Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General POLL: Replacing companions' starter class

That's fair, and right, I think I wouldn't have done it that way, but when you don't respect an opinion you are not really interested into being constructive about it.

In the past days "we" talked a lot about floating and racial ASI (I don't want to open the argument again), and I tried to explain my point of view, how 5e as a whole is designed, I've shown statblocks and everything, but I've done all of this because I kinda understand the different opinion, mostly because these people found this change not as an option but shoved on their faces. If I can't feel emphaty towards an opinion my ability to discuss it becomes limited.

I put "I don't really care one way or another", but for me, it's more that I don't really have any strong connection to any of the origin companions, so what class they are just doesn't matter for me. That said, because I sort of know them a bit, I can't really think of Gale as NOT a wizard, or Shadowheart as NOT a cleric, and so I'll probably keep them as they are, but I have absolutely no objections to others changing them. I do respect the "too much freedom can be a bad thing" argument, but in this case it doesn't affect my gameplay experience.

Most probably not, no. Though I had no illusion otherwise.

But should it have an impact though? Polls like this one are alright if you want to know what members of the forum think, but what the forum thinks isn't necessarily representative of what a majority of players think. Making decisions based on what is popular in the forum would be like making changes to a city based on what a specific neighbourhood wants.

It's already a thing and its implemented. Too late.
Also this is a very very good thing.

We can multiclass so wyll cld still become a paladin, and i assume the respec thing will work on them too, so its probably going to happen unless larian have made it so orgins other then the urge can not be modified?

Even if you cant pick at the start withers will make wyll a paldin if you want that?

Larian haven't confirmed it will be in v1.0. It was in v0.9 played by the press, but when asked about Larian said that they didn't know if it was final. (or something like that)

True. Maybe I'm being too pessimistic

Respectfully dissagree ...

First of all, there is no choice here ...
You dont choose for Lae'zel to be Fighter, for Astarion to be Rogue, or for Karlach to be Barbarian.
Those choices were made for you ... and to be completely honest, i picked theese specificly, bcs those choices seems to be a little random.
As stated in other topic, Astarion should have ben a Bard.
But i presume choices here were made more by wich classes were prepared for EA launch, rather than some strong narative ...
In alternative universe we would be arguing that it makes perfect sense for Astarion to be a Barbarian, since Vampires are tougher than humans and his hunger makes him rage out ... just bcs Larian there decided to do different set of classes first.

Anyway, the point is that if you feel like Commitment to a choice is important for you ... there is nothing in this world and beyond, that would stop you to just respect their classes.
You reset it ... they get to level 1 blank slate ... first thing you pick is their class.
You have what you wanted ... dont you?

If someone wants to commit to their choice, by all means.

I just don't get the rabid need to commit me to their choice.

But I answered 3. I really can't imagine why I would care. If anything, I might use the option one day when I get bored just to try something out, because why not.

Sometimes it feel like this it true reason for lots of people ...
Even if they claim otherwise.

Depends on impact ...

Should Larian completely reverse their development, no matter how close final release is, just bcs less than hundert people want something? Of course not.

But should poll on forum, where majority (if that will be the case) of still active people will express their dislike towards intended change cause research across other media (twitter, discord, reddit, feedback mail, etc.) and potentialy make you rethink your goals? Sure!
After all, if it wouldnt, we wouldnt have reaction system ... Larian words, not mine!

Well, the reason i created my topic and open this theme, was information that Larian is wondering if they wish to keep this option in game, or remove it.
I admit i have no way to validate it, it can be a rumor ...

But if its true, then its not too late to save it.
On the contrary, its about time to express oureselves.

That's nice and all, but this has nothing to do with the question OR with my answer.

Also, let me be honest here: you can spare the effort. I wasn't negotiating my opinion, just stating it.

It's the only take, IMHO.
There is no practical difference between options you will never take and options that don't exist.


Play exactly as you did in early access. Level up your companions as you choose.
Nothing has changed for you.
Commit to whatever choices you make.

You are being a bit unfair here.
It really wasn't subtle at all.

Wasn't the intent here to be a fair? How is this any different from all the other things Larian has done which are being defended as being optional, and therefore those who don't like it or want it can ignore it? It's the same thing here. Why take away from me something I want very strongly when it does not affect anyone else's game in any way?

But that's exactly the thing. There IS a choice, only it's not you making it - it's the writers. To say Astarion should've been a Bard is looking at it from the opposite direction imo, because the choice to make him a Rogue was deliberate. Him being a Rogue has expressive power. It evokes the imagery of an agile and skillful predator, tailing his prey down a dark side alley or worming his way into the good graces of unsuspecting nobles with his sharp wit. Nothing about Astarion evokes musicality or magic.

That's the thing - I don't. With the removal of commitment, it becomes as you write - Astarion can be anything. His class is demoted from an integral component of his character to a mere suggestion. I dare say this is intuitive to any enthusiast of ttrpgs or video games based on them (like, say, Baldur's Gate). One's class isn't just their set of skills to be changed like clothing; it's their life.

The question remains - is it worth sacrificing character integrity to slightly better accommodate more casual audiences who don't care as much? As someone who cares, my answer is no.

When your opinion is what you like or don't like that's not up for debate. It's your choice.
When your opinion is that no-one should have an option because you don't like it then that involves others freedom to play the game they want to and that is up for debate.

Or, way more probably, they wanted a rougue because it's a stample of D&D like fighter and wizard, and just picked one. Which is even way more plausible honestly.


Or it can be a gameplay factor for someone, it can be a known "messing up with things" for others, and it can be "fixing the chracter" for others.

Thanks for excluding be from being a ttrpg enthusiast, I definitely have a library full of rulebooks of different games just for show.

As someone who will spend 500+ hours in this game and is not even remotely a casual, and cares about it enough to buy the collector and take a vacation from work to play it, my answer is yes.

Do you realize that from your response it looks that every single person who likes this rule is a casual who shits on the game?

@Sansang I didn't mean to be gatekeepy about this and I apologize if that's what I came across as. If so, it's because I feel strongly about this and I genuinely think it's bad for the game in the long run. When I said 'it's intuitive for rpg enthusiasts', I was referring solely to the idea that classes are integral to a character's story. Is this not how you see it?

I admit I have a hard time wrapping my head around how it's possible to know you can make Shadowheart not-a-cleric at any time and not have your immersion instantly broken.

Let's put it this way then: my opinion is that I don't want it to be a feature in the game (for the aforementioned reasons and few more).

What it entails for others is frankly irrelevant to me.

And sorry for the comparisons between poor arguments and sex toys. I guess it came to mind as an instinctual association of ideas, since as far I'm concerned both are things people can shove up their ass.