Originally Posted by The_Red_Queen
I’ve spent so long playing games with four party members that it feels more natural to me now, and when I return to six member party games they just feel a bit flabby and messy.

I think I prefer four for BG3. Particularly with 5e rules and classes, where there other ways of covering the classic roles without necessarily having separate specialists, six party members seem unnecessary. And I don’t particularly want longer battles, but neither do I want ones where individual party members have fewer turns each, and it seems as though we’d need to have one or the other given the turn-based combat. I also have very little interest in creating more than one custom character per playthrough.

So, sorry folks, but I do hope the game is kept balanced for four party members.

I don’t have any problem with players being given an option to have a larger party in the core game, though. Well, other than that I suspect I’d then be tempted to go for the max party size for the sake of party interactions, but that’s my problem!

This, I get. For you, it's like how I feel about long rests. Sure. You COULD play party of 4 if they increased the party size to 6, but knowing you can do party of 6 means that you feel like you maybe SHOULD do it. It nags at you. What if you miss something because you only do party of 4?

Likewise, I feel that way about long rest. Sure. I COULD decide to NOT long rest between every battle, but what if I SHOULD? What if I miss something because I don't long rest?