Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Are the EA companions the only companions?

Considering how WotC handles 5e alignment, I wouldn't be so sure if this is a good argument.
After all, the alignment is quite generic, and sometimes it can be quite hard to match certain characters.
Of course, I dont exclude that the character may be evil, but there is still practically nothing in the game that would indicate that,
unless we take into account that Shadowheart is such a brilliant mastermind and plays 4d chess with us.
Rather, I will not continue it because I would have to fall into the category of strong story spoilers and probably a piece of datamining.

Wasn't one of the main things about 5e is that they removed alignment?

Not Quite, Alignment still exists but it isn't as mechanically significant. The list of mechanics and abilities that care about alignment is fairly short, and the list of creatures that care is shorter.

Ah ok, makes sense. my days were in 3.5, I have read a lot about 5e, but never really got into it. Even today if I jump in a party here and there, usually it is 3.5.

Personally, I am betting that it will be completely removed in 6e.
It seems to me that WotC has recently set itself the goal of completely marginalizing alignment in order to be able to remove it without problems (at least for players).
I doubt they would otherwise forbid Larian to add an alignment-based system.
You can argue whether it is a good or bad decision, although personally I have never been a big fan of this mechanics

I'm going to point out that Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous literally has a succubus companion that's considered chaotic neutral, when by the strictest of standards she'd be chaotic evil in a system that places huge emphasis on alignments. Though her major thing is that she's trying to fight her demonic nature and see life like a mortal does, which is apparently a huge deal in that universe.

Though the Pathfinder cRPG's interpretation of alignments from a writing standpoint have actually been pretty sketchy at best too, spawning debates like 'is Nok-Nok actually chaotic evil, or is he only chaotic evil because he's a goblin?'. Because Nok-Nok legit doesn't do or even suggest ANYTHING that would be considered even remotely evil at any point in Kingmaker (the closest thing he does is suggesting that the chieftain of Amiri's tribe is asking to get stabbed, because said chieftain and much of the of the rest of the tribe has a history of being misogynist towards her), when the other Chaotic Evil companion Regongar plays the alignment completely straight. A good chunk of the Kingmaker community sees Nok-Nok as much closer to chaotic neutral or even chaotic good with his character arc.

I think the datamined werewolf companion might be a case of their lycanthropy being a recent development, and their arc might involve either finding a cure for them (by any means necessary, both good or evil) or encouraging them to embrace it, meaning they don't have to start out as an evil companion just because they have werewolf traits. Alignment shifts don't happen overnight. The potential for something like this makes them more intriguing than the good amount of the current cast in my mind, and it's not because they're also a Bard. :P

I just hope the werewolf isn't a halfling. Maybe my imagination is limited, but I am not able to take the halfling-werewolf seriously.

I would think a regular werewolf would also straight up eat a halfling, but weirder things have happened.

I think my bigger (but relatively mild) concern is exactly how the lycanthropy stuff is supposed to work out without a day or night cycle. Do they just transform at will? Considering how Astarion is handled, it's probably going to be tadpole powers again.

If their character arc actually does involve coming to terms with their lycanthropy, this could be a layer of complexity for them, having to juggle whether they want to use those powers AND the tadpole at the same time.

If they are "good" then likely the lycanthropy will be uncontrollable for them, so it is possible that the tadpole tames the beast and leaves her in control, similar to how the tadpole changes the rules for Astarion. However, normally, for a werewolf to be fully in control, unless they are a Shifter or certain Barbarian subclass, they would have to be evil and have merged with the werewolf in personality.

But this isn't about mechanics. It's about lore. It's about story.

I don't really care that much about mechanics anyway. I've already stated how I very much dislike D&D mechanics and consider much of it to be broken or silly. WotC removing alignment from mechanics is just another example of D&D mechanics sucking.

What does matter to me, and matter greatly, is story and lore. That's pretty much the entire reason why I play cRPGs. And as a very longtime fan of Forgotten Realms lore, the consistency of that lore in BG3 matters to me. And lets also remember that Larian has repeatedly said they respect existing D&D and FR lore in making this game.

I think that's an important distinction. They're removing alignment from MECHANICS, meaning a player isn't locked out of doing something in solely due to it going against their alignment (which i think most people agree, is annoying). It does not mean that suddenly everyone in the D&D universe is a morally grey person with dark secrets and possible goodness in them. There are still genuinely bad people and genuinely good people and a lot in the middle.

For me; Gale, Lae'zel, Shadowheart, I love. I like lae'zel's toughness, I see her more as a hardened warrior than just evil to be evil. And she atleast contributes something. She's entertaining for me.

ok but needs more; Wyll

dislike; Astarion, guy has two modes; over the top, and over the top. On top of his story being the least interesting out of them all, he also actively contributes almost nothing to the team compared to everyone else other than again being over the top just for the sake of it, as if he was just created to be specifically that. I feel everyone so far in EA contributes something of worth or atleast provides sound advice, Lae does, shadow does, Gale does. Astarion just manages to exist to provide commentary, rather than actually being a valid member of the group. Doesn't help he disaproves of everything, I don't even play a goody too shoes. Astarion is just evil to the core zero room for flexibility. I laugh at some of the art for him making him out to be pure, yeah...... lmao

But yeah I welcome more companions.

I just see Lae'zel as a product of her society, and hopefully we can have her divert from her path down the line in the story. She's basically a zealot who believes in everything her Queen has said. And even in EA her own people try to kill her due to the tadpole, which might make her change her views on the "truth"

When every companion is someone that we are supposed to "redeem" down the line, then they all become silly cliches.

I'm not interested in redeeming anyone. What they present of themselves to me at the beginning is what I will take of them, and I will judge them and deal with them on that basis only. So Lae'zal, for example, will be lucky if I choose to leave her alive. And as such, for me, I don't currently have a full party to play with.

At the end of Act 1, are we stuck with the four companions we choose for the rest of the game like in Divinity Original Sin 2, or can we still swap out party members as the game progresses, enabling us access to all their content and stories?

Yes. According to their discord.

According to their FAQ too, but it is something I hate.

Same^^ Strange choice, never understood it.

She's not, atleast not in the way Astarion is. She was raised as a hardened warrior who follows orders. But she doesn't take pleasure in senseless murder or abuse in the way that Astarion does.

I have yet to read someone who doesn't.
It seems a bad idea in general for a game with an extensive cast, but it's especially awful when you also have a party limited to four characters.