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

Warnings or not, you're pretty much asking for an effectively untested mode, and that' something I struggle to understand - you're willing to potentially trade your campaign's/game's stability (and others in fact', if somebody decides to play MP with 6ppl enabled) for 6ppl party? Because while there's nothing bricking the game curently doesn't mean it cannot appear down the line. All this doesn't sound like a fair trade to me. Sticking warnings in obvious or semi-obvious problematic points like boat sounds like bandaiding and just screams "unfinished content", like in various EAs; if an issue is found, at this point why not fix it rather than intentionally ignore if this mode is being worked on already? Outside of issues like "completely out of time to finish it before release".
I can understand wanting more than 4 people in party but I cannot understand your willingness to sacrifice for its sake. If I would want this mode I would at least want it fully functional (if imbalanced), playtested and as clear of bugs as possible.
"Legal trouble" was probably too much of a hot take from me tbh. I wouldn't say that everything went fine and dandy for these games though.
VtMB didn't make as much money as it was expected on release and picked up popularity much time after the release and, as I understand, was one of the contributing factors for Troika Games disbanding. It's the community support of the game that ended up keeping it afloat to my understanding.
Cyberpunk lost its intended multiplayer part and any planned major single player DLCs seem to be reduced/merged to one. Not a financial failure per se but it also clearly did not sell as much as intended while tanking CDPR's reputation and losing console sales after it was pulled from console stores.
MEA lost any planned DLC content and killed any plans for its sequel.
ME1... well, while you did not have a fun time with it it was clearly a success overall to spawn a franchise around it.
Can't say much for Bethesda games though, not a big follower.
Yes, assigning clear roles will be easier with party of 6... but I think that as far as BG3 goes 4 still works fine. For example, I don't see a need for dedicated healer for a simple reason that said healer won't be able to outheal all incoming damage anyway (unless you LR after every encounter *cough*, just not enough spellslots otherwise most likely). The only hard-pressured slot I currently see is Gale due to him being the only full-on arcane caster (but I also can see that a 4-ppl without Gale still working out). For example, my party for my only proper full playthrough was Fiend Warlock Tav(EB spam, priority target nuker, party face, semi-frontliner), Shadowheart (buffer/emergency healer/ranged shooter/occasional nuker - kinda everything a bit), Thief Astarion (ranged DD/mobile frontliner as situation demanded) and Evocation (I think) Gale (wizard things - utility or damage as situation required)- not exactly what I think people would call an optimal composition but it worked pretty fine to me. I don't think that party roles are so strict in BG3 that you need to build your party like in a MMORPG.
The thing is... I don't see *only* two "factions". It's more like a lot of sub-factions that can barely agree on some things, and every single one thinks they are in the right. Hence I would rather trust Larian based on what I see in EA (but not everything is perfect ofc) because at least they have more or less clear vision on what to do with, well, their game. And that's coming from someone who has quite a lot of grievances with DOS2.