Originally Posted by robertthebard
Originally Posted by Sozz
Originally Posted by robertthebard
I was until I got to this: "but BG2's companions are a platinum standard that have yet to be matched in any game since", which makes it really clear to me now.
That ain't me, boss.

Maybe if you read what I said more carefully, I wouldn't have to constantly restate my argument to you. There are some interesting ideas going around here stymied by our attempts to cajole you into making a cogent point.

If I had to choose one character to be the "main character" of this story it would be Shadowheart. Like so many RPG MCs she has amnesia, like so many MCs she finds herself with an ancient artifact of great importance to the story, and like so many MCs she has been given a definite objective that promises adventure and intrigue. But don't get me wrong (again), with the exception of Gale, every origin character has a pretty clear connection to the overarching plot, Shadowheart's connection is just the most clear in the EA. Gale's connection will probably become more clear as we play, what I wouldn't wager on is Tav doing the same.

Of course this has nothing to do with what I was talking about, I'm tempted to just quote my post again, just to see what would happen.
Originally Posted by Sozz
The strictures of logic don't stop in fiction, if all that is required for you to believe your personal character is the main character of the story is that you are the playing him, then you really don't care about the internal logic of the narrative. But to be clear, I don't know how many more ways we can put it, I think maybe you're on it now[Nope], our gripes aren't with the existence of the party, or even Tav being leader, it's the inconsistency between the characters, and their behavior to generic Tav.

Yep, sorry about that, it came out of the spoiler tag, and I didn't notice.

However, you avoided my question entirely. Who is the main character, if it's not the character that one rolls up when they start the game? Which games have you played where you're not the main character, outside of IWD/Solasta, since those are Main Party games instead of a single protagonist. It's only logical that you would have an answer to those questions, yes?

Originally Posted by Gray Ghost
Originally Posted by robertthebard
Who is the story about then? Which of the Origin characters do you believe has sufficient ties to the story to be the "main character" no matter who you decide to play as? All of them can die. You can wind up in possession of Shadowheart's box. So, none of them seem to be "main character" material. Which RPGs are you playing, or have you played, where the main character was something/someone other than the character you rolled up, or the party, in the case of IWD/Solasta? If we're going to run with logic, which NPC is it that can take all the agency away from the player? What is it that defines "main character" if it's not the character you're playing as? Even in games like the WH example, you're still playing the main character, because if you wait around for the bosses to do the game, you'll be waiting a long time, and since a "main character" is the driving force behind gameplay, I'm left a bit puzzled by who you think that is. Or, I was.

I think the thing you're missing is that you're equating the mechanical main character with the narrative main character. Mechanically our custom character is the main character in that they're the character we the players embody, and they're the vessel through which we effect the story. But narratively, they're not the main character. The story isn't about them anymore or any less than it's about Gale or shadowheart or Wyll. If we assume that the origin system is gonna work basically the same as in D:OS2, then any of the origins can step into the mechanical main character spot. If we pick them at the start of the game, they'll be mechanically our main character. It's going to be their choices that propel the story forward. They'll be able to do everything Tav does, and Tav's absence won't makea substantive difference, since Tav doesn't have any deeper connections to the plot. Our Tav doesn't have any special skills that make them a unique asset to the group, they just happen to be the character chosen by the player. Any other companion could step into Tav's place if they're chosen at the start of the game.

If you think about it narratively, the actual story makes a bit more sense. Not the plot ncessarily, but the story. Wyll is a character that has to struggle with his morality as he not only seeks to free himself from the mindflayers, but from his contract with the devil tht the mindflayers also captured. Shadowheart stole an artefact that has a direct, significant tie to the parasite and keeping people safe from it. Lae'zel is a githyanki, raised from birth to fight this enemy. Now she's found herself alone on an unfamiliar world, forced to work with those she deemed lesser in order to survive and perhaps prove herself worthy in the process. Astarion has to struggle with whether he wants to risk finding a way to subdue the tadpole in order to maintain his newfound freedom from the master who tortured and enslaved him. Gale is the only one whose side plot really is (so far) entirely divorced from the tadpole plot. But you have all those, with plots and pathos built in, that the game will actually react to. And then we have Tav. An entirely empty shell that can be removed from the story without anything being lost.

I can't be missing it, because they're the same character. Unless there's a character in the game that will play it for us, and make any and all decisions, then we're it. Which character will make the decision on whether we side with the Druids, or the Tieflings in the Grove? Which character will make the decision on whether or not we side with Mintharra? Even if all we're doing is "following orders", such as Commander Shepard in Mass Effect, it would be hard to argue that Admiral Hackett is the main character, wouldn't it? Tav is an "empty shell", also known as a blank slate, because it's supposed to be up to the player to fill in the blanks. Once upon a time, in the world of RPGs, this was the ideal, and now it's more like "we need the developer to define our character for us".

You missed the important part of my post, which is that as far as the story I'd concerned, any of the companions we do now could do those things if we decide to choose them at character creation. Sure if we choose to play a Tav then Tav is the one making the game decision, but if you choose an origin character, then Tav never exists and the story does not fundamentally change. If you removed Shephard from Mass Effect, the story simply would not resemble itself at all. If we select Tav to play and then they die sure, we can't continue the story. But we don't have to select Tav, and we would get to play the same story but likely with new content.