Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Oct 2020
V
Vilthus Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Hello!

I have been really enjoying the game that I have played so far! And I am super excited to see where all it goes. I have one suggestion I would like to make. (If other people have addressed it, forgive me). So this is my official suggestion! I think that we shouldn't be locked to a single party after act 1. I would love to be able to continue to swap party members around and interact with them for the entire campaign. Below are a few points for why I have listed.

1) Forced Replaying. 5 companions are already in EA, and I know that more are going to be added. I don't know the numbers, but my personal guess is somewhere between 8 & 12 total. Thus, if I wanted to experience the story & character development of each companion, I would need to replay the game 3+ times (assuming that I play a custom character each time). While I'm not against replaying a game, unfortunately I am an adult, and don't have the time to replay this game as much as I might like to. I would like to be able to have a full experience of the characters, and their stories through the game, without having to replay the game multiple times. Sure, I might replay it more than once, but either way, a locked party is more like locking a good chunk of the game away.

2) Party Composition. I think an example best explains this point. E.g. I really want my custom character to be a wizard. However, I really like Gale. After act 1, I would have to make a choice. Either have two wizards in my party, or get rid of Gale. I feel like this is a forced choice that doesn't add much to the actual game, when instead you could be allowed to have a party comp you enjoy playing, while still able to interact with the characters you want.

3) Locked Parties sucks some of the fun away. I would like the full enjoyment of the game when I first truly get to playing it once it releases. However, if I am put in a situation where I have 8 companions and maybe I really like 4 or 5 of them, either way I have to get rid of two companions I really like just because my party doesn't fit it. Instead, I would love to see each companion throughout the story of the game. Party interactions, and companion interactions are probably one of my favorite things about RPGs, and restricting it after Act 1 would really diminish the enjoyment of it. Plus, there are situations where I might really dislike a character, but I really want to see their story, and progression. I may not want them in my party all the time, but I want them in my camp.

4) Flexibility & playing with party comps. I like to shake up my party occasionally. It helps when I feel like I hit a rut, or things get stagnant. So, one thing I sometimes like to do with change my party comp. It shakes things up, it stimulates my mind, it is something I like to do. I like to play around with builds, and party composition ideas. However, if the party is locked, then I am heavily restricted with this, except through hirelings. But hirelings are largely flavorless companions. I wouldn't want to give up a flavorful companion and their interactions, for a flavorless hireling. I also like to adapt to circumstances. I like to bring companions who I think might have some interesting interactions with characters. Like bringing the vampire when dealing with vampires, for example. However, if I am locked out, then for 2 acts I am stuck with my party and lose out on so much cool story and interactions. If I want to try a different party comp out, a companion leaves, dies, or something else, I either can't cause I have no one to swap with, or I have to use a hireling, which is lacking in personality and flavor.

5) Personal preference. Personally, companions are my favorite part about the role-playing aspect of roleplaying games. I like the party dynamics, interactions. I like characters getting upset with my decisions or approving of them. I already got some eye rolls from Shadowheart, and Lae'zel already shared her disapproval of my actions. It made me roll my eyes in turn, and I liked it. Just as I liked my character gelling with Asterion, or Wyll. I would like to experience it fully, rather than partially. I would like to see the dynamics of all the companions through the game, and not just a select 3, just because they might work better for my party comp.

6) DOS2. I will be up front, I didn't like this design decision in DOS2. However, It was more forgivable in that game, as you had only 6 options (not counting DLC). While it did hurt me to cut 3 of the companions, because I REALLY wanted to see all of their perspectives, and haven't gotten around to playing it again yet, I dealt with it. Because it was what it was. But here, the game is in Early Access, and you have requested feedback, so now here is mine. Please allow those of us that want all the companions to remain in our party, that wish to, to keep them in our camp, and to be able to swap companions out after Act 1. I don't think a locked party adds to the experience, but takes away from it. A companion dying, might add to it. Not being allowed to have more than 3 companions in your camp (not counting followers) after Act 1, just because you have to "commit," doesn't add to it. Here, we already have 5, and I am already torn as I consider the options. Adding more companions, that I have to get rid of for 2/3 of the game, leaves a sour taste in my mouth. (Having said that, I did really enjoy DOS2. I just didn't like that design choice).
Edit: In DOS2, there was no class system. You could adapt any companion to be any role, and any build. Such is not the case in BG3.

Conclusion, I hope it doesn't come across as me ranting or anything. And hopefully I got my point across. I just wanted to share my opinions, and suggestions on this topic. I am also greatly interested in hearing your (Larian's) reason for the limitation post act 1. Perhaps I can get on board with your reasoning? Either way, I intend to play the game at launch, and to be along for the ride of EA.

All the love, and helpful songs of a hopeful Baldur's Gate 3 bard,
Vilthus

Last edited by Vilthus; 15/10/20 02:45 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
I wholeheartedly agree. Keeping your companions in your camp should at very least be an option.


Doth thou likest jelly within thy doughnut?

Nay, but prithee with sprinkles 'pon it instead, and frosting of white.
Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
They would have to deviate too much from the D:OS structure they are used to, lol. No one cared because there was no TRUE class system in D:OS and their backgrounds didn't have anything to do with their class/skills/abilities/attributes/quest and you could respec anyone on the fly. Almost no one played D:OS for the Story. It wouldn't have made a difference on that game, over here could be a different story if they tweak a lot of the current mechanics since they have the camp feature like in Dragon's Age.

Last edited by JDCrenton; 15/10/20 01:37 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
agreed. DO NOT lock the party Larian, this is going to piss a LOT of people off. going back to your base and talking with your buddies, doing companion quests for companions you might not normally take etc, this was part of the FUN of baldur's gate.

Joined: Oct 2020
V
Vilthus Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by JDCrenton
No one cared because there was no TRUE class system in D:OS and their backgrounds didn't have anything to do with their class/skills/abilities/attributes/quest and you could respec anyone on the fly.

I meant to add this point, but forgot. Thank you! I will add it in an edit. I also agree, this is a much more story heavy game than DOS2 is. I also do love the camp feature, and it seems like such a waste, to limit camps to a select 3, and random followers, when we could easily have the whole cast.

Joined: Jul 2017
Location: USA
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Jul 2017
Location: USA
Don't think it's changing unfortunately.

They had a chance already when they were first designing this game and they had this in OS2. They seem to want to stick to a crappy (imo) design decision.

Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Ah yes do this and give more fodder for the This Ain't BG crowds mudslinging.

In all honesty (not beat the game or know why the lock happens. Don't want to know.) If it is just a mechanic to force you into a party choice then don't lock. But and it's a big butt, really big butt, if it is that it's locking out good/evil companions per the players choice. Them having followed a particular path showing their Scummy McScumbug, or Good Goldy two shoes, then by all means lock the party, it's a consequence of the choices you as the player made. Indeed even if it is based purely on the choices you as the player make then lock it. If you piss off Shadowheart and she leaves, or Le'eazel, or Gale or Whirly whoo hooo, who ever then keep the lock.

Sum it up. Don't put mechanics in any rpg game that doesn't have a purpose other then the fact you can. The whole we can do this because naaa naaa booo booo we're the devs, and you can't stop me isn't an arguement. Yet if especially with this one it makes sense, based on players actions then please put it in there.

ramble: Adding things in games that really add something like 'Us" then later removing them simply disappoints people. Have a reason for things, let players find out about them. Yes I am obsessed with Us, I enjoyed his quirky voice. It was light hearted, and humorous imo, plus he added a bit of lore to the game. Plus he was so squiiiiishy, and tentacly. Other games have 'Chosen' animal pets, blah blah blah, Ya'll had a baby intellect devourer!! that was crying for his mommy, and mommy came and you took him away from her!!!

sum it up. Add or keep mechanics that make sense. Keep Us reunite us!!

Joined: Oct 2020
C
stranger
Offline
stranger
C
Joined: Oct 2020
I could have sworn that in the "From Hell" event Swen said that if you do the right things, you'd be able to get Us as a camp follower. Maybe they just haven't finished that implementation, or intentionally left it out of EA?
Or maybe my memory is going or they changed their minds...

Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
Originally Posted by Crikk
I could have sworn that in the "From Hell" event Swen said that if you do the right things, you'd be able to get Us as a camp follower. Maybe they just haven't finished that implementation, or intentionally left it out of EA?
Or maybe my memory is going or they changed their minds...

.not sure cause I haven't beaten the game, been trying out all sorts of things.

Joined: Oct 2020
A
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
A
Joined: Oct 2020
Have they said they will lock the party? I got no real indication or feeling that it was the case when I finished the EA. But it does seem like you can't have all the characters with you if you make certain choices.
Pretty sure Wyll will not take kindly to you joining the Goblins, and Astarion get's very crabby if you get angry at him for being a vampire.

All in all it doesn't seem to me that the way the game is set up is going to force a locked party, in fact it seems like the opposite. If they force the party, they cannot have party members leave the party, or else you are stuck with just 3 members.

Joined: Oct 2020
B
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
B
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Crikk
I could have sworn that in the "From Hell" event Swen said that if you do the right things, you'd be able to get Us as a camp follower. Maybe they just haven't finished that implementation, or intentionally left it out of EA?
Or maybe my memory is going or they changed their minds...


I just watched this the other day and he said that they stopped short of making it a companion. It went from interactive object to possible encounter to temporary follower.

Joined: Oct 2020
P
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
P
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
Have they said they will lock the party? I got no real indication or feeling that it was the case when I finished the EA. But it does seem like you can't have all the characters with you if you make certain choices.
Pretty sure Wyll will not take kindly to you joining the Goblins, and Astarion get's very crabby if you get angry at him for being a vampire.

All in all it doesn't seem to me that the way the game is set up is going to force a locked party, in fact it seems like the opposite. If they force the party, they cannot have party members leave the party, or else you are stuck with just 3 members.


Yeah, I was actually pretty sure they wouldnt lock It, since you got so many camp followers already, why not have the companions you are not using when leaving act one follow too, don't know if I missed some conversation on game or Interview, but I got no indication this would happen at all

Joined: Sep 2017
Location: South Africa
E
stranger
Offline
stranger
E
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: South Africa
Originally Posted by pgmoro
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
Have they said they will lock the party? I got no real indication or feeling that it was the case when I finished the EA. But it does seem like you can't have all the characters with you if you make certain choices.
Pretty sure Wyll will not take kindly to you joining the Goblins, and Astarion get's very crabby if you get angry at him for being a vampire.

All in all it doesn't seem to me that the way the game is set up is going to force a locked party, in fact it seems like the opposite. If they force the party, they cannot have party members leave the party, or else you are stuck with just 3 members.


Yeah, I was actually pretty sure they wouldnt lock It, since you got so many camp followers already, why not have the companions you are not using when leaving act one follow too, don't know if I missed some conversation on game or Interview, but I got no indication this would happen at all


Same here, in game I have not experienced anything that indicates that the party is locked, was something said about it interviews or something? It would be a pity, and needs to be made very clear if/when/how it happens to not accidently lock people into a party that they don't consider their main party.

Joined: Oct 2020
V
Vilthus Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Endraca
Originally Posted by pgmoro
Originally Posted by Aurgelmir
Have they said they will lock the party? I got no real indication or feeling that it was the case when I finished the EA. But it does seem like you can't have all the characters with you if you make certain choices.
Pretty sure Wyll will not take kindly to you joining the Goblins, and Astarion get's very crabby if you get angry at him for being a vampire.

All in all it doesn't seem to me that the way the game is set up is going to force a locked party, in fact it seems like the opposite. If they force the party, they cannot have party members leave the party, or else you are stuck with just 3 members.


Yeah, I was actually pretty sure they wouldnt lock It, since you got so many camp followers already, why not have the companions you are not using when leaving act one follow too, don't know if I missed some conversation on game or Interview, but I got no indication this would happen at all


Same here, in game I have not experienced anything that indicates that the party is locked, was something said about it interviews or something? It would be a pity, and needs to be made very clear if/when/how it happens to not accidently lock people into a party that they don't consider their main party.


It was mentioned in Community Update 7 in the q&a portion. Quote below. I am perfectly okay with companions leaving in result of choices. I think that is fine, and pretty cool.
"Will companions be interchangeable during long rest?
Yes, at the start of your adventure your recruited companions will be at camp when not in the adventuring party, and can be swapped in and out at camp. Just like friends in real life! After the first act however you are going to have to commit, also just like in real life."

Edit: To me, the quote seems to imply that after act 1, companions become no longer interchangeable. Which would be a shame. I like companions leaving if they don't like you, but not having your party locked.

Last edited by Vilthus; 15/10/20 01:15 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
F
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
F
Joined: Oct 2020
Hm, "after the 1st act" is not the same as "at the end of the 1st act".

It may mean that sometime during Act 2 we reach a point where cannot save all the companions.

As already pointed out, the end of Act 1 does not imply companions are left behind, the druid specifically says he is coming with you, and he is in the camp.

Joined: Oct 2020
V
Vilthus Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by FrostyFardragon
Hm, "after the 1st act" is not the same as "at the end of the 1st act".

It may mean that sometime during Act 2 we reach a point where cannot save all the companions.

As already pointed out, the end of Act 1 does not imply companions are left behind, the druid specifically says he is coming with you, and he is in the camp.


That could be. To me, it implied you can no longer swap companions out after act 1. I think we definitely need a bit more clarity on this subject. Also, is the druid a companion, or just a follower? Cause there is a difference.

Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
If they are only locking certain (not all but 3) companions based on a choice/choices you make in act1/2, then that is perfectly fine. I agree that we could really use some clarification on this.


Doth thou likest jelly within thy doughnut?

Nay, but prithee with sprinkles 'pon it instead, and frosting of white.
Joined: Oct 2020
stranger
Offline
stranger
Joined: Oct 2020
I support this message.

Joined: Oct 2020
F
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
F
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Vilthus
Originally Posted by FrostyFardragon
Hm, "after the 1st act" is not the same as "at the end of the 1st act".

It may mean that sometime during Act 2 we reach a point where cannot save all the companions.

As already pointed out, the end of Act 1 does not imply companions are left behind, the druid specifically says he is coming with you, and he is in the camp.


That could be. To me, it implied you can no longer swap companions out after act 1. I think we definitely need a bit more clarity on this subject. Also, is the druid a companion, or just a follower? Cause there is a difference.


The druid is a follower, but if he can follow you through to act 2 from camp it implies there is no plot reason why companions who are also in camp cannot follow you the same way. I'm pretty sure "committing" to a companion means a whole lot more than simply having them in your party when you finish the first act.

Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
I actually find the whole concept of comapnions waiting around a camp whilst you swan off rather odd anyway. It already grates in Act 1 when you tell Lae'zel (who is intent in fining a creche) to sit and wait in camp, why would she? She has been ultra bossy and commited since moment 1 and now she just does as told? It's narratively odd. At least the dialogue (or narration) should make it clearer why.

If the narrator made it clear that her thoughts were to begrudgingly accept because she realised alone she doesn't stand a chance, then that's fine, right now, it feels weird that these companions sit around with what they believe to be a ticking time bomb in their heads.

So from that perspective I see no reason for people to hang around, i.e. a form of commitment makes sense, be it based upon how you have "behaved" (i.e. alignment based), or out of a character's need (maybe Gael is clingy or too egotisitcal and it's take me or I leave), whatever, but I think it makes sense that not everyone would just always be there, even if it is just for the purpose of gameplay. At least up until the point in Act1 I have played to, you are not a leader, a hero, messiah character, you are a party and people will follow as long as their needs are met, but if not, they should go.

Not to say you won't cross paths again later on, in fact that to me adds more intruige to the story. How would their lives turn out if we didn't stay together?!
That's not to say I don't only want the party of 4 (or 5/6 should that increase), but if a story reason can be found for a "camp", where stragglers reside, then I am equally fine for some to hang around, I just don't want them all there.

Lastly on the CAMP, I am not that far into Act1 addmitedly, but resting whilst in a dungeon or cave and then resting, brings up the generic outdoor camp, once done I am where I left off, back in said Dungeon. I appreciate the gameplay aspect, but it breaks the immersion for me. in BG1/2 you had to leave certain locations before you rest.
I believe the game would benefit from an immersion aspect if only short rests were permitted in cave areas, for anything longer you have to go back outside (or the camp as a whole has to be moveable), then there is just the question why aren't people "in camp" at your side in a larger party.

So yes, I appreciate wanting spells back etc... but I would like a better way of handling this (short of a magical scroll of teleportation each time :hihi: )

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

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