Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 5 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10
Joined: Jul 2022
S
stranger
Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Jul 2022
I'd be pissed if they changed it to 6 tbh.

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
Originally Posted by SerCabbage
I'd be pissed if they changed it to 6 tbh.
It wouldn’t affect you in the slightest, though, given that no one would force you to play with 6 characters, so being pissed about it borders into lunacy.

Last edited by Tuco; 03/08/22 10:39 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by SerCabbage
I'd be pissed if they changed it to 6 tbh.
You'd be pissed if some optional feature (that you don't have to use) gets implemented? Okay...

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by SerCabbage
I'd be pissed if they changed it to 6 tbh.

Why though? You could still play with a group of 4 people.

Unless, of course, they'd rebalance every encounter for a party of 6 rather than 4. But as long as it would be an optional feature I see no issue with it.

Joined: Jul 2022
S
stranger
Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Jul 2022
That's the thing, they'd obviously need to balance it for one party size or another. And even if 4 remained viable I don't like the idea of how big the encounters would need to get to square off against 6 PCs.

Joined: Aug 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
I usually play with a party of 3-5 in single player. I don't think party size is as important as other gameplay issues in BG3. I.e. as long as Long Rest is spammable, magic items are MMO-like and combat is a basically brainless shove fest, I don't think it matters whether I have 4 or 5 or 6 PC's in the party.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by SerCabbage
That's the thing, they'd obviously need to balance it for one party size or another.
Thats the thing ... they dont.
And as far as i know litteraly nobody on this forum ever asked for that ... on the contrary, people keep asking for adjusting party size WITHOUT any futher adjustments.


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Jul 2022
S
stranger
Offline
stranger
S
Joined: Jul 2022
I wouldn't mind the option being in assuming the default design is for 4. Seems like something we'll get as a day 1 mod but Larian could just as well include it themselves.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Originally Posted by SerCabbage
Seems like something we'll get as a day 1 mod but Larian could just as well include it themselves.
Exactly this! smile


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by SerCabbage
I wouldn't mind the option being in assuming the default design is for 4.
Exactly this! smile

Joined: Jun 2014
L
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
L
Joined: Jun 2014
So long as they handle difficulty levels well, then I don't see how it would matter too much. If it's too easy at 6, then bump the difficulty up; if it's too difficult at 4, then bump the difficulty down.

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
Exactly laugh


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Oct 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2021
Where's the cut off point?

Should they make the game for ten? If you only want to play six, you don't have to play all ten.

Maybe they should make the game for twenty?

Thirty?

Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
veteran
Online Embarrased
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Liberec
There is no such point ...
Just few dozen (maybe even hunderts) suggestions, demands, and requests for 6 ...
And basicaly none for anything else, if you dont count sarcastic coments. laugh


In the words of the senior NCO instructor at cadet battalion:
“If you ain’t cheating you ain’t trying. And if you got caught you didn’t try hard enough!”
Joined: Oct 2020
S
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
S
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by JandK
Where's the cut off point?

Should they make the game for ten? If you only want to play six, you don't have to play all ten.

Maybe they should make the game for twenty?

Thirty?
Wow, quite the strawman you've constructed there.

Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
Originally Posted by JandK
Where's the cut off point?

Should they make the game for ten? If you only want to play six, you don't have to play all ten.

Maybe they should make the game for twenty?

Thirty?

Could you give me a couple of examples of people asking for more than 6 members in a party?

Also, I wonder if you could enlighten us as to why most people seem to mention 6 as the number they like. Do you suppose it's just a random number that people selected?

Joined: Oct 2021
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2021
Originally Posted by Staden
Wow, quite the strawman you've constructed there.

What strawman are you talking about? I'm not sure we agree on the definition of that word.

It's a legitimate question. Where is the cut off? People keep using this argument to shut down folks who prefer parties of four. At what point does that argument no longer apply?

Originally Posted by Boblawblah
Could you give me a couple of examples of people asking for more than 6 members in a party?

I just did. So I'm an example. I'd like to run thirty characters through the game so I can play a small mercenary company who got picked up by the mind flayers. Or maybe a group of missionaries. I haven't decided yet.

Originally Posted by Boblawblah
Also, I wonder if you could enlighten us as to why most people seem to mention 6 as the number they like. Do you suppose it's just a random number that people selected?

I suspect *most* people want four, which is why four is what's provided.

Those who aren't satisfied with four are the ones you're talking about. Even though plenty of them are saying five instead of six.

Anyway. You ask why they keep mentioning six? I can't read minds, of course, but my guess is that it initially got mentioned because previous games had parties of six and some folks around here have a sort of boomer nostalgia thing going on, where they're married to years gone by.

Others probably latched on when they heard six and used the number themselves. If the number had been seven or eight, they probably would've been saying seven or eight.

Joined: Dec 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Dec 2020
edit: off topic/ no point

Last edited by Boblawblah; 03/08/22 11:16 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by The Composer
The main reason I prefer 4, is the fact that I would prefer to play as many characters as I would in tabletop: One.

I doubt many would agree with me, but I'd actually prefer a cRPG with one controllable protagonist per player (multiplayer) and rest being fully AI controlled NPCs. I don't play four characters at the same in D&D, let alone six. So realistically I'm indifferent past that initial preference 😂 It'd actually also increase my interest in companions as companions, because anything I personally control, I consider to be *my* character, not a companion. So by having control over multiple characters, it actually lowers the value I put in them as companions.

I'm weird.

I don't think you're weird. If anything the trajectory of D&D and Fantasy RPGs seems to have moved pretty clearly in that direction going on 2 decades now, with only a couple brief and clearly nostalgia driven titles going for the full party control vibe.

For my part, the defining characteristic of Baldur's Gate was the idea that the player was running an entire party, and not just their own character. The impression I always had was that this experience was not at all like the Table Top, or perhaps it was, sort of, but where the player is more of a pseudo DM/PC hybrid, as opposed to just a normal pnp PC. This worked in part, and especially as the game got going, because the campaign was about the rebirth of a dead god, and so a godmode of this kind was sort of fitting. Also I think BG3 has the perfect set up to rationalize something similar.

The idea being that we're a actuallly a party of Illithid mind Worms in this game, and not really the PCs they're inhabiting, which are just like our hosts. So Tav is a worm. Lae'zel is a worm. Shadowheart is a worm... etc. We're all worms! A party of tadpoles, with a connected awareness, shared sense of collective experience, and POV. It actually works quite well I think, if they'd lean in. It's not that Tav was infected by the worm, but rather that Tav is the worm. I think they could run with that.

There are many reasons I want a party of 6, all covered in the mega thread many times. Not 4 or 5, or 2 or 3, or 10 or 20, or 1, but 6! I think it's unfair to characterize this as slippery slope situation, or a 'don't give an inch, or they'll take a mile!' sort of deal, as suggested in some counter arguments. This is clearly a popular or at least oft repeated request, compared to many others floating around. Though I'm sure it will be merged again like the others, there's a reason this thread re-materializes every couple months. Just to reiterate, I want 6 in the base game, and I want it work smoothly, not as a mod that potentially breaks other things along the way.

Last edited by Black_Elk; 04/08/22 01:32 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Boomer nostalgia LoL more like Xer Nostalgia (all 6 of us)… the good ol days when pixels ment something heh heh heh!

Page 5 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5