Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Which party members will you bring along on your first playthrough? (Includes datamined companions)

Because it could change, dramatically, upon release. Especially when Larian has repeatedly said they are working to make Act 1 a fresh experience, even for people who have sunk hundreds of hours into the game?

Also - given what we have seen I don't even necessarily think that your hypothesis is correct. I think you could argue Lae'zel is a bigger part of the game so far and 'pushed' on the character more given that she is the very first person you meet in the game.

If Shadowheart is the Fane of this game - it isn't going to change anything. Even if you killed off Fane in D:OS2 or didn't take him in your party the entire game still pretty much revolves around his origin and story.

EDIT: I don't even think that is a bad thing either - to me I could care less. I care more about it being a good story and the characters being interesting than I do about my character being the most important person at any given time. I actually prefer stories where there are more important characters than myself - makes them significantly more interesting.

The whole point of a roleplaying video game is for the player to interactively collaborate with the game's creators/writers to tell the story of the game through their player character. Go look up the words of any well-known RPG creator/writer, this is what they all say. If the game is going to narrate a story for you and you as your player character are largely along for the ride (which btw is exactly what out "Tav" looks like right now), then that's not an RPG. That's a novel or a movie.

That would actually be okay if the game explicitly forced you to play only as Fane (D:OS2) or SH (BG3) or Geralt (Witcher 3). A better way would be the game very clearly saying to me the player: "Hey player, although you can play this game as one of the other Origin characters or even a self-made character, the game is meant to be played with you as SH, because the whole game has been built around SH as the central protagonist of the game."

I think there's something interesting to the idea that Shadowheart being the main character, because I think that what 'main character' can mean for a story can be interpreted different ways. Whichever character we play as will be the actual main character inevitably, because it'll be our choices and decisions that drive the plot forward, with Shadowheart following our lead. But it's also very possible for that to coexist with Shadowheart also being the charcater whose backstory and general plot is where a lot of conflict comes from.

Well that is kind of an interpretation thing though - right?

Being the main character of a story doesn't necessarily mean you are the most important, powerful or even impactful to the story. Though it will mean that you end up deciding a lot of things in the story because your choices are made to matter and influence things.

Geralt in The Witcher 3 is a good example. While he is the main character - I would not say he is the most important character. I don't even know if he ends up having the amount of influence or sway as Yennefer. He is certainly not as important to the story as Ciri - who you could say is the actual main character of the game. He doesn't hold as much power, sway or influence of Ehmyr. So I think you could say this about any story that is written well - unless it is an over the top power fantasy that would just be miserable to play (in my opinion). I think you could make the same argument for The Witcher 3 and be like...

"I wish I could just kill Ciri at the start of it. I am the main character of this story, WHY TF IS SHE THE ONE SAVING THE WORLD, TELEPORTING ALL OVER THE DAMN PLACE AND TRAVELING TO DIFFERENT REALMS? WHY AM I RUNNING AROUND SEARCHING FOR HER LIKE SHE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN ME? WHY IS SHE STRONGER, MORE POWERFUL, MORE SOUGHT AFTER AND MORE CRUCIAL TO THE FATE OF THE WORLD?!"

No need to wait so long ...
Technicaly it "could change" next patch, that should come in few weeks.

But since my criticism was that it didnt change so far, that change you are talking about would be most welcomed.

Sorry but no. I mean, you couldn't possibly be more wrong. Geralt is the main character of Witcher 3, not Ciri. You are mixing up main character/protagonist within the game story versus a character's importance within the setting universe. It's like saying that in an RPG set during the French Revolution where our PC is the protagonist, that PC is not as important as Napoleon, when yes our character *is* more important than Napoleon *for the game.* So your whole post only serves to make my point, which is that Geralt is who is central to the story within that game, and without his actions - which is to say my actions as the player - nothing else would've mattered (within the story of that game). It's like saying in BG1 Elminster, who makes cameo appearances and who is way more powerful and important within the Forgotten Realms setting, is more important as a character than our 'Charname' PC. That's just flatout wrong.

I don't really think Shadowheart is the "main character" of this game. While her arc/story does seem have to some plot relevance via the box, I think that's really the extent of it. She seems more like BG3's version of PF:KM's Tristian, or if you want an example from previous BG games, Imoen in BG2: she's a character who's personal story has some relevance/importance to the main plot but she's not the driving force behind it.

The player character is still very obviously the "main character" and has a ton of agency within the story, even if their backstory doesn't really have anything to do with the game's main plot save the plot hook of being a captured Baldurian.

As for who I'm going to bring with me, if I really had to choose it'd be Shadowheart, Minsc, and a tossup between Karlach and Gale for the final slot. My PC would ether be a paladin, wizard, or rogue. I do hope that they won't lock the party like DOS2 though, it would really be terrible if they did especially since we can permanently lose companions depending on your decisions. They should do what 99% of modern CRPGs do and just have the full party follow you but be at camp/a home base if you're not bringing them with you.

Having, or being, the MacGuffin doesn't make you the main character. You can also be a main character, instead of the main character in an RPG, in fact that would make it a more typical RPG for most of the pen and paper players. I feel like we're just continuing a discussion here, that we had over in the "amount of companions" thread. Which of course was had a lot in common with the many 'Origin Characters' threads.

Did you read my post? What you are saying is literally what I said - so I don't understand how I "couldn't possibly be more wrong". I literally said...

"Being the main character of a story doesn't necessarily mean you are the most important, powerful or even impactful to the story. Though it will mean that you end up deciding a lot of things in the story because your choices are made to matter and influence things."

Also - your argument with Geralt does not hold up. Yes, without your actions nothing else would've mattered. But without Ciri's actions nothing would have mattered either - she is literally necessary to stop the end of the world. If she didn't do what she did everything else would be meaningless because everyone would be dead. Geralt is not more important *for the game* - Ciri is literally the most important character, powerful character and only character that can fulfill her role *in the game*.

But regardless, this isn't worth going on about.

I am quite happy with being a main character, I am perfectly fine with being part of a group. I am curious how my choices will affect the story, but my character does not always need to take center stage.

For me, an essential factor for a good role playing experience is the possibility to interact with NPCs/companions, in order to flesh out my character through my actions and dialogue choices.

As much as I liked Skyrim, it did not feel like a role playing game to me. Yes, I was definitely the main character, but it felt a bit boring. There were not enough interactions with NPCs where I could really play my character. My Dragonborn felt a bit like a blank slate.

Of course, everyone has different and very personal expectations of what makes a good RPG.
Up until now, Baldurs Gate 3 lives up to my expectations, and I am looking forward to the game's full release.



I just had a new outcome of the scene with Gandrel: I talked to him, with Astarion in my group, but kept the conversation rather short (I asked what he was hunting, what he would do if he would find this Astarion, and wished him good luck). Aside from his usual remark, Astarion kept calm, I noticed there was also no disapproval. I am really astonished how many options and outcomes there are for just one scene.

As a tempest cleric
Or unlikely storm paladin
Laezel wyll and shadow heart will have to die on site or else your God will have a problem with you

paladin as my pc (he can bring in some extra healing and be the Charisma for shops/convos)
if helia is a bard and in game - extra healing, thief role and a bit of magic
Minsc for off tanking (hopefully hes still tough)
Gale because he probably would work fine in a good party and a dedicated mage would be nice

So Minsc is not an origin character. I wonder where those 5 votes will go now?

Jaehira being a companion would also probably change results quite a bit too. Might depend on what class she actually is in this game, I heard she was a Fighter/Druid multiclass before.

Im more curious about what will she be now ...

Even Wylls Fiend subclass, or Shadowhearts Trickery Domain seem little restraining from time to time ... having character with prepared multiclass would be ... interesting, but in some ways even worse. :-/

Yes, Jaheira is canonically druid/fighter and I found her extremly useful in the other games. She was one of the most versatile characters imo, with a decent stat distribution.
I liked her character too, she sometimes was a bit bossy and standoffish, but mostly she was the motherfigure of the group.

I'll be playing if possible a multiclassed character (ranger, barbarian, fighter) with a custom party. I would be surprised if I even bother with the current party members and never ever will I touch the option to play with one of Larian's characters as main. I don't care about them enough to endure them as a party member even less as main.

Minsc was the only character I voted for and the only origin I might have had any interest in playing as, still would have run with a custom party of at least 2 others. With him no longer an origin companion and Jaheira in with him as non-origin companion options that is likely my first release run right there, 2 customs + Minsc + Jaheira. I may let one or 2 of the other companions tag along after modding the game for more than 4 characters but honestly as far as I'm concerned they can all turn into mindflayers or whatever the big "companion commit" ends up being.

I'd like to play with Shadowheart because it is the only origin that I like... but I really don't like AT ALL the trickery domain so I hope I'll be able to custom her subclass.

If we can I'd like to go with Shadowheart + Minsc + Jaheira if they are confirmed as companions + my main as a fighter, as all my first characters in rpgs.

BUT here comes the main problem I have with a party of 4 : I'd also like to have someone in my party that uses profane magic well so I guess I'll have to trade Shadowheart for Gale (a character I don't really like) and build Jaheira as my main healer... which is not really what I'd like to do.