Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Mega-threads and Guides Party Size Discussion

I personally don't really care if we have a party size of 4 or 6 for strictly combat balancing reasons, even if I would prefer the latter because it'd expand party compositions considerably.

But at the same time, I can understand where the party of 6 crowd comes from if they are arguing from a party interaction/writing standpoint, because larger parties means greater importance on dialogue that makes the whole party feel like they're alive in a way. A party of 4 indirectly diminishes the need for it.

I will also bring up yet again that if we end up losing like half our cast of playable characters largely due to an arbitrary headcount limit at the end of act 1 once more, I don't think people are going to give Larian a pass for that this time. Larian learned the wrong lessons from D:OS2's success if they think that had anything to do with the success of that game, when it was largely successful DESPITE that.

Hope for mod ...
Acording to Swen, that is never going to happen.

The party of six came from pool of radiance

I played Pool of Radiance and Curse of the Azure Bond last century in the 80ies on my Commodore64 with a 1541Floppy.
Damn im old.

First, you should just serach and you will see, we alreay alk A LOT about "what make a Baldur's gate game a Baldur's gate game?"

But, I will answer you lazyness.

As a casual BG fan let me tell you some fact because it's what you are interesting in.


What is no-BG-like :

1) no RTWP

2) tons of empty and useless containers

3) tons of useless stuff to drop

4) tons of crafting

5) "romance" poor written and only sexually oriented (and it's not a feeling, everyone litteraly try to bang me at the party just cause I was nice... it's creepy, not romantic, have nothing to do with love and show the POVERTY of the writing)

6) goblins talking.

7) the pushing mechanic (never have to die cause I got push in BG)

8) the verticality of the fights

9) system of approval over anything from companion (besides, it is so baaaaaaaaadly done)

10) teleportation system

11) big openworld with few connections instead of a lot of little maps interconnected

12) no area with nothing amazing. Like every little space of BG3 is a place for epic events.

12) companions having all amazing background...

13) ...but still level 1 and unable to kill a fucking cockroach (look I'm a mega wizard in love with the god of magic but meh...).

14) the roll-dice in dialogues.

15) zoom on people when you talk to them (even if it's just the village's dumbass).

I'm pretty sure I could keep finding some "facts" which differ from BG but I think it's enough to make a point.

Your "list" was poor, incomplete and oriented.


By the way, I was really enthousiastic and open-minded when I heard about BG3.
I liked Divinity and was ready to accept this system if they succeed at keeping the BG feelings.

Guess what? They didn't. And guess what ? It's their job to give the RIGHT feeling.

Here, Larian take the Lore of BG and put it on their Divinity system without a single fuck. Unfortunately, BG-game wasn't only about a Lore.

Oh man you keep showing us that you just don't know what you're talking about...

You can only choose 2 companions out of 8 in Wasteland 3 and you create the 4 others.

You can choose 5 out of 20+ in the old games.
Yes, Baldur's Gate 1/2 are games that offer WAY more freedom than most (every?) other games to create and custom your party with companions.

That's one of these games particularity and appeal, even if it may not be the only games to have a party size of 6 and ""a lot"" of companions.

You're arguing for the sake of it thinking you have the truth, one more time.

Listen, I get you are not a native English speaker and I try to give some leeway on that but you never said anything about a large number of companions in your original post or that the party size had to be x/number created versus x number picked up. I just went with the guidelines you provided.

So let me help you re-write that: "I feel a Baldur's Gate game incorporate a 6 party system with the ability to bring in 5 other companions from an expanded list of up to 20+ that you can meet in the world"

Its an opinion still, but at least its articulated now. It also means The Black Pits I and II and Dark Alliance games 1,2 are not Baldur's gate games of course. Would you agree?

So are you sure this is a list of things that don't make it a Baldur's Gate game and not just a list of things you don't like about the game? It may just be that your list is badly written but there are things in here that would make the original Baldur's gate games not Baldur's gates games.

And honestly some of these are just bizarre...like "Goblins Talking". Not only does that make the original games not BG games since they have Goblins that Talk, but it objectively doesn't make sense unless you can further qualify it and say specifically why it makes it not a Baldur's Gate game or even why its an issue at all since Goblins speak common.

I feel like we are scraping the bottom of the argument barrel at this point, probably the bottom of a lot of barrels really. I'm done. I invite you to scream into the void.

so you ask for a detailed answer, get frustrated when they don't provide one, they provide one and now you respond with "i invite you to scream into the void" Good lord man, could you be any more dismissive? Why even bother responding to them in the first place?

I LOVE how you jumped RIGHT over my actual response! Because you have no response to that nonsense.

Its objectively crazy that "Goblins Talking" is a REASON that its not a Baldur's gate game when the ORIGINAL BG game had Goblins Talking!

RESPOND to that please. Do it! You won't. LOL

Womp womp...

I started playing Wasteland3, and while it has similar unfortunate movement system (you control on character and the rest follows) it has far more flexible grouping system - select/diseellect all is there and is bound to space (because it is kinda important), but on top of that you can quickly create smaller groups either by boxing with mouse, or SHIFT-click on portraits (I think ALT is used remove from groups but am not 100% at this moment). TAB is used to switch between characters within created group, or you can click on their portrait to set them as leader.

“Following” is still a problem (twats lagging behind and then taking a shortcut through a mine, etc) but the grouping it more efficient and more functional then what Larian has at the moment.

I think it is something Larian should take a look at, as it doesn’t fundamentally (I think) change control scheme into RTS-like one, while provides handy option one would expect from party based game. Group/ungroup is there already, and it already made the game way better. Now they need to figure out better and more reliable grouping.

From my observations, I feel the BG crowd not liking this game can be boiled down to:

• It doesn't play like a Baldur's Gate game (non-infinity engine style gameplay)
• It doesn't look like a Baldur's Gate game (has a dynamic camera, and again, doesn't look like it's an infinity styled engine at work)
• They have issues with the writing (either not being serious enough for their tastes or not being up to par for their standards to be considered "good")

Besides the last one, these are completely valid reasons to have issues with this game, especially when there are modern equivalents happy to mimic this style of game (the Pathfinder games and Pillars of Eternity). They have even said they would have no issues with this game as long as it wasn't called Baldur's Gate 3, but because it is, they take umbrage with the fact that it is only Baldur's Gate in name. That's fair.

As an OG Baldur's Gate player, I do not possess the same hangups that they do. I've always wanted a sequel or re-imagining of the Baldur's Gate game but with a modern engine and with a dynamic camera, and that is what Larian is offering, but I still understand where these pissed off BG players are coming from and I want Larian to do more to appeal to the Baldur's Gate crowd. They need to incorporate more gameplay elements and more things to make it look like a Baldur's Gate game (I'm using 'look' loosely). For example, they've recently added the point and click soundsets, that is something I consider to be Larian making the game "look" like a Baldur's Gate game. As is, Larian has multiple different crowds that they have to please and that by itself is going to be extremely difficult to do.

What are you doing bringing intelligent, thoughtful arguments into this discussion? Have you seen the people in this neighborhood?

(KIDDING)

Agreed. 100%.

Personally I love the writing, and at least from a technical perspective I can say it is well-written in that it:

Shows but not tells (much of the story is hidden in visual cues)
Limits most exposition to books
Uses smart narration descriptively.
Allows for an optional level of engagement and depth.
Includes a lot of optional flavor story that is not directly related to the main story.
Includes many subplots
Strong Dramatic focus to the central story
Memorable characters - even side characters (Shovel, love that little guy)
Uses a lot of variation style - poetry, prose, writing, and changes in rhythm and accent.

I am at almost 1000 hours played at this point and I am still finding new things.

@Zefhyr

Not Judging, i just see only that you define a BG game just how the first and second one was made in times where such game as Divinity wasnt even possible technical wise.
The Core what a BG Game is, is very debatabl ofc.
Some say it must follow the first two games to the point and not even considering that technical progress makes it possible to explore new Visual approach.
Same goes for trying out new possibilities of gameplay by using the Divinity Engine.

This is Early Access of BG3 and for this Larian gives us the chance to help making the right decisions and find a way to invent Baldurs Gate series anew.

Nothing is written in Stone yet, and staying in the past mostly brings more problems later.
That is true for the real world and our lives in this world.
Standing still wont do ever in your or others lives.

BG3 will be something new and im glad about it.

So fun. Looks like the guidelines were clear enough 1 message earlier but they aren't anymore...

The Black Pits are not games.
Dark Alliance are not games of the main Baldur's Gate series.

Despite your beautifull english sentences you obviously don't know much about BG1/2 but you're arguing about "the definition of a Baldur's Gate game"... Interresting.

Lol.
You're funny, Blackheifer.
You talk about one point over 15 and that's it ?
Nice way to... how did you say ?... "bringing intelligent, thoughtful arguments into this discussion"

So, yeah, I did a mistake. It happens.
I have no problem with that.
Now, you was crying for someone who would tell you what makes a BG game a BG game.
Here I give you a non-exhaustive list and what did you do ?
You see one mistake and just talk about it. Not a single word for all the other points.

It's pretty classical from people who are just looking to have the last word and prove their point no matter what.

So, yeah, I forgot, for a minute, there was talkative goblins in BG (guess there wasn't so much of a full village of friendly goblin, etc, but it's my bad anyway)

Now, we still have 14 others points to talk about. Sry, 15, you can add this one "15) a camp to sleep safe, almost available H24" (not sure about this one, I asked for a refund, months ago)

So, again, you seems to like talking to people with self-sufficiency but I just did a list of few things which differs from the original BG games.

Arguing about what make a BG game a BG game have alreayd been discussed on another thread (as I already told you), here I jsut give you a counter list to your poor one.
I was hoping you would think about it.
As I already said (but it seems like you are not a really good listener - or reader - so I repeat) a game is not just about the Lore and quoting the similar Lore to justify your point of view is not a valuable argument.

So, let the bottom of the barrel alone, take your fingers away from your keyboard and take some times to think about the way you talk to people, the way you approach a conversation and the way you treat neutral informations given.

PS: yeah, I may have badly written, not a native english indeed. You win the "best written comment", happy you.




By the way and for the others, I wasn't giving my point of view of what is a BG game.
I was just answering Blackheifer who define BG game like this :

" Baldur's Gate Elements so far.
- The Main story takes place in and around Baldur's Gate
- The Plot revolves around the Dead Three , Bane, Bhall, Mykrul
- Its in the Forgotten realms
- People involved in the original crisis are involved in this story (Elminster, Minsc, Volo, Jaheira) "

So I won't argue again about what is a BG game, but obviously it can't be restrain at his Lore angle.

For now, the best successor to BG game, from my point of view, is Pathfinder : kingmaker then PoE Deadfire.


More, about the writing, the banters are not bad in themself, but the romance are (at least was months ago) really crappy and, more, the options in the conversations and the storytelling wasn't this diversified and interesting (the inevitable death of the little girl by the crazy druid if you miss a roll-dice is a really good example).



PPS:

Ok, I thougth it would be funny to go a little further with my little list...

1) no RTWP, turn-based fights ------------------------------------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
2) tons of empty and useless containers --------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
3) tons of useless stuff to drop --------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
4) tons of crafting --------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
5) "romance" poor written and only sexually oriented (and it's not a feeling, everyone litteraly try to bang me at the party just cause I was nice... it's creepy, not romantic, have nothing to do with love and show the POVERTY of the writing)
6) the pushing mechanic (never have to die cause I got push in BG) --------------> Not BG
7) the verticality of the fights --------------> Not BG
8) system of approval over anything from companion (besides, it is so baaaaaaaaadly done) --------------> Not BG
9) teleportation system --------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
10) big openworld with few connections instead of a lot of little maps interconnected --------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
11) no area with nothing amazing. Like every little space of BG3 is a place for epic events. --------------> Not BG, DIVINITY
12) companions having all amazing background... --------------> Not BG
13) ...but still level 1 and unable to kill a fucking cockroach (look I'm a mega wizard in love with the god of magic but meh...).
14) the roll-dice in dialogues. --------------> Not BG
15) zoom on people when you talk to them (even if it's just the village's dumbass). --------------> Not BG

I add yours and some more from me
16) The Main story takes place in and around Baldur's Gate, The Plot revolves around the Dead Three , Bane, Bhall, Mykrul, Its in the Forgotten realms, People involved in the original crisis are involved in this story (Elminster, Minsc, Volo, Jaheira) -------> BG
17) the kind of humour ----------> Not BG, DIVINITY
18) the surface in the fights ----------> Not BG, DIVINITY
19) the colors, pretty flashy, of the graphics ----------> Not BG, DIVINITY
20) the camp to sleep ----------> Not BG
So we have....
Not BG : 17
BG : 1 (4 if you want separate your 4 informations about the Story and Lore)
DIVINITY : 10
The problem seems pretty clear to me...
And we could add more and more points... (like the possibility to move the chests, the scrolls usable by everybody,...)

I asked if they are Baldur's Gate games. The title on them is Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance1 and 2. Its been accepted that they are part of the Baldur's gate series as they take place in the city or around it.

But according to your definition they are not. Even though they are considered good games on their own. That's Gatekeeping btw - which is pretty awful behavior. WoTC has established a fairly straightforward definition of what a BG game is, with a fair degree of latitude to establish storylines. That's called setting precedence.

Objectively they (WoTC) would be the authority on this sort of thing. They granted a License to Larian not only because of the licensing fees offered but because they presented a solid story that *they* felt honored the series appropriately and they had the game-making chops to create a worthy sequel. Initially Larian had been rejected - just to get ahead of the ungenerous assertions of "because money, duh" - because they felt Larian wasn't ready.

They're not a part of the Baldur's Gate main series video games at all. And they don't take place arround the city. Just like BG2 (for your information).

An authority to "define" something that exist ? That's fun. Maybe it's just a concept in your head but it's 2 existing video games

Obviously, Wotc can make what they want with their IP but BG3, the next episode after BG1 and BG2 does not look inspired by the legendary previous episodes of the series.

Is that a problem ? The answer depends the player but they are definitely things they could have done, including a party size of 6 and tons of companions rather than their usual party size of 4 with a very limited number of wierd origin characters.

In this thread you just want "to win" a discussion, as usual

They are Baldur's Gate spin-offs. Just as Gears Tactics is a spinoff of main Gears of War series, and doesn't try to sell itself as Gears6.

It's just bad branding. Means nothing to people not invested in BG1&2, and created wrong expectations for those who want Baldur's Gate3 proper.

Because it is not . Like Bioware they are adapting DnD to digital form, but it is Larian's take on DnD, not continuation of what Bioware did. They seem to not only not take many inspirations, but actively disagree with a lot of things that Bioware did. As much as I hate to say it, it might be one of those cases where just "Baldur's Gate" might be the more desirable the title. You know what, that's how I will call it: Larian's Baldur's Gate Reboot. or Baldur's Gate: Hell&Squids

They don't necessary disagree with Bioware IMO.

They just want to create a game that will help them to improve their next games (DoS3), they want to be a part of the legend and write "Baldur's Gate" on their website/linkedin profile and they want to use a ruleset and a setting millions of players love arround the world.

Marketing purpose, that's pretty obvious. BG3 is a wonderfull opportunity for Larian.