Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides Party Size Discussion

Its not so restrictive in Dragon Age in the first place ...
There are 3 classes only in that game, none of them have any main stat (at least in last game, dont remember the second, and in first one all you need is at least one rogue, otherwise your party members doesnt matter at all) ...

So, unless you really dont want to, you can allways create group that will contain every important role (Warrior, Rogue, Mage) + your PC.

In DnD ... even if you look aside from classes themselves ... bcs lets be honest, most of them are basicaly just slightly different variations, or mixures of each other.
And focus on stats ...
You want someone with high Dexterity for traps and lockpicks ...
You want someone with high Strength for pushing, pulling, draging ... and carrying heavy stuff ...
You want someone with high Charisma to be face of your party ...
You want someone with high Intelligence to pass most checks in game ...
You want someone with high Wisdom, for saving throws if nothing else ... you dont really want whole party locked ...
And sometimes you also want high Constitution tank ...

Leaving two of theese things out bcs you have to simply dont feel good. :-/
One surely would argue (as they did in the past) that Constitution is not really specialization since everyone need it and you dont really *need* tank in this game ... that is both true, but i said want, not need.
And there certainly is second argument, that unless your Tav is Intelligence character, there is not much use of it, since we cant switch talker during conversation, nor ask our party members for advice (wich both sucks) ... but having bad system dont justificate making it even worse, at least not in my eyes. :-/

I think we have to start all over again, there is soo much not said yet ...

For example, a party of 4 feels restricted. What do I feel with a party of 6 if I want a party of 7?

Party of 8, all the way!

Here's why:

1. In multiplayer, I can have 3 friends play with me and each of us can control a companion.
2. In single player, I can have my MC and 7 other companions b all the current ones and Jaheira and Minsc. Bam! Perfect.
3. I'll naturally short rest less, meaning things in the story will flow more smoothly because I could easily complete EA without long resting once, just like the game kinda makes it seem like it should be with buildings that never burn out and rituals that never complete.
4. I don't really have anything else because I am not serious.

But party of 6 is definitely just right. Come on, Larian. It's 1 number. Make it legit so we don't need to mod it.

Actually, client manages party of 8 just fine.

Yes. Well, the mod did prove that, didn't it? But 8 does make the game SO easy that it is no longer fun.

That said, as mentioned before, it makes sense from a realism standpoint that they should not limit party size at all. Let us decide how many we want to take with us. After all, if I'm going raiding to wipe out a cultist camp, I would probably bring everyone I can.

On the other hand, I think they COULD limit party size in a more story-driven and realistic way. If I brought a party of 7 or more to the goblin camp, maybe have the goblins become more suspicious. "Who are you? Why so many well armed individuals? Seems like you might be thinking of starting something, if you ask me. Think I'll keep my eye on you.".

In other words, after X party limit is reached, people start getting nervous about you and treat you warily. The max size before drawing suspicion would be based on where you are.

So, the player would then have to plan strategically. Do I take more with me and arouse suspicions or take less and if trouble starts I could be in trouble?

That would be cool, but I doubt they have that in them at this point.

I gues this depends on taste ...
Also, there will be difficiulty setting in final game to tune this futher.

NO!
Just no.

There is roleplay ... and there are game mechanics ... and theese two should never, ever, EVER! Mix together ... it dont end well.
No matter what explanation you create, it will sound weird in some situation ... thrust me (or not, w/e), its better to leave it where it belongs. :-/

That sounds like a great idea really. An insight check and any one of the companions could open a dialog and say "This large of a party will certainly arouse suspicion don't you think? I think if we want to infiltrate, we'd better keep our numbers down."
Then you decide and do whatever you want.

Weird that you would say that. Roleplay and game mechanics NEVER mix? But that's what a Roleplaying Game is. It's a mix of roleplaying and game mechanics. The entire premise of D&D is this very thing.

I just thought, from a DM's viewpoint, that if I was DMing a tabletop session of BG3, I'd certainly not tell the players, "You can only take 4 characters with you into the Goblin Camp." I'd just say, "Who are you taking?" and if they took everyone at their camp, even if that was 20 characters, I'd not prevent them from doing so. I might have an NPC say, "Hmmm. Are you sure you want to take so many? I mean, isn't it going to look weird if we take so many people into their camp? They might view us immediately with suspicion."

Absolutely, I would do this. I could see people at the grove accepting a large party. They might even view them as saviors, but the goblin camp would definitely see a larger party as a potential security risk. I'd have goblin sentries following the PCs around, watching them at all times. The larger the group, the more sentries would follow them. If they did ANYthing wrong, the sentries would run off and alert the entire camp.

In this way, larger parties would probably have to fight more enemies at once. Attack Minthara in her inner sanctum? A sentry or 2 runs off and alerts everyone. Suddenly, you might have a party of 8, but you're fighting the entire goblin camp of 20-40 as they come in waves to kill you. Maybe you should have gone with a smaller party. Then they wouldn't have even thought twice about you. Makes sense to me, anyway. A whole lot more sense than Lae'zel telling me I'm full up because I have only 3 other companions especially when there is an entire army of cultists you're about to go attack and especially if you drew them to the grove and you and your companions might be the only hope of the entire grove surviving.

I would say that it's roleplaying/game mechanics and QoL/UI decisions shouldn't mix. The issue is that a 4-person party is a developer QoL/balancing decision, yet characters in-game reference it, making it a part of the BG3 world. Essentially, they're breaking the 4th wall but in a very weird way. Most characters that break the 4th wall know they're doing it (e.g., Deadpool). BG3 companions, however, clearly aren't aware of the real world and play it straight, which causes dissonance.

Why is my party "full up" at 4? The real answer is "because the devs wanted to craft an experience for a party of 4." The Lae'zel answer is...[unknown]?????

i sincerely feel 4 party characters are very restricted. 5 would be best IMHO. but 6 would be old school which i have no problem with. seeing larian wont be supporting it, my only hope goes to any modders who willing to rebalance combat with 5-6 party characters. may even chip in some donation if they make it happen.

If you were DMing a tabletop session ... you are human being, on the contrary of our PC game ... wich (among other things) means you can adjust everything in the game acordingly to your party in real time ... PC cant do that.

But we allready talked about this in the past. -_-
You simply cant compare PC game and tabletop session.

There is game mechanic, that limits your party size ... it dont exist in roleplay in any way, it dont make any sesnse for it to exist in any way ... so it should be ignored from Roleplay perspective and kept in system only.
As stated several times in our past discusions. -_-

And once again I disagree. Tabletop is not impossible to implement in a PC game. In this scenario, actually, it could be done. You have a party of 5 or less, no change in gameplay. You have 6 or more in the party, coding is put into the game so that if you show up at the goblin camp, goblin guards start following you around, 1 sentry per extra companion above 5. Add a line of dialogue from the Narrator where she says, "Seems you've attracted some unwanted attention; perhaps because you have a few too many companions. Larger groups do draw greater suspicion, don't they?" and viola. Done.

I mean, you said it yourself. The game already can handle party of 8. So it's not an actual limitation that HAS to be implemented or the game would crash. It is entirely implemented, as Fuji said, I believe, because the devs want to balance combat around party of 4.

Not sure who are you disagreeing with ... since nobody said this. O_o
But good for you i gues. :-/

Ok ...
So i go with party of 4 ... Tav, Gale, Wyll and Shadowheart ...
I will be a Ranger, and will have a Pet ... Gale will have summoned familiar ... Wyll will have summoned familiar ... and Shadowheart use scroll to summon Shovel the Quasit ...

We are party of 4 ... so the game does nothing even tho there is 8 of us.
So everything is fine.

Then we just add Lae'zel to the equation ...
And lets say that we rested, so Shovel is not with us anymore ... and this time i dont want to spend spellslot to sumon familiar with Gale ...

Now there is 7 of us ... but what just happened? Some goblin is following us, bcs "there is suspiciously many of us now". -_-
That indeed sounds perfectly logical. xD

Or we can make it even funnier ... lets presume the game will count whole party not just character members.
I didnt try it myself, but i heared that if you summon a Zombie and it bites someone, that one can turn into another Zombie under your control:
Your party of 5 (familiars and followers included) is fine:
> sumon a zombie - SUSPICIOUS!
> dismiss a zombie - FINE, nobody care.
> sumon a zombie - SUSPICIOUS!
> dismiss a zombie - FINE, nobody care.
> sumon a zombie - SUSPICIOUS!
> dismiss a zombie - FINE, nobody care.

See what i mean?

Eh ... no.
No, they dont ... i mean in Goblin camp, since that is example you picked ... they outumber you in ratio 4:1 ... even if you take all your companions and 3 Tavs to have 8 characters in total ... wich is maximum party you can have now ... they still outnumber you 2:1 ...

What makes you so suspicious in larger group?
Especialy if we take under concideration that even single Wizard on apropriate level can decimate 90% of them with SINGLE fireball?

It's not all that, Ragnarok. Minions aren't as much of a threat because they lack intelligence. Most of the time, if the master is taken down, the minion flees or surrenders. So, yes, you could have a party of 4 characters with a gazillion minions, but they aren't as big a threat as intelligent characters that could potentially cast spells, etc.

So yes, a party of 8 characters would be a far more suspicious group than 4 with 4 minion companions. A level 4 Lae'zel might have 40 HP while her minion might have 10. Quite a difference in threat level especially since Lae'zel has a much higher damage potential than say a raven or a quasit.

For someone sake ... pick a side for once. -_-

Um. What? What sides? Roleplay and mechanics go hand in hand. That's what I've been saying all along. People who separate them don't fully understand the mechanics.

Lae'zel is a much bigger threat than a wolf or quasit both mechanically and from a story perspective. So, absolutely a party of 8 characters is more a threat and worthy of suspicion than 4 with 4 minions. If I have a ranger, fighter, thief, wizard, warlock, and cleric plus a paladin and barbarian, that's a MUCH bigger threat than a ranger, fighter, thief and wizard with a wolf, quasit, raven and zombie.

BTW, the whole zombie apocalypse thing is SO not D&D or FR lore. It's just for the sake of modern zombie apocalypse lovers. It is 100% not cool and just another gimmick that breaks the game.

But whatever. We're not discussing zombies here. We're talking controlling party size with actual story consequences. You know, things Larian for some reason doesn't like. You know, things that make sense.

Large party creates suspicion. Makes sense.
Party of 4 and people say, "You're full up. Go face 30 goblins and ogres and bugbears with 4 people because of... Um...

...

.........."

This reminds me of the weird interaction you'd have with Imoen in the Labyrinth beneath Spellhold if you couldn't take her on. It makes no logical sense for this to happen, its purely because of how the game has been designed.

Without a DM to modifying the encounters you just have to roll with it sometimes.

Thats is something i tryed to state abowe ...
Since single Wizard can wipe out 3/4 of whole Goblin tribe with single Fireball ... all you need is two dudes in robes that dont seems much strong, in order to "seem suspicious" ... it dont really matter "from a story perspective" if there is 4 or 6 of you.

What if you have "a ranger, fighter, thief and wizard with a wolf, quasit, raven and ..." 50 zombies? 70 zombies?
I didnt count potential victims in Druid Grove, but i believe it should be possible.

And even 2 Wizards with no familiars and no friends are MUCH bigger threat than party you described.
Thats why amount of people isnt exactly relevant.

Agreed ...
But its there, so we have to take it under concideration.

I haven't followed BG3's progression for ages it seems. Is Larian's stance still firm regarding party size or is there some leeway judging from their comments (if they've had any on the matter)?

My personal preference leans more towards the classic BG party size. I haven't tried BG3 in a long while, but my feeling at the time was that the 4-party iteration they had then didn't cut it for me. Maybe it was just the whole shebang that didn't live up to my glorified expectations, but still, I think they should allow for 5-6.

It's about a PERCEIVED threat, not the actual threat.

2 skinny dudes wearing cloth robes are much, much smaller of a perceived threat than 10 big marching, great sword wielding hulks in plate armor...even though the 2 dudes in cloth robes are actually 10th level wizards and could wipe out the village in minutes while the 10 hulking warriors are just 1st level fighters that will fall to archer arrows before they can get to the front door.