Planescape Torment had only 7 companions and it worked really well. BG2 companions were... Well, they had nice writing, but most of them felt pretty generic. Not in a bad way, mind you, and not all of them, there were several standouts, but the majority of them were your average high fantasy adventurers with basic backstory and basic personality.
That just proves his point, and that of many others: at the end of the day, most of us play games to have fun. We don't play games because "oh but this story makes so much sense" or "oh but it's ultra realistic that you have a smaller but DEEPER and DYNAMIC cast". It's fun to have a large roster of adequately written companions even if they are "generic", because we'd have options to choose from. It is fun to have options.
You can certainly sit there and hope that BG3 will turn out to be another PST - in terms of both style and writing quality. "It worked" for PST, yes, but why? Because that game was never about combat. It's about dialogues, philosophy, story, and it has a superb story. Does BG3 look like it's trying to be another PST - not about combat and going to have PST-level writing? No, it looks like it's going to be another Larian game instead.
Here's another thing, what if you dislike certain companions? Oh these NPCs are sooo DYNAMIC and DEEP but you know what I hate their personality, so can I choose other NPCs to fill my party? Oh wait but I don't have much of a choice, do I, because there are only a handful of them. In fact, it's only reasonable that you have at least two options for each major class, so if you need someone to fill a certain role, you have at least two NPCs to choose from - 2 tanks, 2 rogues, 2 archers, 2 mages, 2 clerics, 2 whatever. This explains why BG2's big roster serves it really well - you almost always have options regardless of what kind of role you're trying to fill.
PS: this is not even talking about other rp factors like alignment yet. If I want to roleplay a good/evil character, I would want to take along NPCs such that it would make sense for those NPCs to follow my character. As I understand it, this game is trying to create companions that have personality, meaning that they should react to the things you do. So what if 3 or 4 of them dislike what you do? You're screwed big time if you don't have other companions to fill your party. On the other hand, if every NPC would be willing to follow you around no matter what kind of character you are, no matter what you do, then... that sucks.
Excellent post. Having options is possibly the single most important and foundational characteristic of a good and fun and memorable (and replayable) RPG.
Originally Posted by Try2Handing
Originally Posted by GM4Him
The story implies these are the core characters. 6 people are considered by the Absolute as "Chosen". That is why they are considered "beautiful weapons" and why the goblins are searching for them, and why THEY all have unique special backgrounds and they aren't all just common, regular people.
Huh... Let me guess: at some point late in the game you will have to battle/compete among your own party to decide who will be the one really chosen and that person will get the chance to ascend, or something like that. You will have the option to submit and surrender all your power to some other being, or kill said being and take all said power for yourself, or kill said being and also relinquish said power, making sure there will never be another "chosen one" ever again.
(Does this game also start on a beach, by any chance?)
Also, fire everywhere.
LOL. Another great post! Larian's fire everywhere has spread to you, 'cause you're on fire!
