Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Opinions on amount of companions

The last thing I read on companions was bg3 would have more then dos2 (7?) And less then bg2 (ee had 21?)

Larian confirmed 8 ?
But could be more, I'm just wondering where the room for good npc are

1 wyll
2 shadow
3 lazel
4 gale
5 astarion
6 kalach - barb?
7 helia - wearform druid?
8 minsc - ranger?

Some suprise npcs/companions I'd like to see
Jaheera, Viconia and Aerie.
A lich version of Edwin

I'd would have liked a gruff older battle worn paladin trope in my party

I know Larian said we will be getting good companions later, I wonder if minsc helia and kalach will be all we get?

Larian has not confirmed the amount of companions.

I think the safe bet is to say that we will be getting 8 companions given what we know. If you are an optimist I think you could hope for 12 - one for each class and we have just seen nothing on four of them.

It also would not shock me if Larian eventually announces that there will be 'origin companions' and also 'sidekicks' like in PoE2. Sidekicks being party members you can play with - but that do not have the depth or major story of the origin companions. I think good examples of characters who could become 'sidekicks' are Halsin, Minthara and Gandrel.

Hopefully so!!! 🐻🐻🐻

I'm sort of leaning towards there being 9 total - As much as present day D&D is shunning alignment as an overt or visible element of player characters specifically, in Larian's original comments they mentioned that we were getting the 'Non-Good' companions first.... and we have:

CE (Astarion)
NE (Shadow - though there's odds of this flipping with her memory)
LE (Lae'zel)
CN (Wyll)
TN (Gale)

So, we may expect to see:

NG (Minsc, traditionally)
CG (Helia maybe, we know nothing about her character yet, but it's *unlikely* to be Lawfully aligned)
LN (Karlach can be read this way, potentially - years fighting in the bloodwar under devil hierarchy, which we hear of, and a commitment to taking care of her own duty-of-danger before joining you, which she voices)
LG (If we're getting one rep for each, we should have one more, as yet unknown)

Yeah, as far as we know, Minsc, Helia, and Karlach will be the 'good' companions (although the lot we have already includes Wyll and Gale, who already lean in that direction) So you will have a total eight companion options in BG III, or seven if you play an origin.

Personally, I'd prefer more. While it's true that other rpgs make do with less, BGIII seems to encourage a playstyle that results in a high turnover of party members right now, what with the way you can lose party members left, right and center if you play your cards wrong (anger gale, let Lae'zel go off alone to the Githyanki, side with the goblins, let the hunter take Asterion, etc) Plus the planned party member 'funnel' we know about at the end of act I where we get stuck with whatever party comp we have.

Plus, there's no redundancy in regards to certain iconic classes/roles. If you lose Asterion, that's it-no more rogues. Similarly, there's no understudy for Gale, so if you lose him, there's no more wizards, or even a sorcerer, to fill the role of arcane spallcaster. And no cleric alternative for Shadowheart.

There's a reduced party size in BG III over the other BG games too, so the choice of party comp feels very constrained. If you go to fill the archetypical roles first (bruiser, arcane caster, divine caster, sneaky one) your composition will end up looking pretty similar afaik. Maybe you'll switch out Lae'zel/Minsc/Karlach, but with four slots, your party will end up looking very similar, I think.

And in the department of personal taste, I don't particularly like how so many of the companions are already written almost like superheroes. Gale is an archwizard and ex chosen (and lover?) of Mystra, Karlach is Zariel's champion, who went toe-to-toe with demon lords, Wyll's is persona is almost *literally* a superhero. Everyone feels like a protagonist, because everyone was written as one, and I'm not super crazy about that. I'd like some more grounded party members.

Its also very human-heavy in terms of party members right now. Gale + Minsc + Wyll makes three out of eight, almost half. Several races are completely unrepresented, which is sad. Notably, we have no Dwarf party members, no drow, no gnome, no half-orc or dragonborn. Dwarf being absent among options I think is particularly surprising.

So to conclude, I do think we need more companions. Some non-origin ones preferably. I'd personally support another rogue-type along with a divine caster and another arcane caster (possibly a sorcerer) as options. And preferably *not* human. Several npcs we have met would make good candidates, like Barcus or Minthara, but IDK...Larian seems pretty married to the idea of the Origins companions.

I think it is on purpose. All companions seem to be quite powerful but lost the thing that made them like this. If I had to bet, I think it will play an important role in later acts.

I would like a couple more companions, especially since as Leucrotta pointedout, we don't have a lot of great alternatives if we lose various companions. Though I have found Shadowheart to make a solid alternative for Astarion as a rogue.

I also wish there were more races represented. A drow would fit really nicely here, maybe one who ran afoul of the cult and was wrapped up in things that way. And yes, a dwarf companion would be welcome.

Current race rep: 2.5 humans, 1.5 Elves, 1 gith. It's pretty abominable, really.... and to think they had the gall to clap back and call players the 'boring' ones.

We know we have Minsc to add to that...
But we also have Karlach, who is a Tiefling.
We do know that Helia is a halfling - I'll lay you 10 to 1 that she's not available as a romance partner, because I'm bitter and cynical.

I'm half expecting that we will get a dwarf, and it will be a paladin, LG, and will punch every associated stereotypical character trope with successive divine smites.

That would make the diversity balance look a little better, certainly... but the overall roster is just so thin that it's crippling their ability to offer a proper set of diverse options for players to chose from

As long as we get some non-Origins companions and preferably ones with a more grounded backstory, I might give the game another chance out of curiosity. It would be a shame however if non-Origins companions are given the short straw with their back stories though (I always enjoyed the companion quests in previous BG games, something which seems lacking in BG3 as all companion stories revolve around the tadpole).

A Dwarf rogue might have made for a refreshing change from the habitual but we already have a rogue with that annoying twat Astarion. I truly hope that Helia isn't a because it just feels so cheesy and contrived alongside having a vampire companion already.

What are the odds if there is a Dwarf companion that he claims he used to be tall but the tadpole made him short?

I'd really LOVE to have companions that are not Origin character.
I'd also like to have people in my party that have other goal than "cure / control" the tadpole... This could lead to very interresting side quests and to be honnest there's not a lot of interresting side quests yet in my opinion.

Many companions quests in the old games were epic or lead to epic adventures / dungeons.
Companions doesn't necessarily have to be involved in the main story or to be playable characters (and all that this implies) to ensure that players have an enjoyable experience.

yeah I miss this a lot too

Finding the temple district in bg2, taking Anomen to his dads house, dealing with his family problems, potentially changing if he becomes a paladin or not.

Keldorn, wife problems was grounding and interesting gave him an understandable backstory, the cost of Duty on the Lawful good
you can help him realise he still loves his wife, help her realise she still loves him and let him retire, you can also convince him to hang the guy she is seeing and imprison his wife leaving his kids with out a family.

some small quests from bg2 that didn't feel huge and epic or anything, but still had a massive impact on me and left me thinking about them years later.

I would love some more grounded classical companions, that follows your quest because there is an evil to be vanquished or power to be gained/treasures to be looted etc.. I hate that everybody is a protagonist. Just a couple of regular low level adventurers seeking adventure.

So, there being mercs in the game? Rumor or confirmed? If so are they to fill in for umm dead origin characters . Would rather have NPCs that have a non origin background. Heck I would be happy if “Tav” is an actual NPC that is a blank slate class/race wise with a backstory based on what you decide IF your main character is one of the other Origin characters.

Still would rather for Halsin, etc to fill the non origin ranks. Some of the existing Origin characters get under my skin but they play a vital role. My Paladin would never work with a vampire so there goes my Rogue. My Paladin would never work with a demon bound Warlock, so there goes another. My Paladin would never even give the time of day to a priestess of Shar… Y’all get my point. Lazael, Wyll, are pushing it LoL. So if push comes to shove Wyll is the only Origin char my Paladin could overall tolerate. Let’s hope someone can find traps…

I think that having some Deadfire style 'sidekicks' would work great for BG3. Even if they've got less meat to them, you can still have some personality and interaction. It would be a decent compromise on top of the origin companions.

As for Darkwood, I think you should be a bit open-minded with regards to Wyll. He had good intentions and wants to get out of the deal. Your paladin could look at it as trying to save the soul of a repentant man who genuinely wants to be a good person. Also you forgot about Gale. He was foolhardy, but I don't think he's done anything really evil.

I’ve been hearing talk from dataminers that Helia’s data actually hasn’t been updated in about a whole year, compared to the other datamined companions being in a near complete state. She also never got an MTG card while everyone else did. Her data has supposedly been scrubbed recently too.

Prepare for the possibility that she may have been scrapped.

I really hope not ...

Maybe im naive, or greedy ... but i still hope for at least one companion per class.
I dont really wish to be dependent on custom party, or mercenaries to do some wild combinations.

I'll admit, nothing about what little we know about Helia particularly excites me...but not every companion should be written to appeal to everyone. We should have a variety-big part of the reason why I think we need more companions. Seven would not be great IMO. Her not having a card at all did raise an eyebrow from me.

And yeah, one per class would be ideal.

I'm hoping in patch 9 Pfh they will confirm how many companions we get


just looked it up - There are 25 companions in Baldur's Gate and 17 companions in BG2.

and for me lots of different Companion interactions and finding all the hidden npcs, and seeing how they interact with each other, getting all the hidden dialogs, and arguments, romances, was one of the reasons I Played threw the old games so many times

I have fears we will end up with 7 now, but I want to hope for more, I really want to hope.

We hear lots of <less but better quality>...No way. Its just not fun to have to pick from extremely low list of class combination...whats more only 4 slots! I guess thats a lot for you if CRPG= the Witcher.
In BG2 you could have a human Sorcerer, gnome wizard, drow cleric, elf fighter/druid, tiefling bard/thief, dwarf berserker in the same party. Oh and cherry on top, everyone is a companion and interact with each other.

Dunno but even for the 18 BG2's <shallow> companions , like it or hate it everyone who played seems to clearly remember them !
The movie like cinematic qualities of BG3 is also to its detriment in terms of class flexibility, party composition, and companion banter/dialogue interaction.

So I am in the camp: cut the ugly cinematic fat, add more companions & classes. Because realistically having both is currently impossible apparently.

"Less but better quality" is just cognitive dissonance to convince themselves and their audience that they'll be blown over by the cinematics but if you scratch the surface you have less dialogue options, less companions, less choice fundamentally. This is the outcome of sacrificing oneself on the altar of making BG3 fully cinematic, which is something which clearly appeals to a lot of people. Personally I feel it is style over substance. The cinematics would have been fine for important interactions alone.