Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Automatic Dialogue - Please prioritize the main character.

Here's an example of how terrible this is in real time, a scenario in which I want to talk to Mayrina with my main character and the female gnome afterwards. But instead;

• Mayrina ignores my main character standing right next to her and instead talks to Lae'zel
• The female gnome instead of talking to Shadowheart (who can be seen on the minimap standing right next to her), instead pulls my main character into a conversation from way over there

Just by playing the game, it becomes obvious that when it comes to dialogue proximity, there is a clear 2m radius that makes an NPC ignore any party member within it and instead initiate dialogue with the closest companion outside of that radius. I wish this proximity dialogue would be severely reduced and optimized so these things don't happen.

The second worst offender is Nadira, the Soul Coin tiefling, who will do the same thing and talk to anyone except the main character.

Fully agree!

+1 !
Excellent suggestion!

I also remember having to reload and trying to reposition my characters before the final blow in combat just to make sure my Tav would be the one having the conversation afterward. For all the reasons given in the OP.
At the top of my head, I remember most vividly the case with Rugan (conversation triggered after the big fight with gnolls), or I should said most conversations that start after a fight.


The video also shows fairly well how the current system feels pretty awkward. Basically both dialogues start at the same time? How weird. And the main character couldn't be more in Mayrina's face.

+1
That would be great!

+1
That would be the ideal option in my opinion.

Love that!

I have also thought about this again. The best thing would be to completely abolish the automatic dialog trigger. Let's just trigger the dialog ourselves, like in the good old games, by addressing the corresponding NPC ourselves. Then you can at least save wisely before the dialogs instead of positioning ranged fighters in melee or accidentally killing Ethel with a crit and not getting the dialog at all etc. pp. A simple, tried and true, and much less annoying solution.

As far as the answer selection is concerned, I agree with the previous speakers.

Agree! I hope they make this change. It is very frustrating for a companion to get dialogue that starts automatically instead of the main character.

So what would happen if your "main" character far away from the conversation? Would it talk telepathically? Would it teleport? Would it walk to the conversation? And since companions may have different dialogue paths as your "main" character, what if I want this companion to talk in that situation?
For me, it sounds like a global toggle with an option to right click to choose who will walk to initiate the conversation is the optimal choice there (man that's a lot of "to" in that sentence).

Personally I'd prefer it that way as then I wouldn't have to worry about it whatsoever, though I doubt they'd do that.

The way I see it, they could just drastically reduce the radius to like 1m so the dialogue initiates only if your character is basically in the conversation distance as they are in the dialogue scene. Because even now our character may be 30m away in actual real-time location, but in the dialogue scene they're just 1m away. It would make things more immersive this way.


Both questions are already answered by the video showcase I posted.

The game already teleports a character who is far away into a dialogue scene, as my main character is nowhere near the female gnome, yet she is pulled into a conversation on the opposite side of the room. Which is a problem.

The game also ignored my main character who is literally next to an NPC I do wish to speak to, which is also a problem.

Basically this dialogue proximity is terribly inconsistent and terrible in general. So to make dialogue good, three things need to happen:

• Drastically reduce the radius of automatically triggered dialogues to 1m
• Prioritize the main character (to avoid these dumb situations where I as a ranger need to go into melee range and fight over my companions to engage a conversation)
• Add a feature so at the start of conversation we have the ability to switch to another character (who can step in off-screen), to carry the conversation

Pretty simple solution. The way it is now though sucks and is a major inconvenience.

Why just at the start? O_o
I mean, if there would be some kind of code allowing us to switch dialogue leader ... why limit it?

Wouldnt it be much better if we could switch any time we want?
For solo game, it could help the player to feel like his whole party is alive, if different members would be able to react any time ...
And for multiplayer, it would be needed sooner or later anyway, unless Larian wants us to be just spectators in someone else story. :-/

Because of consistency and flow. And I can only imagine the technical headache it would cause trying to code something like that and make it work, by characters constantly stepping in and out, the camera angles and camera focuses switching, while keeping track of all the dialogue branches, choices and outcomes.

Companions already have the ability to interject during dialogue scenes with their commentaries, but if they wish to make them more dynamic and alive, then for such a thing it is better what UnknownEvil suggested. Having companion dialogue choices also present alongside ours and them interjecting if we select their dialogue choice.

My primary focus however is the main character, as the game does not respect it in terms of story and gameplay.

Who wants, looks for a way ... who doesn't, looks for a reason.

Anyway ...
I dont see any reason for anything you mentioned ... simple feature allowing us to swap who is talking, just as we can swap our controled party members during conversation is all i ask.
No "constant stepping in and out", no "camera changing angles and switching focuses", nothing like that.

I dont really need the game to animate this for me ...
Hells, i dont even need the game to recognize something changed.
Actualy, it would be best if the game wouldnt even notice!

And thats the problem ...
Who is "main character" ?

Sure, its easy if you have single Tav and his followers.
But what if you create two Custom Characters?
What if you play in Multiplayer?
What if your main character is just damned stupid Barbarian, and you have two Wizards in group that would surely sucess in Acrana/Intellect roll ... and you actualy WANT to get this information they would get?

As long as the game simply picks single character and forces him forward no matter what, you just created the same problem as you are trying to remove ... just in different situations. :-/

You asked why, I answered why. If something is an issue for you, then feel free to offer alternatives or better feedback that could make it better, instead of counter-argumenting an answer you clearly asked for with even more questions. I even mentioned there is an alternative method that could address that, yet you conveniently ignored that part.

The main character is clearly the character created at the start of the game. Everyone else is an NPC because you cannot dismiss the main character, so what are you talking about by asking who is the main character. Clearly the character we start with, as all the story revolves around that character and they're the driving force that keeps pushing it forward.

Also I play the game as is intended; meaning singleplayer 4-man party with a main character and 3 companions, therefore my feedback is based solely upon that core gameplay experience exclusively. The proximity dialogue is a core issue that affects core gameplay, not imaginary what if scenarios. This is practically a bug with the game, which I'm addressing and offering feedback on how to fix and make better because it is not working as intended nor providing an optimal experience. In fact it detracts massively from the experience, as many others have had similar experiences.

So I do not worry about imaginary what-if scenarios for secondary optional aspects of the game such as custom companions, custom parties, custom modded parties, multiplayer nor anything of the sorts, because first of all this affects the core experience of the game, so these optional secondary aspects cannot get treatment until the core gameplay is fixed. And second of all because I don't play nor ever will play the game in ways that you mentioned.

One could of course, argue if multiplayer is the main experience, or single-player, but even a majority of multiplayer sessions would benefit from a fix - if there is coop going on, human players should be treated as equals in likeness to be engaged in conversation in NPCs, but if there are, lets say two players, each with their own companions, surely each of them would prefer if NPCs would engage their "main" in the conversation rather then the follower.

I think that would be a nice QoL feature on top of 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). I also don't think it would be as simple of a feature to implement as you think - I doubt the game has functionality required to achieve what you describe. Adding cosmetic touches, I expect would be the least trouble some feature, as the game already have cutscene system that could be utilised. 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.

I was there, remember?

Lets revert it ... shall we?
Rather than repeating what the other one said ... lets try to find meaning in those words.
It might be more effective.

It seems to me like you are trying to find some reason why something would be at least problematic, if not impossible ... rather than at least try to think about some way to actualy MAKE it possible.
When i look at your response it seems like: "I cant build a house, bcs i would need to make a roof, but i dont even have walls yet." ...
This dont mean you cant build a house, it only means you cant start with a roof. :-/

Same here ...
Dont imagine some superdeep all animated scenarios where characters need to "constantly stepping in and out, the camera angles and camera focuses switching, while keeping track of all the dialogue branches, choices and outcomes."
Keep it simple ...
You click on icon to swap > pick a character > that character is giving the answer.

Keep in mind that this game have prepared answers for everyone.
For one, bcs they can be Origin characters and therefore all and every conversations can be lead by them ...
And for two, bcs the game right now dont force any character to "lead the conversation" > therefore any character can get into position of speaker.
So quite litteraly no "keeping track of all the dialogue branches, choices and outcomes" included at all.

I did ... yet you conveniently ignored that part.

I believe you mean "as i intent" rather than "as is intended" ...

Since concidering that this game includes multiplaer from the very begining of its existence, and all presentation in past at least year (not quite sure about first ones) were created using that multiplayer ... i find it quite hard to presume that Larian "dont intend us" to play as custom party.
Especialy since Swen himself promised option to create custom party even for single player game.

Depends ...
It also may be atempt to fix so often criticised fact, that our followers affection is changing even if that companion is not physicaly presented.

Wich i presonaly welcomed ...
So, since you demand that people provide their own suggestion ... my suggestion to fix this particular problem is to set "range" where follower can be influenced by our action back to infinite (or simply delete that condition, depends on how it exactly works).

Can i borrow your crystal ball?
No, jokes aside ... how did you find out what was intended?

Cute ...
Selfish, but cute ...

Now back to my question that you conveniently ignored:
What if your main character is a Barbarian, you have Gale with you, and you really really REALLY want to sucess in sone Acrana/Intelligence check?

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

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.

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.

Agree! I want a main character rather than a companion to get conversations that start automatically in either single player or multiplayer.

I would also like SWTOR-style conversations for multiplayer, but that is also likely a lot more work.

I would love both if possible, but just having the main character(s) get conversations that start automatically would be a huge improvement from the current system!

Precisely that swap is what I suspect might be difficult to pull of, though I don't know inner workings of the system enough to speculate in detail. Would this system prevent characters from roaming free during conversations as they do now? How would it work in multiplayer? Couple coop players switch between each other? I think once you figuring that stuff, enhancing presentation would be relatively straightforward to do. If you think on it for a little bit, one can thing of quite a few areas where such feature could run into troubles, so I don't think it's worth considering, especially at this point in development. And considering how much effort Larian is pouring into production value, I doubt they would want to implement something as half baked as your are suggesting.

And personally for me, it wouldn't address the issue that I have - and that being the game breaking me out of roleplaying my character by forcing me to convers as someone I am not playing as. You can play it in couple different ways, but it is not a game starring party as a whole like Wasteland2 or Solasta.

I get it, but an ability to manually set a leader (which might not have to be created PC) should help you out as well as long as it is quick and easy to do. Leader tagging, of course, should apply to conversations triggered by NPCs only - if you manually switch to shadowheart and engage conversation then, it is she who should be conversing regardless if she is a leader or not.

Well its foundation stone of the whole idea ... such things have tendencies to be the hardest stepp.
Basicaly everything beyond is just polish.

Me neither ...
But since it was allready done in other games (so often mentioned SWtOR for example, but i heared DoS2 had something simmilar aswell but dunno didnt play) i know it is possible ...

And just for the record, i really hope SWtOR style will not be used. :-/
Some might find it suitable, but personaly i really hate RNG in such things ... seems like powergaming to me ... forcing other players to play along with your way just bcs your dice rolled more ... bleh ...
Cant even count how many times my Lawfull Good Jedi was in flashpoint forced to helplessly watch as some Smugler bastard kills somebody in cold blood right in front of him ... just bcs some internal RNG decided that its his turn now. :-/

There was few times in topics like this one mentioned rock-paper-scissors-lizard-spock system that i liked much more ...
Yes, im aware that my Jedi would be forced to watch as that same Smugler bastard kills people just the same ... but i could only blame myself for picking wrong option, rather than RNG system ... thats the point, you have better control over your fate.

I dont think so, no. O_o

This part i believe can be exactly as in KOtOR ...
You either are close enough to participate in conversation, or it goes without you ... if you are part of conversation, logicaly you cant roam around ... if you roam around, logicaly you cant pariticpate in conversation. Its mutualy exclusive condition.

Exactly the same ...
Actualy, just the presence of multiplayer is the reason why i believe we would need such system ... and if that will be implemented there, then all we would need to do would be use exactly the same mechanic during single player.

Possibly minus (or plus, depending on wich you concider default) the RNG (or other methods) to pick wich character will actualy speak in the end.

But the system itself would work ideally exactly the same in both cases.

The way i see it, Larian have curently two options in front of them:
1) Make multiplayer as *a hero* and *his PC followers* ... where whoever starts the conversation, or whoever NPC start talking to is the protagonist ... and everyone else are just spectators, who cant really do anything.
2) Try to implement some way to switch curently talking character ... then add some method to decide wich character will actualy speak ... and make multiplayer to be party of heroes.

In case they decide second option ... all they need to do is to use the same for single player and voila!

Depends ... yes and no.

Logicaly that would also need some method to decide who will be deciding ... like RNG, or rock/scissors/paper, or w/e they come up with ... maybe some kind of voting as they do via twitch? Dunno, dont matter.
BUT! And this is not as big butt as usualy, but its important one.
Thats another layer ... curently we are talking about switching itself, as long as its not possible, there is no reason to add any deciding method ... once it is possible, adding deciding method for multiplayer is step two.

This seems like odd mindset ...
"It may cause problems, so lets not implement it at all."
Hells, if people would be thinking this way, we would still play 2D games.

As i said abowe, there certainly are situations where this would need to be disabled ... for obvious reasons.
Like the one where Astarion is holding *a PC* on the ground ... or when *a PC* is holding Necromancy of They book ... etc.

But i dont see that as a reason to throw it away completely. O_o

As i said ... its a fundamental idea ...
I hardly doubt that anybody would try to prevent them to bake it futher to make it better. :P

Ehm ... what? O_o

And i mean it, im genuinely lost here ...
How exactly is the game "forcing you to convers as someone you are not playing as" ... IF (and this is important one) ... you could pick who are you conversing as? O_o

Call me slow one, but it seems to me like its adressing exactly the issue you have.

I gues it depends on how that would work ...
To me anything beyond lets say two clicks would be too anoying to concider it good solution. :-/

In such case, "curently controlled character" seems quite fine to me ...

Or that previously suggested option to simply stop conversations starting automaticly and let us start talking instead ... we know this caused some problems in the past.
Remember our companions dying in flames, or failing all their saving throws bcs we were talking and therefore unable to "help" them?
Im honestly not sure if this is still the issue since i didnt see my companion on the edge of death during conversation for quite some time. O_o

These dialogues...there is fundamental problem with it all, not just the camera...I am sorry but I just can't stand it anymore...

Remember how deeply Baldur's Gate would immerse you in its world, just through the dialogues alone?
How it could create a sense of reality, the feeling of being part of something new, and wanting to learn more about it? That's partly because in the dialogues of Baldur's Gate your attitude sets the tone, and every action grows organically from that.
In BG3, you only get to chose the action, and it dictates what stance your character must take to achieve it.

Every actor knows that it's not the text, but the way you deliver it that makes the difference.

Life is not made up of basic colors, it's the nuances, the subtleties that make it appealing. Moss green, sky blue, alabaster white, crimson red, hazelnut brown.
The dialogues in BG3 use the attitude system from Mass Effect. Green, blue, white, red, brown. But make no mistake, they won't ever straight up tell you that. They'll make you think you can order a Tequila Sunrise, but what you'll get is a Bloody Mary. And then it's somehow your fault for not ordering correctly....

In NWN2, whenever a conversation with an NPC happens, it's a conversation - a conversation with the party.

When a major combat ends and a conversation needs to start right away, it does a little screen fade, and moves the actors so that they can all converse in the space; this creates and preserves the in-universe immersion in a way that rigid one-on-one immediate dialogues and sudden teleports don't; it works well.

The conversations are indeed conversations and everyone who is present for it is involved in it. companions speak up alongside NPCs as the discussion unfolds, and the player character is one element within that; you get to speak regularly, and direct the conversation and line of inquiry in the general and primary sense, while an actual conversation unfolds around you with everyone else having their say, in character, as they would. You-as-leader still ultimately tend to have the final say in most matters; the game lets the player make choices, as a game should - but those choices can still have consequences up to and including other party members who cannot abide your course taking action of their own because of it.

The party discussing what needed to be done, or their next steps, is always a discussion between the whole party that is present - not five or six discrete one-to-one independent dialogues which make no sense in context.

That game also doesn't Put emotional or ethical responses on your character without you actively choosing them - unlike current BG3 which forcefully characterises your own player character for you, with strong, visceral reactions and behaviours, completely outside of your control and your expression; the games Makes your character do and say things that actively rub against any type of personal characterisation except the one that Larian has picked for your character to have, over your head... and that's just disgusting, for what is meant to be a character-driven rpg.

How is it that a game that is more than fifteen years old has a more evolved and more advanced method of handling party conversation than this game currently has? And why are some people trying to defend this?

+1!
At this point, I don't expect a miracle but yes, prompts given to players could be formulated in a way that doesn't force characterization onto us.

Currently, the game offers too few options that are way too specific in terms of characterization ; which severely limits the types of character one could create (see this thread and that thread as examples).
Either we need more options or with need options that don't push characterization that far.

However, if Larian Studios just decides to continue how they do things, this won't be changed because DOS2 has the same issue.
I might have to accept to play their vision of the good Tav instead of my own character 😞


+1!

That screen fade (discret loading screen of sort) could make things less wonky (weird transitions and leveling-up effect during convos) and allow the possibility to either :
- Have the player's character be the lead by default (easiest implementation)
- Choose who will speak.

I'm not a fan of the "proximity system". It's easy to imagine that after a fight people would take a breath and then walk toward npcs to talk to them (which is what a screen fade would imply).

I agree with this if this is the easiest way (more realistically achievable that far in development) to improve things in terms of implementation.

Oh it's possible alright, just the engine might not support something like that.

D:OS2 had nothing resembling that - it worked very much like BG3 now - one person would engage in conversation, and you needed to leave a conversation to restart it with another character. The conversation would start from the beginning with without acknowledgment that it was done before.