Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Total number of companions : disappointment over the Dark Urge

Did I miss something? When did TEN companions become a small number? That's massive, especially for the amount of work involved. Pillars of Eternity has a generous 11, but Mass Effect goes down to what, 7 or 8? Dragon Age is also in the 9/10 area. Meanwhile DOS2, Larian's previous game, only has SIX. I'm not at all disappointed in the number, and am honestly really glad the Dark Urge exists. At absolute most I might want more variety in the companions, but even then eh. What would we give up? Gale or Wyll, probably, for a dwarf or halfling, maybe?

I'm pretty sure the people you have been saving and helping since your redemption arc would disagree. The same person can be a hero for someone and a demon for someone else.

Also ''heroes'' are pretty childish as a concept, all heroes you see on movies let the villains live because ''I'm not like them'' (AKA have a clear conscience) just for said villain to come back 5 years later and kill a million people just because you couldn't finish the job. Heroes are mostly someone with superpowers and ''the moral high ground'' with very simple personalities aimed to be an example for kids growing up into good acting adults.

You’re right when comparing to modern games.
But people are using the rest of the Baldurs Gate series as a benchmark, and there were 17 companions in BG2. So it’s a bit of an availability heuristic being exploited to make people say BG3 should have more, but it gives me an excuse to demand MOAR.

Red Queen isn’t this suggestion a ban able comment?!? I am sure it is 😂

Ooh, that does indeed look like a statement designed to cause distress to other forum members to me Shame on you Zerubbabel! You'll give us nightmares.

"10 " (VERY LOOSE 10) is massive lol? I guess for modern standards.
Baldur's Gate 2 had over 18, not including another dozen great modded in companions. Sure not all are perfect, still leaves many great options.
The grounchy bunch we get over half are far from perfect and not very likeable. That leaves...very little options.

Man has standards dropped for people to say that. Amount of work?? Like making these older games was a walk in the park?? For the times, it was way harder to make these games than now. Or at least just as hard.

Oh and Pathfinder WotR has 19 companions mind you. The game came out 2 years ago. So some studios gets it. More IS better in an RPG.

Dread it.
Run from it.
Beloved community favorite Abdel Adrian still arrives.

If you got the Enhanced Edition, Baldur's Gate 2 had 22, 23 if you count Clara but that's a special case. The first game had 25, plus an additional five for the tutorial and four more added in the Enhanced Edition. Baldur's Gate 3 doesn't even have half that number. Admittedly, it's not a fair comparison as Larian had to put a lot more work into the 10 companions we have in BG3 than Bioware probably put into all the companions in both previous games combined.

At the same time, I don't think it's really a fair comparison for another reason. The smaller party (which I will always consider a huge mistake) makes it harder to balance more characters. While there are definitely gaps in the available companions, I don't think it would be worth adding more companions we couldn't include in the party to add them.

So you essentially want less narrative structure and interaction with your companions and do not want their story to really impact the overall plot. Non-Origin characters, ala OG Baldur's Gate games had party banter, and brief 'aside' conversations (some of which were romance scenes), a short personal questline, and an ending slide or two. That was the full extent of their involvement with the game's narrative and plot. I'm pretty sure the reason that Larian introduced them (Origin characters) is that is a fascinating aspect of a game to be able to experience two perceptive realities of a character, both from the first person and third person. So, if you choose the origin character, you are the one visited by the deity, or antagonist, while as your own character, they may simply tell you about it. It creates an additional narrative layer to a game. By getting rid of it, you are just removing one of those perceptual realities and thereby simply lessening the options and story depth of the game. You can simply choose not to play as one, and then you remove one of those realities by default.

Now, the amount of time and energy that goes into their creation is really what this is about, since probably one Origin character takes up the same amount of time as creating 5 other disembodied companions with the same amount of resources, perhaps more.

I'm waiting with the sword.

*Prepares Smite Abdel*

Most of BG2 companions had very limited personality and involvement aside from their personal quests. Compare Edwin and Mazzy for example.

Do we have to do this again? Comparing immovable sprites with written dialogue and little to none voiceoiver to BG3 companions?

Yes, 10 is A LOT.

The companions in Bg1 and Bg2 were an inch deep. They had one simple quest each. You had some core companions with more dialogue but it wasn't super involved.

It's like comparing 25 bowls of dog food to 10 plates of filet mignon and declaring it the same thing.

I don't care how many companions we have. If 70% of them are assholes, then that's 70% that are assholes. I'll take the dog food that has some variety over the steak that is all burnt.

Oh, very nicely put!

At least you have some choice over choosing to take assholes/nonassholes with you if you want. Larian indicated that the Minthara/Tiefling companion split is still there, soooo....yeah looking forward to having half the roster unavailable to me right out the gate if I choose to play evil.

Very subjective, a character with what most people would agree is an assholish personality isn't necessarily a bad character, many fan favourites and popular characters from fantasy and fiction are admittedly dickheads, and many of the old BG characters were assholes too. But anyway, most BG3 companions are hardly assholes.


While I don't think we are short-handed in terms of companions, I do by no means think 10 companions is massive and would certainly welcome some more, of course that is, as long as they're properly written and have at least some depth. Also, using dlc and modded content when discussing these topics isn't really fair.


These comparisons with the companions from the older games are just ridiculous, obviously technology and the whole gaming industry have advanced, and you can fit a lot more stuff into a game nowadays than you could back in the day. But if you believe that the same amount of work goes into making a BG3 companion than in making a companion from the original games, you're just delusional. Astarion had probably more work put into him than the entire cast of BG1, you just can't reasonably expect the same number of companions while also wanting them to be more fleshed out.

More isn't always better, I'd choose quality over quantity any day.

This. And even if the interactions are good, more isn't always better. In Mass Effect 2/3, or worse the Pathfinder games for instance, talking to everyone in between missions became such a chore. And in those - once you pick them up, they're there forever, too.

I am *so* grateful for the fact that once they disagree enough, they leave or even attempt to kill me. Bring it. That's how NPC's should work They did so in classic Baldur's Gate. Attack Drizzt? Jaheira is gone. Forever. I hated that Mass Effect Paragon/Renegade option that worked everytime and was fine with everyone. For this game, it is my intention to keep my camp clear of everyone that I don't actively have in my party a lot. This way, I save content for future playthroughs.

I used to play computer games more in the style of 'I must do everything, everytime' - but I find it more fun as I grow older - to genuinely roleplay. It's much more compelling, and more of a challenge, too. No reloading, take it as it comes and stick to your guns. Even when I do things like BG1 or BG2, where this is a little harder, and definitely not the maximizing way of play and you can miss out on a lot of things.

For instance:

It's probably too early to judge. My long held hypothesis is this: the companions in Bg3 are plot hooks.

Every single one of them. They weren't designed to be liked, iconic, or even synergic. Their dislike of each other makes the party feel cramped at times. I'm not sure if this was the way to go, but I can't really know before finishing the game, can I?