Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback On Custom Characters (and Origin Characters)

The topic of Custom Characters, and Origin Characters, arose again recently (in a thread that quickly rode out of its initial tracks).

So I've decided to kind of summarise some aspects of the discussion, as well as my personal requests, suggestions and feedback, on Custom Characters.


Terminology and relation between type of PC, Backstory and Personal Quest.

I'll start with some terminology, to avoid misunderstandings or repetition of long phrases.

Origin Character (OC) : a character made by Larian. They have fixed Stats, Cosmetic Design, personality, Backstory and Personal Quest. They can be recruited as companions, or chosen as the PC at the start of the game.

Semi Custom Character (SCC) : a character where we can choose the Stats, Cosmetic Design, ideally the personality as well. But they have a fixed Backstory. And they most likely have a Personal Quest.

Fully Custom Character (FCC) : a character where we can choose the Stats, Cosmetic Design and personality. We can completely make up their Backstory in our head, and the game will not contradict it.

Stats : all mechanical things found on the character sheet. Includes racial features, Class, Background, Ability Scores, Skills, starting spells if applicable, Feats, etc.

Cosmetic Design : Race, sex, physical appearance and name.

Backstory : what canonically happened to a character before the Main Story told in the game.

Personal Quest (PQ) : a quest specifically related to a companion character (e.g. Astarion becoming free from Cazador, Gale getting rid of his bomb, etc). Typically a side quest.

Main Story (MS) : ... the overarching adventure (with Absolute, tadpoles and so on).

Player Character (PC) : the character that we play as, and fully control.

Non-Player Character (NPC) : any character that is no the PC. (Examples : Aradin, Sazza, Astarion, Shadowheart.)

Companion : an NPC that can join/has joined our party. (Examples : Astarion, Shadowheart.) Note that a Companion does not have to be an Origin Character. And in most RPG, they are not.


The relations between type of PC, Backstory and Personal Quest are then as follows.

An Origin Character has a very clear and fleshed-out Backstory, and those we've seen so far all have a Personal Quest that is related to their Backstory.

A Semi-Custom Character has a Backstory. It might be a rather generic and vague, with gaps the players can fill. But it contains enough pre-determined elements to potentially clash with a player-imagined backstory. The Personal Quest will likely be related to the Backstory. (The typical example is Gorion's Ward in BG1-2, who grew up in Candlekeep, under the mage Gorion and is a Bhaalspawn. The player can make up some parts of their early life, but the PC can't have been a Sailor, or an Outlander who trained as Druid.)

For Fully Custom Character, the Backstory is not assumed and not referred to. If there is a Personal Quest provided for this type of Custom Character, it cannot be related to the Backstory.



How to make a Personal Quest without drawing on the Backstory of the PC ?


Here are a couple of ideas. I'm not saying I'd like them all equally. I'm just demonstrating that it's very possible to come up with some.

• Personal Quest based on Background.
• Personal Quest based on Class (classes which can be clustered, e.g. Martial and Spell-casting).
• Personal Quest that depends only on what happens to the PC during the adventure.

These Personal Quests are about actions and choices made by the PC after the start of the campaign.

If you want the PQ to be about "resolving some issue of the PC", the PC can create the issue during the campaign.

Alternatively, the PQ could be about "revealing what the PC truly stands for". (For instance, "what sort of Druid are you ?". Or "The making of a Hero".)

The Fully Custom Character does not need the game to acknowledge aspects of their Backstory. What makes a Fully Custom Character interesting is not their past (which, by the way, doesn't have to be ultra-unique and edgy and cool and shit). It is who they are and who they choose to become. 

Or, as Topgoon recently put it,



Link between the Main Story and the Personal Quests of the adventurers


In a non-interactive media (book, film, etc), the PQ of the main characters and the MS can be very closely related.

In a pre-written tabletop RPG campaign, they are often largely independent. That's a very convenient thing. It allows players to bring in more or less the Fully Custom Character that they want.

I hope that Larian is going for that kind of broad independence between the adventurers' Personal Quest and the Main Story.

And so I hope that we will not discover that Cazador, Vlaakith, Gale's Netherese orb, Shadowheart's past and Mizora are all deeply tied to the Main Story. And that all the Origin Characters are Chosen Ones of some sort. And that any Semi-Custom Character's Backstory is similarly tied to the Main Story.



Single Protagonist vs Group Of Adventurers.


In the Single Protagonist model, the PC is the only main character of the story. It is their story, their adventure, they are the hero/heroine, and the Companions are the supporting cast.
Examples : Harry Potter, Baldur's Gate 1-2.

In the Group Of Adventurers model, all the party members (Player Characters + Companions) are the heroes of the story.
Examples : Lord Of The Rings, most DnD campaigns.

Obviously, some players prefer the first model, some prefer the second model.

This writing/design choice has consequences on (at least) two aspects.


Who decides ?

I don't want to expand too much here, but it certainly has been hotly debated.

On the one hand, BG3 is a video game, and more specifically a party-based RPG that most players will likely play in Single Player mode. So there are inevitably some video game conventions to accept (e.g. I can, as the player, choose the equipment of the companions, the actions they take on their turn during combat, the way the level-up, etc).

On the other hand, there are important decisions that the party takes, that influence how the story will go. For instance : the various groups to side with (Druids, the Tieflings, Goblins, no one ?), or the leads for a cure to pursue (Githyanki creche, finding a healer in the Grove, elsewhere, or something else ?).

On this aspect, the Group Of Adventurers model is probably a bit more complicated to write for, as it requires carefully drawing the line between the choices of the player, and how they translate into what happens among the characters.

My faith in Larian's writing ability isn't exactly high. So that should make me lean toward having a preference for Larian going for a Single Protagonist model. However, for the very same reason, I fear that they would have the PC be the Single Protagonist by making them be a Super-Special One/Chosen One. And I'd rather not have that trope yet again.


Feeling of importance : who is (held as) the Most Important adventurer in the game's universe ?

From the point of the view of people in the game world, who is the most important member of our party of adventurers ? For instance, if the city of Baldur's Gate is to celebrate someone as Hero Of Baldur's Gate at the end of the game, will that be just the PC, a single companion, or the whole party ?

On this aspect, it is possible to somewhat accommodate both preferences.

The idea is, again, to make this feeling of Most Importance result from choices made during the story.

And these choices could determine whether it is the PC who obtains that Most Important One status. Or whether it is another companion, or more than one party member, or nobody at all.

Some examples :

• The adventurers have mastered their tadpoles, and it's now just giving them pretty sweet powers. But the PC (or another party member) may choose to sacrifice their tadpole in order to prevent a big event that they view as very bad (for example, Baldur's Gate is destroyed).
• The adventurers have found a way to get rid of their taxing, burdening tadpole. They can do it right now. But one or more adventurers choose to keep it, so that they can use their tadpoles' powers to locate the other unfortunate tadpole victims and destroy their tadpoles. Those who kept the tadpole will continue suffering from its adverse effects, but hey, they'll be Heroes.
• A god or three have been killed. But a divine portfolio must always have a bearer. Such is the rule. The PC can choose to take that role, become a god. Or let another character become one. Or nobody in the party wants to do it, and they let all the other existing deities of the Forgotten Realms setting fight for it.

Again, these are mere examples to show that solutions exist. I'm not advocating for any in particular. In fact, they all fit into the "sacrifice" archetype, and I'm sure one could think of more. I'm not here to write this game. I'm just showing that Larian could satisfy the players who want to feel their PC is the most important character in this story, all while running a Group Of Adventurers model and not have "the PC is actually the Chosen One".

Essentially, being remembered in-game as Most Important Adventurer would be akin to a game ending. It would be achieved through choices and actions during the game, instead of being granted automatically to the PC at character creation, simply because this is the character that the player will play. And it would emphasise player agency.



How "blank" Tav is currently vs how "blank" the Custom Character will be.


This is Early Access : not all features are there yet.

Currently, we can already create a Custom Character. But from what we have, we cannot get a sense of whether Larian will only provide us with a Fully Custom Character, a Semi-Custom Character, or both, and what sort of Personal Quest they will provide.

I don't think that everyone has this big caveat in mind when expressing the idea that "Tav feels bland".

Also, I'm not convinced that it was a good idea from Larian to release the EA version with the current configuration (OC accessible as companions-only for now, their Personal Quests well outlined, but no clue given about how the Custom Characters will be handled).

On the plus side, they can see that plenty of people are giving feedback along the line of "Tav feels like an empty shell". To me, this sounds somewhat similar to "Custom Characters were bad D:OS2. Please don't do the same in BG3". Which Larian knew already, but if they wanted confirmation, now they have it.

On the minus side, I feel that the current absence of any content specially made for the Custom Character creates a bigger demand for specialness of the Custom Character. Which could be interpreted as "we want a Semi-Custom Character, a CC with Backstory and related Personal Quest", and "we want the PC to be the Single Protagonist of the story".

Well, for what it's worth (if discussing Custom Characters is worth anything at all), I'd like to stress that, within "the Custom Character space", there is Semi-Custom Character and Fully Custom Character. I would immensely prefer having access to a FCC. And from what I've read, I'm far from the only one.



Summary ...


Feedback

a) It is possible to provide a Fully-Custom Character, i.e. with no assumption on that PC's Backstory.

This is all the more so possible that the Main Story uses a "you were all abducted and you wake up as prisoners" opening, and follows the initial escape by a "you were all infected and must find a cure" campaign starter. Which means that no Backstory element is required for the campaign to work (contrast with BG1's story).

Fundamentally, making it work, e.g. by giving a Fully Custom Character a Personal Quest or a Most Important One status, can be done by focusing on choices made during the campaign, not on the Fully Custom Character's past. This has the advantage of going along with the idea of giving players agency, that Larian seems to care about.

For Semi-Custom Characters, there is a spectrum. The more assumptions are placed on the Backstory, the less Custom the Semi-Custom Character will actually be.

b) The current configuration (OC not playable, CC available with none of the CC-specific content) isn't the greatest, as far as getting feedback is concerned. While CC vs OC isn't at the very top of my list of priorities, I feel there is much to gain in making some CC-specific content available for Early Access feedback.

Also, I'm not quite sure of what Swen meant when he talked about "how much depth there is already to the Custom Character".


My requests/suggestions.

a) The possibility to play a Fully Custom Character : no Backstory assumed (not even one that chosen in a list, or customised via a questionnaire of some sort.)

But I'd also like an actually-developed Fully Custom Character, not just a stripped down version of the Semi-Custom Character (with the simple addition of the value None in the Backstories list).

If that doesn't happen ... I hope the Backstory (or Backstories) available to the Semi-Custom Character won't assume too much, and won't be all Chosen One backstories.

(To give a point of reference : I believe that the only indication that we have so far, of how a Custom Character will play out, is that if you're not a Githyanki or a Drow Elf, then you are assumed to be from Baldur's Gate. And I'm not a fan of this.)


b) Group Of Adventurers model : I'd like a party of somewhat equally important characters. Not a story with a Single Protagonist. And I'd like even less a PC who is the main character of the story by the mere fact of being the PC (and probably some sort of Special/Chosen One).

If Larian doesn't want to cater to all preferences (which is fine and very understandable), I hope they choose the Group Of Adventurers model. Partly because that's what I would prefer playing. And partly because that's the typical DnD experience. They have spent enough time describing their vision in terms of "this is our DnD campaign, we will be your (automated) GM", and not merely "our game takes place in the Forgotten Realms". I feel that this creates expectations for the Group Of Adventurers story, not so much for a Main Character And Sidekicks story. (Yes, there is not a single way to play DnD. But some ways are more typical than others.)

As for whether some members of the cast of adventurers end up being viewed as the Most Important Adventurer(s), I'd rather have this be a game ending, a consequence of our choices throughout the game.

+1. Thank you for this. Very well written and explained. A great summary. Personally, I don’t have a strong preference on Fully Custom versus Semi Custom, but I do have a strong preference that the answer is not NONE.

Nice Post.

At the moment it does feel like the Group of Adventurers type in my opinion. The characters are equally important.
I wouldn't mind being a bit more special with my custom made character, especially since the backstories of the companions are very overwhelming compared to our poor custom made characters.
It would be nice to choose from a variety of backstories or just select none, If someone wants to have a really blank state.

I agree, that currently it feels, like the CC is unfinished and Tav too simple. I like more varieties for my character and not just in looks.

And yes, If we have to get origin characters, it would be good to be able to test them in EA.

Short offtopic: Harry Potter isn't about a single main character, the whole story is a group effort. Harry is chosen, like Frodo in LotR, but without his friends he wouldn't have come far. So while the book ist mostly written from Harrys PoV, I feel like they are about an adventuring group. (Just my 2 cents as a Potterhead).

Thanks for the in-depth post!

I'm fine with either FCC or SCC, as long as they get ~equal quest/storyline importance as Origin Chars, and I'd like Larian to commit to either Group of Adventurers or Chosen One. Currently it's feels a bit halfhearted.To me, currently the characters aren't equally important because Tav makes all the decisions. They're equally important in theory, but not in practice. Now, obviously for a single-player game mode the player (probably) needs to be the ones making the decisions. But BG3 could be made to feel more like a Group of Adventurers if the party, all-together, actually discussed plans and goals.

The player would ultimately make the final decision, but we could see the party interacting with and bouncing opinions off of each other. And, in my idea, the player would have to convince certain party members of certain actions upon threat of disapproval or party members temporarily leaving. E.g., Lae'zel & the Creche: in these group dialogues, you should have to actually convince/intimidate her to decide to go places other than the creche, and a big enough failure to convince her means she rushes off on her own or just disapproves. In these group huddles, perhaps Tav could be the deciding vote because the companions are otherwise tied, or because Tav is simply convincing enough - some in-game explanation would be better than Tav's current undeserved and unexplained leadership position.

In sum: to make BG3 feel like a Group of Adventurers, the party members should discuss plans together and be more reactive to Tav's decided course of action.

+1

I am really enjoying two completely different playthroughs with two different FCC I have create both with in-depth backstory's that I use to help me make decisions in the game, everything from who I have in my party, to dialogue choices and which side quests I pursue and how I pursue them.

+1

I am definitely wanting the FCC or as close as we can get to this. My fear is that they will take away some of our options for this because too many people are complaining about Tav feeling unimportant. I think especially at this point, it is important to leave the option for a blank backstory. Add in options or even character templates for those who need it, but there are much better ways to go about making Tav special.

This is a great way to do it.

Great post OP!

I too don't mind if my custom PC is fully or only semi customizable, though I would of course prefer fully customizable. What I want is for the custom PC to be at least as integral to the game-playing experience and to the game's world as are the origin PCs, so that I am not coerced into playing an origin PC if I want to get that "extra" immersive experience playing the game. Furthermore, my custom PC needs to be just as central and important to the party as any of the origin characters in terms of what my custom PC brings to the party.

This was a great post. I've been thinking a lot about the issues you've raised here and something which occured to me is that, I think the biggest problem surrounding CC, be they FCC or SCC is that it feels as though they don't bring anything to the group dynamic. They feel like a sounding board off of which the OCs bounce a lot of the time. They don't feel like they add anything special to the story. There isn't really anything they do that it feels like an OC couldn't do as well. And that, combined with the fact we now OCs will get unique interactions with the story makes our CC feel flat.

Thus far Gale is the only OC whose story isn't directly tied to the main plot in some way; Asterion is grappling with the fact that the tadpole has given more freedom and power than he's had in over a century, Wyll's patron has been captured by the Mindflayers (which by the way is a genuinely cool stroyline to go with for a Warlock), Lae'zel's part of a culture that lives to kill Mindflayers, Shadowheart stole an artefact that clearly is important to the plot. The fact that there's Netherese magic at play with the tadpole also leaves the door open for Gale to have sometie to the tadpole as well. But our Tav can't even have the option for that kind of tie to the main quest. Not outside of our own headcanon anyway. We have no way of establishing that our character has a life or anything they care about. We don't get to talk about our past or what we hope for our future. Our character is confined to only expressing thoughts and feelings about the present. And that's kind of an alienating feeling. The Origins have real, driving goals that they talk about and that we the audience can care about. We don't have anything similar that can make them care about us.

One small thing they could add for custom characters is the ability to select a personality that would be used for barks. I love the barks of companions, but Tav’s are quite boring.

Great post OP, reading this really gave me some great ideas for what I would like to see for Non Origin Characters. One of my favorite RPGs is Dragon Age Origins. If I were to equate your definitions to the origin stories in DA:O I would say they seem to fit the mold of Semi Custom Characters. I’m personally really quite fond of this type of character. I love the flexibility of being able to define our player character by their actions but still having a background to give our character a place in the world. My personal favorite origin in DA:O was the Dwarven Noble. I love how it introduced the dwarven culture, as well as the darkspawn threat and set up the political tensions over the succession to the throne. I loved how it established the world and your characters current place in it without establishing a personality.

Contrast this with Tav, waking up on the Nautiloid feels like starting DA:O with the joining ritual at Ostagar. It would be a similar feeling of being thrust into this extremely serious situation but without any build up for the player to care. Like yes you would care about surviving the present situation, but why should I care about my own character. DA:O’s origin stories give our characters motivations and histories that tie them to the world. Additionally they set up future personal stories and unique interactions with the main story. Trying to recruit the Dwarves feels so much more personal and interesting if you are returning as an outcast dwarven noble.

As such I’d love to see DA:O like Semi Custom Characters in BG3. I was mulling over some ideas and came up with 3 examples.

Elturel Refugee:
For this origin I imagine our character starting out in Elturel. It would take place after Elturel is returned to the Material Plane. You have yet to be reunited with your (friends/family/lover) but you heard that they have already left the city and are headed to Baldur's Gate so you decide to join one of the many caravans of refugees headed to BG as a guard. Some time after leaving the city you are attacked by goblins or bandits. This could serve as an introduction to combat prior to the Nautiloid that is more appropriate for a level 1 character which seems to be a complaint a few people have. After the combat encounter you could have a cutscene of your PC being abducted by the nautiloid which would serve to show how you got there. Additionally you could give enough exp during the origin story prior to the Nautiloid to get your character to level 2 which might make it seem a little more appropriate. This origin story could have some unique interactions with the refugees at the druids grove. And once you get to BG your personal quest could involve looking for your missing loved ones and helping out the other refugees.

Baldur’s Gate Flaming Fist:
For this origin I imagined our character is a fairly recently joined flaming fist member. Your captain assins you and your squad member to investigate some Dead Three suspected murders. You are sent to some slums and are attacked by thugs but they don’t seem to be related to the Dead Three. You then enter a building and after some searching you find some documents that mention something suspicious happening outside the city. Transition to a new area that was mentioned in the document. You and your squad are ambushed by Dead Three/Absolute cultists and you are knocked unconscious. Your eyes flutter open and you see the cultist leader talking to a mind flayer right before passing out again. This origin story could have some unique interactions once you return to Baldur's Gate assuming you were going to interact with the Flaming Fist at some point. Additionally once you get to Moonrise Towers you might see one of your previous squad mates is now a true soul and you might have the option to try and convince them to betray the cult of the absolute.

Harpers Initiate:
For this origin I imagine our character is a Harper Initiate that is sent along with a senior harper member to investigate a Selunite temple they haven’t heard from in some time. When you arrive at the temple it has been either taken over by bandits or low level monsters. After clearing out the mobs you look for clues and find some traces of Sharn members. This might be a little too similar to Grym Forge but I'm running out of ideas sorry. Not really sure how to transition this one to the nautiloid either but I was trying to hit each of the major plot threads so I wanted to include this one.

I’m sure GM4Him or Niara or any others way more creative than me could come up with some interesting premises.

The main goals of such a Origin System would be to give our player characters a place in the world, an introduction to one of the main plot threads and set up for a personal quest and personal interactions with characters in the world.