1 by tadpoles or whatever, but you can't do that to established characters from BG 1 and 2.

Cameos would be cool though. But still the level difference is so huge it might feel forced unless you meet them later. Much later. Or else, why wouldn't an epic level Jaheira just go flatten the Mind Flayers and be done with their plotting.

Unless Larian can get Jim Cummings to voice Minsc, I'm not sure I would want to see him again in any form; it would be wrong somehow, as to me the voice defines this character more than anything else.

I don't really expect to play any origin character, because the idea doesn't appeal to me compared to moulding a blank slate character. But, I'm sure many people that prefer to play pre-defined characters would love to play Minsc. And if I were to play any origin character in BG3, Minsc would be preferable to the other existing companions.

I'm sure you could play Minsc any way you want, including evil, since the character in BG1/2 had suffered brain trauma and was rather unhinged. Obviously this would require some creative writing from Larian for Minsc to self-justify his actions, but would be perfectly possible.

Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the Origin system scrapped BUT I would still like to keep resources on giving each Origin Companion unique dialogue options cause it makes sense to allow them to interject in conversations or even act as the face in a conversation, and they would definitely handle certain things their own way.

I think this would work best for Minsc, keeping his personality intact but giving the player some control over them. Just making it that he doesn't have many outright evil Dialogue options.

The notion of playing Minsc (I truly hope we can't)), highlights for me the inherent problem with playing Origins characters; I'm just not sure where I stand on being able to roleplay a character counter to the defined personality we experience while having them as companions. Ok, creative freedom or whatever, it just feels a little disingenuous to role-play Astarion or Lae'zel as some goody 2 shoes saving the world and every puppy in it. Or as others have said, role-playing Minsc as some sadistic evil bastard would just feel wrong.

Once again I may be in the minority, not having played BG1/BG2 years ago so I have no attachment to Minsc. I can understand the apprehension about him being a playable/Origin character, for those who have become attached to him through the original games. But let's just have faith that Larian understand just how much of a beloved character he is to so many people, and the gravity of the BG legacy they've taken on, and have faith they will get it right.
It's difficult to have faith at the moment because of SO little communication from them... people are jumping to so many negative conclusions right now because of anxiety over the lack of news. But let's try to assume the positive, that they are hard at work getting things right and will tell us the details as soon as they can?


We shall see what happens. In DOS2 (which I only just started playing last night) the Origin characters have their own little intro telling us who they are, and so many class/spec possibilities for them. In BG3, the character classes are set, which is already a good sign - hopefully their personalities and choices will be more set as well, and we may not get options they would never choose? For example Wyll CAN'T choose to give up his one remaining eye to the Hag. I can't see him having the option to side with the Goblins/Minthara either.

As well as character-specific conversation options. I love roleplay so - at the moment I've started playing Lohse in DOS2 - whenever I see an option to speak as her, I pick that. Along the way I am learning who she is. I hope they will do the same for BG3, to have character-specific dialogue options to choose that only that particular character would say.
If it feels wrong to choose the other options, then go with what feels right for you and your playthrough.

I do think it should be strongly encouraged by Larian to play a custom character first, and then an Origin character to experience a playthrough from their side of the story.

I am not sure what the issue is here? If it feels wrong to play a character a certain way, then simply don't do it. If it bothers someone that others might play a character contrary to how they think they should be played, then maybe don't watch play videos or play the multiplayer with people that don't think the same way. I think this would probably be the safest way to not be bothered by how other people play their game. Most likely companions will have different dialogues for situations that will be based on how they are "supposed" to be, but all the options will still be there to take the different paths and for corruption/redemption stuff.

I think the Origin system is not going anywhere, they have spent too much time on it already and while I may not play as one myself, I am glad it exists. Many people seem to have trouble in coming up with backstories and feel "lesser" than the companions, and some people don't care about creating a character at all and just want to play the game. Origins make it easier for these people.

Well said. Larian is being super ambitious and taking the big risks in jumping into this game. I celebrated the day they got this IP, because I had been with them since DOS1 and they were the only company I could see getting this right.

Could you imagine if EA/Bioware got this? The IP destroyer?! EA would get halfway through it and cancel the development and we would end up never seeing anything. Or they would release a game so full of microtransactions you would end up having to pay individually for every single line of Mincs' dialogue.

"To respond with Mincs specific dialogue please enter your credit card number"

A lot of BG1/2 fans already consider the IP destroyed because of Larian and the divinity style.

A lot other a more "open minded" but trusting Larian doesn't seems obvious like it is for some of their fans.
I don't care being able to play Minsc, I won't ever play any origin character. I just hope he won't become another wtf Larian style character.

First I'll just say this argument is completely academic since I agree, the origin system doesn't go anywhere.

But on topic, the reason people are so angry is because there are a lot of resources that go into implementing this system, resources that could have been spent on other revenues. So those who are for the system will say it is a good usage of resources and those who are against it will say it isn't.

Personally I think that not only is it a waste of resources, it also creates unnecessary difficulties on the writing and simply isn't worth it.

But than again, I think this one is a done deal so we should just grit our teeth and move on

I imagine Larian might opt for a hybrid Origin-system where not all companions are optional player characters. At least when it comes to famous/heroic characters like Minsc. It makes ZERO sense Minsc would be a first level character, even making Minsc a lower level character to fit as a companion would be a stretch.

I like the detailed backgrounds of companions, but dislike the Origin-system as it comes with a host of negatives and only one positive.

I hope they will do exactly that.

I agree. If they had never started with it, it would have been better (they could have custom templates for the less imaginative people) and they could have spent the time on improving or adding other things.

I hope for the same, but there would probably need to be some "good" playable characters to add to what we have for those who play that way.

HELL NO. Clearly you are unfamiliar with the character so let me be the next, if not the first to tell you: Minsc cannot, and never will be evil in any shape or form, it is a major betrayal to his personality. He prides himself on fighting evil.

Yeah but you know, it was a long time ago and now he probably has a tadpole in his head. Tadpole's influence can explain everything !

I am well aware that he will never be evil, and my question was only 'will we be able to play him evil?'. I am actually very much against being able to play him 'evil', as much as I am against being able to play Astarion or Laezel as 'good'.

Do we even know that Minsc is going to be a permanent companion? I thought he is going to make a cameo appearance, similar to Drizzt did in BG1 and 2.