Originally Posted by kanisatha
Originally Posted by Nightmarian
Originally Posted by kanisatha
For me, for multiple reasons, this last companion needs to be a good-aligned female arcane spellcaster from one of the standard tall races. So definitely not the werewolf.

Oddly specific, but hey, I guess it's possible we're getting a dragonborn sorcerer. We're missing a bard and monk too though, so eh there are imo just as likely.
Yes, specific, but ...

1) I want only good-aligned companions in my standard party.
2) I want no duplication of party roles within my party, especially my too-small four-person party. That specifically means no duplication of classes, or even 'similar' classes, and my PC will be the party's melee warrior, likely a paladin or ranger.
3) I want a feminine female romance option, someone not "dodgy" as discussed in a different thread here.

I consider these party and companion composition rules to be quite reasonable.

Good news, because unless Larian lied to us the mystery origin character(s) is indeed good-aligned. I'm pretty sure they're going to be half-orc or dragonborn, but I guess they could just throw out gnome or dwarf for some reason... kinda weird to hold this one close to chest for the dragonborn/half-orc and monk reveal PFH though after just tossing Karlach out into the open like she means nothing.

As for duplication... uh, I mean, not even similar roles? What does that mean, because every class is pretty different, unless you're planning on just running you and one caster. If you're including everything like fighter, paladin, and ranger as the party's one and done 'melee warrior,' then by that same definition, you can only have one caster and maybe if you want to split hairs a support caster cleric/bard but they're still really just casters.

Originally Posted by FrostyFardragon
Since alignment is not in the game there are no "good" characters.

This is false, and I'm both disappointed and shocked people still have this mentality. Coming from, oh, I don't know, every other narrative space ever in existence besides DnD, many of it comprising much better fantasy settings and characterization, good writing doesn't require you to slap a "I'm a good boy" or a "I'm Mr. Evil" on the tin of a character, and generally, the best ones make both you and themselves think about the weight of their actions and their motivations. Like christ, we already roll our eyes when the bad guys have to do some token bad thing like break a puppie's neck just to highlight they're bad people. Actually listing them as evil is just silly.

DnD's alignment system was always terrible and worthless and far too constrained to ever be realistic. Morality is never that simple and dnd is better off forcing DMs and players to actually think about their choices, or, you know, maybe continue doing that instead of sighing and going, "Well, I'm Chaotic Evil, so uh... I kick that kid in the shins I guess just to make sure everyone knows it."

Many evil characters don't even consider themselves evil, and in just as many cases, from their perspective, they aren't. At least, not any more so than the "hero" party. This lack of nuance makes for shallower characters, trust me. If you read some of the more beloved fantasy novels, you'll find yourself begrudgingly respecting or being enthralled by the villains just as much as the heroes even if you still hate them and/or what they've done. Especially these days when it's no longer just some dark lord trying to conquer the world for unspecified reasons.