question whether the necessary response to 'the evil companions are too snarky' is that we need three new companions exclusive to good players
I cant imagine any better response. O_o
It's more a question of 'why would Larian keep writing characters that won't stay in an evil player's party when none of the evil party members have any conflicts with a good player?
There's this weird conception that there's been an imbalance in party members towards evil, even though it's been public knowledge pretty much since day one that we'd be getting additional good party members later, and from datamining that we'd be getting at least three. But people didn't read datamines cause they didn't want to be spoiled and missed the initial announcement about the additional good companions. So we got complaints about how the party was 'too evil'. And Larian jumped right on that despite it being largely based on miscommunication. But the other side of the coin? Yeah, IDK what's going on with Larian, the complaints about the evil side of the campaign being lackluster were at least as loud as those complaining about Shadowheart's attitude, but from the looks of it at release we'll have conflicts with the following companions abandon you if you side with the forces of evil, potentially or automatically resulting them leaving your party for good:
Wyll (automatically) Gale (possibly) Minsc Jaheria
(minor datamined spoiler)
Karlach
And it also conflicts with a Shadowheart as a romance option, as well as Gale, even if you convince him to stay.
Even if Minthara ends up as an evil-exclusive companion, which some indications point towards the possibility, that's woefully unbalanced and the math's right there to prove it.
