NPCs approaching set "leader" by default (I think some games did it, so first person in the "chain" would be set as a leader and therefore a default conversationalist if appropriate, but then Larian would need to figure out a way for the character UI to not be hotmess that gets randomised with every unchain/chain all commmand).
Thats the best part ...
Once you can switch speaker during conversation, you dont actualy need to figure out anything of this ... bcs you can allways answer as whoever you intended!
Yes, it may seem a little odd at first that NPC asked Astarion how is he doing and Lae'zel is answering as if she was the the who was asked ...
But that is all just matter of habbit, once your get over first weirdness you can easily get to the point where any dialogue lead from NPCs to you is lead to your group as a whole, rather than specific character.
And once you are there ... it no longer matter who was asked ... all that matters is who will answer, and that can be anyone.
> Therefore i dont see any reason to anyhow automaticly set a "leader".
>> To me, curently controlled character being the one who will be asked seems quite fine.
Especialy since *i* dont have fix leader in my games ... sometimes i want my Barbarian to lead a conversation, sometimes i want my Druid to talk, sometimes i want Shadowheart to talk, sometimes i leave that to Lae'zel ... it all depends on circumstances.
And therefore being forced to allways speak with same character seems like horrible experience to me. :-/
Like:
Barb: "Hey, Eloi ... you are druid, they are druids, maybe you can talk some sence to their stubborn heads."
Druid: "Okey, i'l do my best."
DM (aka Game): "Nah! Druid leader demands to speak with your Barbarian only and refuses to interact with anyone else!"
Is that really what you want? O_o
as the game already have cutscene system that could be utilised.
Yes im aware ...
BUT! (and this is big butt)
Those cutscenes are happening *in between* your choices.
So if you think about conversation in general ... stuff happens ... then you are presented with options.
And in *that* exact moment all that is happening is that camera is looking at your character who is standing there often looking like an idiot (at least my Tavs often do :D) and the world is effectively frozen.
Now, the function im talking about, in its most Raw and unpolished version ...
Would simply switch your Tav with any other party member in THAT exact moment ... and then continue as if he was there all the time.
Sure, there are scenarios where this function would need to be disabled ... no arguments about that.
For example when Astarion holds *a character* on the ground with knife on his/hers neck.
Any swaping in such situation would be ... unwise.
But lets focus on scenarios where things we are talking about is possible.
I think a far easier way of implementing it would be for a character in a party with the highest chance to succeed to do the check for you.
Easier ... yes.
Sufficient ... not even close.
I know it may seem odd, but sometimes you (or should i say "i" ?) want to fail your (/my) checks.
Thats the main reason we (to make it little more general
) create things like Barbarian with 8Int, 8Wis, 8Cha ... and then send him/her into situations where s/he have little to none chance to sucess.
And i believe that if Larian meaned it, when they were talking about how they wish this game would be suplement for tabletop DnD session ...
That they need to provide us at many options for both scenarios as possible.
