Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Party Size of 4 is too small.

Could be get the ability of having 6 people in our party like BG1 & BG2?

With 4, you are really limited.

1. Fighter type
1. Healer type
1. Sneaky type
1. Mage type

having 6 for a party would like you create more interesting combos of classes.

i think 5 is the magic number

This!
I would also like customization over the character. To fill holes in the party appropriately

yea

I've never understood limiting party size to 4, even 5 feels really restrictive in most games. Maybe it has something to do with consoles and 4-player coop.

I think it also has something to do with balance.

IF you add more toons then you need more enemies.
Enemies in this game seem to target the weakest, most vulnerable player in range.
If you add too many more enemies then every turn they would be picking off your squishy characters.

For this reason, four is a good minimum, but six better facilitates using classes that sort of fall between those four types while having their own flavor. For example, a ranger is cool class, but is kind of weak in filling any one of those four roles.

4 is fine

I really don't agree with the "you have to have these roles" viewpoint. If by fighter type you mean tanky, you can go without a tank through several methods (disengaging, kiting, CC and buff/debuffs). If you mean high damage melee combatant, there are more builds that can do this than can not. You don't need a dedicated stealth expert, and anyone with proficiency can pass required skill checks. A healer is nice to have, but you can make do without. Even with a cleric, I'm more likely to use their slots for buffs and utility, which several classes can do. Besides, a good number of classes can be built to be self-sufficient in the health department. A caster is definitely needed for specific problem solving scenarios, although I think you could get away with using scrolls or cheesing. They'd be more pertinent to the exploration aspect of the game, in which case I would be very surprised if Larian didn't provide numerous workarounds. On top of that, several classes can fit several of those roles anyway, so if you do gravitate to that layout you have several options on how to go about it.

That said, I also like variety and wouldn't be opposed to 6 characters. I have to agree that there far fewer hoops to jump through if you want to mix up your party composition when you have 6. 4 is definitely restrictive on your options for a party. It just isn't because you need to follow the fighter-mage-cleric-thief layout.

I agree 4 is too small, 6 is the right number with the ability to create them all.

DnD 5e is balanced around 4 PCs.

You do not *need* every "role" of PC.

Just get a group of 4 clerics and play as the A-men.

tired of this argument. this is a video game not dnd and there is already its own balance. in addition, there will be difficulty levels so balance need to be adjusted to them all.

so 5-6 party is a must

We currently have only 4 avaible spots and there will be 5 npc characters that are allowed to join your party. I don't see any posibility to make multiclass character so I hope it will be. And what if I want play as a thief or mage but I don't want to have Lae'zel in my party, or I want play fighter and don't want to have Astarion and I want to have my party balanced. There is possiblity to make a second "mercenary character" and add it to party in late game?

This is a complete non-argument.
D&D sessions often aren't even a hundreds-of-hours-long epic with a thousand characters involved.
And you pick your companions before even starting, anyway. So the variety of party composition doesn't rely on picking between a bunch of premade options.

I don't know about you but when I play D&D it's usually balanced around how many players are in the group rather than a predetermined number