Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
There is a "gold standard", the classic 4-person RPG party model. It was made by games such as Dragon Age and Original Sin, even in Neverwinter Nights they usually had a party with 4 companions (to get more you needed a special skill if I'm not mistaken)

I personally like 4 characters: the main character and three companions. But there are those who want to change this standard and set up an experiment on the players.

How about 3 party member? This will make our group more united, speed up the battles, and so on. Who has any thoughts on this? The player will not have the feeling that he is leading a small army. How it is done in Mass Effect!

[Linked Image]

Joined: Mar 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Are you trolling us? I'm for it. Go three! Like Harry Ron Hermione, gimli Aragon legolas, and the Powerpuff girls!

Oh yeah go Kotor

Last edited by Abits; 09/11/20 12:37 PM.

Larian's Biggest Oversight, what to do about it, and My personal review of BG3 EA
"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems."
Joined: Oct 2020
E
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
E
Joined: Oct 2020
dnd is balanced around a party of 6 , because the game have 6 stats and its impossible to cover all the rolls with only 4 party members.


[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Evil_it_Self
dnd is balanced around a party of 6 , because the game have 6 stats and its impossible to cover all the rolls with only 4 party members.


You can do two to the maximum, in the character creation editor. For a warrior - Strength and Endurance (although Laezel has them already high). To the Wizard - Intellect and Charisma. So this task can be solved with the help of three characters. Oh, and there is also an artifact in the game that makes a warrior's intelligence equal to 18

Joined: Mar 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Just wanted to add the awesome animaniacs. Indispensable proof that three is best.

On a more serious note - the balance argument is kinda bs. Nwn had 2 party members as far as I remember and I don't see many people complaining about it. On the other hand it's nwn so...


Larian's Biggest Oversight, what to do about it, and My personal review of BG3 EA
"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems."
Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
Why stop at 3? Black Friday is coming up, lets go for 1! Like the Witcher!!!!

Then you don't need to worry about shitty companions because you wont have any!


Verily it is written that the Omnissiah grants his blessing to those who come well-equipped with explosives. -Aphorisms 96.9
Joined: Oct 2020
Tuv Offline
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2020
you can always play with fewer characters if you want to unite more, speed up combat more and so on more. Maybe 2 teams of 3 united in one?

I generally like the idea though of argueing which number is the one true number

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuv
you can always play with fewer characters if you want to unite more, speed up combat more and so on more. Maybe 2 teams of 3 united in one?

I generally like the idea though of argueing which number is the one true number

I also have such an idea to remove the limit on the number of companions. It's realistic! The main character and his twelve friends. Then everyone will be happy.

Joined: Nov 2020
Banned
Offline
Banned
Joined: Nov 2020
You only need ONE group member.
Me - the f°cking god of everything, lol.

-
Or maybe two with extrem buffs like in DoS2.
Why not?

But five members would be very nice.

Joined: Mar 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
Me and scratch against the hordes of hell. That would be epic


Larian's Biggest Oversight, what to do about it, and My personal review of BG3 EA
"74.85% of you stood with the Tieflings, and 25.15% of you sided with Minthara. Good outweighs evil, it seems."
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Not sure if it's a troll or not, but assuming it is... It would be so easier for them to read and hear players if this forum wasn't drowned in this kind of topic

Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jul 2014
Location: Italy
I wish I could slap you out of existence.

Last edited by Tuco; 09/11/20 02:48 PM.

Party control in Baldur's Gate 3 is a complete mess that begs to be addressed. SAY NO TO THE TOILET CHAIN
Joined: Sep 2015
N
old hand
Offline
old hand
N
Joined: Sep 2015
You can do it yourself. They don't need to change anything.

Last edited by Nyanko; 09/11/20 03:12 PM.
Joined: Mar 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Mar 2020
2/10 must troll harder.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
OP Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Tuco
I wish I could slap you out of existence.

I didn't say that the third character in the group should be the cleric of Loviavar from the goblin camp, why are you angry

Joined: Oct 2020
T
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
T
Joined: Oct 2020
There are peeps that did EA with 1....so it can be done.

Joined: Sep 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Thrandarian
There are peeps that did EA with 1....so it can be done.

Trust is a foolish thing. I like my party of one. smile

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Agree, this must be trolling... Grant it, I think that at some point, varying the number of party members would be awesome, but there would need to be extra balancing involved. Such as increasing the number of monsters, or buffing them if you have over 4 party members. Then debuffing or decreasing the number of enemies if less than 4. DoS2 had 2 mods for this to balance the difficulty.

And just for the record, the 4 person party concept started with Final Fantasy, way back in 1987. :P

Joined: Oct 2020
L
stranger
Offline
stranger
L
Joined: Oct 2020
I like one better.

Most game have one, it really gives you the importance of teamwork as an emphasis. It also makes you so much more important.

You don't need to micromanage because it requires too much thinking, you just do your own thing. A single player game, since most of us have no friends right?
Isn't that why we want low numbers for party members.

Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Vortex138
Agree, this must be trolling... Grant it, I think that at some point, varying the number of party members would be awesome, but there would need to be extra balancing involved. Such as increasing the number of monsters, or buffing them if you have over 4 party members. Then debuffing or decreasing the number of enemies if less than 4. DoS2 had 2 mods for this to balance the difficulty.

And just for the record, the 4 person party concept started with Final Fantasy, way back in 1987. :P

Minimal encounter balancing is necessary. Just divide encounter exp between characters who are actually present.
-Party of 2? The exp is only split two ways, meaning that each character levels up faster
-Part of 6? The exp is split 6 ways, meaning that each character levels up much more slowly.
The first 3-4 fights would be much easier/harder with a party of 6/2, but it would very soon auto-correct itself, at least to some degree. No need for any specific "lone wolf" mode.

To prevent companions left-at-camp from being underleveled to the point of uselessness, maybe auto-level them up to stay no more than 2 levels below the PC.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

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