We have? That must have been a while ago because I haven’t been here in quite some time. Good memory.

“If you think you're going to turn into a Mind-Flayer, and think there's an clear avenue of action, why tolerate a party that goes from one dead end to another while ignoring your objections.”

Because it’s evident quite early on that something else is a going on, you aren’t in immediate danger of flaying out, and it’s safer than going it alone. It’s contrived, sure, but most games rely on contrivance and don’t address their (to use a popular buzzword) ludonarrative dissonance. I really don’t think all that much more justification is needed besides “this shit is crazy, we’re safer together than alone. This guy / gal is taking charge so okay.”

Party members in BG 1 and 2 would put up will a lot of meandering about too, and while some would leave if you didn’t complete personal quests in a timely manner, there were much more companions because each companion required less work (mo-cap, voice-work, personal quests). Therefore, the game can afford to have companions more readily leave you because you can just go find another. Everyone is free to disagree, of course, but I personally don’t mind this trade off all that much. I’d rather have fewer fleshed out companions. If I want more companions with BG1 level development I can just make my own. 😂

And of course, there is always the option of just selecting party members who you plan on actually accommodating. If I’m not planning on recruiting a party member I usually kill them anyway (especially Lae’zel because she is rude to me, so firebolt to the face it is). I don’t think role playing requires the motivation of real consequences though. I often do it just for fun.