Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Companions

Astarion is a corrupt and evil one that I ensure, he will against your grey or good path decisions, and then down his relationship very quick.

if you don't choose the evil path and you do not have the love to him, I strongly recommend you fire him during "the such blood event".

and if you think "Astarion might be not so bad", then you will be sorry about the decision, because you don't have any other chance to fire him after "the such blood event" in the early access.

I totally agree with the principle of this idea and believe it is how things should be in a BG game.


t
The inherent issue is, unlike previous BG games where our PC was very much the protagonist/"special one" with a supporting cast, in BG3 all the companions share the tadpole...thus creating a situation where every companion shares in the 'special one' status...because of Larian's Origins system. The main protagonist status no longer belongs to our PC alone, it is now shared amongst this ensemble of companions that are also playable. Every companion just seemed to overshadow my own character and I found it hard to create any enthusiasm like I did in previous games.

It's not that I find him evil, in fact I don't find any of the companions evil, no matter their disapprovals. I always strive to making the camp as friendly and acceptable as I possibly can to all companions, I even let him suck my blood.

My opinion of him is that he is terribly inconsistent, but clearly a tortured soul. From being overly confident, to deeply reserved, to flirtatious and then outright murderous if you say the wrong thing. I fully understand every companion except Astarion, because he is all over the place with his feelings, so I can't pin-point yet the true Astarion. But I'm sure he will become very enjoyable once I get to know him better when the game releases.

Personally, I like this a lot. To me, the companions in BG 3 feel so much more alive than in other RPGs, and this makes the game so much more fun for me to play. I am perfectly fine with some conflict/friction in our group, this is more realistic and - for me at least - much more interesting.

I like the companions we've met so far, I think they are all very interesting and complex, I especially like that they all got their flaws. And I like having them around, I have a hard time deciding who to keep in my party. Even after 571 hours of playtime, I still enjoy the dialogues/camp interactions (of course, the excellent voice acting and animation contribute to this).

As Crimsomrider said, it is too early to judge their personalities, but I like that with each dialogue and each reaction, we get to know them a little better and get a glimpse of their personalities (that's why I like that we see what our companions approve or disapprove of).
I would like to write more about the individual companions, but it is really late (or early) now, and I am much too tired to type.

If there is one thing that bothers me, it's that most times, there will only be a camp dialogue for the companion with the highest approval (even if there are other companions with a similar level), which -to me- is a great pity. I would very much like to have the opportunity to talk to the other companions as well.

acturally, the tadpoles are not few, there are some "chosen ones" in absolute camp, so are there all protagonists?? no.

the issue is, our player character is different from the companions, because the player character is "YOU"!!!

if you put your will in a companion as the player character, then the companion's character is ruined, and become "neither fish nor fowl".

the easy way to say --
Yeshua and disciples

companions => disciples
the player character => Yeshua

can you say Yeshua and disciples are one??
no, Yeshua is the unique one, any disciple can not replace him, or that will be just a joke.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

by the side talking

Gale said that Raphael wants our "tadpoles".
but I don't agree his talking, because the tadpoles are not few, or tadpoles are many(in absolute camp).

Raphael wants the soul of our player character.
remember that the temple of chatty skeleton said "I have seen you once".
that points your player character, not the companions of any aside your player character.
the chatty skeleton follows with interest in your player character, not "tadpoles".

and the secret agent in goblin priestess plot, she said "my master will see you soon, don't die easily".
this means see your player character, not the "tadpoles" and also not your companions(she is talking with your player character and the meanwhile your companions are just waiting outside the hall).

you do have love with Astarion. or you will not let him touch your neck, will you?

"man are not bad, woman do not love"

though I am a good man or at least not a bad man.

I replenish the importance why the sense of incongruity might be --

if Yeshua doesn't birth, is there any other one can rise to be the savior of the world?
the answer is no, because there will be no one undertakes God's mission. God won't give others the mission.

this is different to birth of king, a king's perish must bring a king's birth.
but a savior of the world doesn't birth, that means...the game can not to be started.

I don't care for any of the five companions we've been given so far. One, Astarion, will be definitely killed off or at least driven away from my party. Another, Shadowheart, will at best only be contemptuously tolerated for story reasons, though possibly also killed off. The other three are all utterly dislikeable in one or another way, and I would put up with them in my party only because otherwise I won't have a party to play the game with, as I will never use empty-suit mercenary companions.

This, btw, is why my problem with the game having only a party of four is secondary to this issue of inadequate companions. If I don't have enough companions I like to fill out a party of four, what's the point of talking about a party of six?

Most likely we'll get option to create or add custom characters later on. Divinity 2 had it, so you didn't have to play with those companions either.

I think that the BG3 companions should actually push *more* against our actions if they don't match with the companion's own goals. E.g., if you rest X times before going to the githyanki creche, Lae'zel leaves. Importantly, the game foreshadows this by having her:
- talk to you about her extreme desire to go to the creche and her frustration that you're not going there fast enough
- THEN the mechanical "Lae'zel disapproves" if you still don't go
- THEN she says she is leaving, but you can still persuade her to stay with a persuasion check
- THEN, if you still don't go, she leaves
You'll find her when you go to the creche, but now (MAYBE, this is only an example) she's been captured or knocked unconscious or being interrogated about the weapon/other people she knows are tadpole infected. The point is that the encounter is different because she went ahead of you. And here you have the chance to bring her back onto your team.

Well the problem is that empty-suit mercenary companions we create are the worst option of all. So I'd still rather use actual companion characters even if I utterly dislike them over companions I could create. But it wouldn't be an enjoyable experience having to adventure with a party of companions I loathe.

yes, each companion has his/her story and potential legend.
if you create a companion without story-orient, then that will be valueless.

just I can not understand, in early access, we can choose a companion's "empty shell" then input the player character's will(your will) and assign he/she to be the protagonist...
I don't understand, why the game designers allow us to ruin a companion's character and ruin his/her potential legend to input the player character's will, and then hit the road of the player character's storyline with player's will, this is for what??

a player character is unique.
the chatty skeleton and the secret agent in goblin priestess plot, they are taking to the unique one in the world, not one of the chosen ones that is assigned to be the protagonist(this is telling players, your player character can be anyone, you are not unique in the game, but I think this is wrong!). this is my view.

Origin Characters - 'Hi, I'm <insert name>. I have a dark and mysterious past, which you aren't allowed to know, until you randomly choose things I might approve of. Once I approve enough of your random choices, I will tell you everything about myself and burden you with my sidequ... I mean, my deep and mysterious problem, which you will have to help me with.'

To be honest, every character is the same character, which is why they are unlikeable. They are ALL hiding something, and hiding it badly. Vampire (Astarion), Insecurity/Need to prove my worth (Laezel), Magic nuclear bomb (Gale), 'Secret' agent of Shar (Shadowheart), Pact with the Succubus (Wyll). And they all want to sleep with you, for no real reasons at all seemingly other than being horny. Can't they sleep with each other? Or a party guest?

The secretive Shar worshipper is the only one telling you all her secrets at every turn, despite the fact being a Shar worshipper means you don't tell anyone, anything, ever. They are basically secret agents. It should scare the piss out of Shadowheart that you have a mind connection using the tadpole, because it'd give you access to her secrets potentially. But she groups with you anyway, and that's all to get the maguffin special object the plot will revolve around to the PC.

I don't like any of the companions personally, or their side quests - Gales is particularly stupid, sacrificing magic items to him makes finding any loot almost annoying. And I don't like the fact you are all from the same ship at the start, but you only see 2 of them in it.

I wish Larian would surprise us by announcing there will be no more Origin characters, but more voiced companions with less content and story connections instead.

In a party of 4, I would want some ordinary characters without over the top backgrounds as well. It's important to play with a party you actually like. I don't think I will ever have Astarion or Wyll in any party, and Gale's cocky "wizard prodigy" attitude and ridiculous Mystra story are rubbing me the wrong way too.

I would like Halsin to be a companion!!!

I agree …

1. Companions having their own agenda makes them more engaging, and I don’t mind the resultant squabbling.
2. It would be interesting if that has consequences and/or they leave if you don’t support them or they don’t like you (both have precedents in BG1 & 2 of course) and I like the hint of this with a certain side deal Gale strikes in some circumstances.
3. mrfuji3 is right that there should be warning if a companion is reaching the end of their tether, and I love the idea of coming across them later and finding how they fared without us.
4. I think Gale, Astarion, Shadowheart and Lae’zel are great characters with mainly excellent voice-acting and, glitches aside, good animation. For me, Wyll isn’t quite coming off yet but I still think he has promise and take him along on some playthroughs. And fair point that Shadowheart should probably be more secretive and that there may be too many similarities in the overall shape of the companion stories at least to begin with.
5. We have plenty of tadpoled characters already and I’d be happy with any further companions having different motivations for joining. (Despite the fact that we seem to have at least Karlach still planned to come.)
6. I’d also be happy with no more origin characters, or indeed no origin characters at all.
7. I’d like Halsin to be companion too, and would also put in a bid for Barcus Wroot!

Ah, the hours spent torturing my buddy Regill with the Commander's chaotic shenanigans... You're right. Some companions were optimized but some you just took along, regardless of party comp, for their personalities & dialogue (Valentine, Garrus, Xzar, Haer'Dalis, Neeshka, Gann, Daeran, and Regill were some of the ones I'd always pick, even if they didn't fit the party setup) Astarion can be 'fun' if your idea of fun is sadistic entertainment. Everyone else is too 'busy and important'. (Or pretending to be busy and important, yes, I'm looking at you Wyll.)

Yes, yes, we're dying... I've been dying, infected, corrupted, had parents murdered, kids kidnapped, been brainwashed, abducted, etc since I started playing RPGs. But with how bossy all the companions are being, Tav has a bit of sidekick energy... which I dislike. See, I don't mind if the protagonist's a hero or villain but I'm not wasting hundreds of hours of my life as a sidekick.

Plenty of party-based RPGs had interesting companions with cool personalities, backstories, and/or personal quests and the protagonist still shined. D:OS 2 took origin character importance a bit too far in my opinion, when compared to custom player characters: here's this chunk of the main quest. Are you Sebille? No, then you get the lore-lite version. Here's another big chunk of the main quest. Are you Fane? No, then lore-lite again! Thankfully, I haven't found any Origin-gated content in EA so far, so I'm hoping that stays true for the rest of the game.

And hopefully, Minsc and Helia are the missing fun companions.
If not, Tav and 'the Mysterious Guest' might just have to...

I can’t disagree, I just hope that Larian find a way to deal with this by making our Tavs display more character rather than the companions less. I know not everyone agrees, but just having the controlled character speak more in dialogues would help for me. And the next level would be using background, interactions and actions to influence and develop how the character is presented. But that’s off-topic, sorry!


Agree, though for me it was Tiax and Xan in BG1, and Deekin in the NWN follow-ups. Though I fully recognise that one person’s hilariously quirky can be another’s unbearably irritating (looking at you Jan Jansen!).


I don’t know, I always find making Gale sneak good for a giggle! But yes, I do hope there will be more lighter moments and personalities in amongst the horror as the game progresses.

I think the best part of a third of a game is ample time to get a decent handle on the companions' personalities. It would be terrible writing if they all had these redemptive story arcs and they all turned out to be really rather friendly and it was just the stress of the tadpole that made them such monumental jerks. I wouldn't put it past Larian's writing though...



Amen.



There was a quote somewhere from Swen about how they wanted to take the BG IP and put their own slant on it, basically for their own ends. While I understand their motivation, it's a terribly arrogant admission to take on one of the most lauded CRPGS of all time and effectively butcher a lot of what those games so memorable.

This is of course a totally valid game to want to play and it is more in the spirit of the original BG games, though there are games like IWD and Solasta that take a different approach.

But despite having little interest in actually playing them as origin characters, one of the things I like best about the companions is that each of them feels like someone who *could* be the hero of their own story. While I’ve never played table-top games, I think it must be more like that, as all players will want to roleplay engaging characters and not play second fiddle to one protagonist, and the story is the party’s rather than one person’s. I love that I can get some of that feeling without needing to do anything so sociable or well-adjusted as play with other, real people!

My problem is that a custom character is still at risk of being the least interesting member of the party, and that we need far more in-game opportunities to flesh out their character and background and have the game respond to that, for example in companions or NPCs asking more questions of them with some interesting options for responses rather than it always being us asking the questions. There’s obviously a limit to the options that can be given and someone who wants to roleplay a really wacky character is going to have to use their imagination, but it feels like there are some general things that the game can help us express and then respond to. For example: did we live in BG or were we only visiting? what were we doing when captured? were we born in BG or did we move there? do we have mothers, fathers, husbands, wives, lovers and/or children? and if so are we worried that they could have been captured or killed in the illithid attack? what about our background, e.g. if a criminal are we reformed or still in the life, or if a guild artisan what sort of craft? Anyway, I’ve gone off-topic again, so I’ll stop belabouring the point.