aksrasjel

I don't think you can recruit her after Chapter 5, although don't quote me on that. And you'll be missing on a lot of her content this late in the game. She actually has quite a lot of interjections and reactions sprinkled throughout the game. As well as a really pleasant romance arc - if you're into that. I would suggest starting a new game, just to see what she has in store. But it's up to you.

You first meet her in the prologue as a quick cameo.You can recruit her properly at the beginning of chapter 2. She shows up in your throne room and offers you a sidequest upon which she's unlocked as a companion.

After having a long break, I finally managed to find some time to play Kingmaker and see what this new Wildcards DLC is all about. I even managed to get the damn thing to work without much issue. Must be Christmas. So I've been hanging with our new companion for a while, and I have to say - I am really impressed with her so far. Pretty much everything involving her is a spoiler territory, so I'll just say that she's a really creative idea for a companion, both in terms of story and mechanics. And to top things off, she's extremely likeable and is pretty seamlessly integrated into a main story experience. And I understand now why she's (I'm going to call her "she" for the sake of convienience) a DLC companion and not in a main companion roster. There must have been insane amount of resources and time spent on her in order to make her work. I was a bit sceptical for a DLC that includes "just" a companion, but Owlcat really made her worth the money. So, yeah - she's a fun addition to the game, I guess.

I don't know if it was mentioned before - but details on the Kingmaker season pass just dropped. First DLC is called "The Wildcards - it's due to launch at 6th of December. And it provides us with a new race (tiefling), new class (kineticist) and a new fully fleshed out companion (tiefling kineticist - obviously). And she's both romancable and can be one of the advisors in your kingdom. Yay? https://www.gog.com/game/pathfinder_kingmaker_the_wildcards The other one is called "Varnholds Lot" - it's due to release on February: A new bonus campaign. While celebrating your victory at Jamandi Aldori’s mansion, you’ve met another hero of the Stolen Lands: the mercenary captain Maegar Varn. While you’re building your barony in the Shrike Hills and Narlmarshes, Varn and his people are establishing their own nation ofVarnhold in the rocky foothills of Dunsward. What did they have to face? Play this new story, and export the consequences of the choices you’ve made there into the main campaign of Pathfinder: Kingmaker! This exciting new side story is about the size of one chapter of our main campaign and will take 6-12 hours to complete, depending on your playstyle. And finally: "Beneath the Stolen Lands" - April 2019. A new game mode. Sometimes you want to play a story with memorable characters, rich lore, and a complicated set of choices and consequences. But then there are days when you just want to grab a sword, cast some spells, and destroy a horde of monsters! This DLC will introduce a rogue-like randomly generated endless dungeon, complete with a new unique boss. You can explore it in a separate game, or as a part of your main campaign. How deep can you go? Sounds interesting.

For the sake of the discussion, the classical argument can be made that the fans were more lenient towards PoE 1 and it's shortcomings - they were starved for an isometric RPG in vein of BG2, they to some extent understood that Obsidian was in dire straits and had limited budget, and so on. And the situation on the market was much different. But with Deadfire, Obsidian had no excuse - the fans expected them to deliver a really remarkable game in all respects. Otherwise they would just choose a different RPG. Everything was in Obsidian's favour, they had even bigger budget than before, they had the established franchise, they had the mechanics figured out and full creative freedom. And I'm not going to speak for everyone, beacuse I know that a lot of people on these forums enjoyed Deadfire, but for me personally, creative leads simply miscalculated what the fandom actually wanted from the game and more importantly didn't have unified and strong enough vision to make a game they needed to make. And to be completely fair, the half of the backers of PoE didn't actually show up during Deadfire Fig campaign - so there is that.

I don't actually wish to get into arguments - but aren't you disregarding "the word of mouth" as one of the factors? RPG fans are not living in a vacuum, they do research and they read each other's comments and opinions - in many ways, some of them might be more valuable than official reviews. Objectively speaking, Deadfire wasn't necessarily praised for it's gripping storyline and companion writing - even on these forums. The same things about "fixing things that aren't broken". And the word gets around. It's a kind of the mirror opposite of "sleeper hit" situation. But that's just my thoughts on that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Siege of Dragonspear tank spectacularly? Specifically due to the beforementioned dodgy writing, as well as other controversies, plus narrative lead being a bit... too antagonistic towards the fanbase? Making an expansion to a beloved game, 15 years later, on an old engine was in hindsight a very risky move by Beamdog that didn't pay off. To the point it pretty much buried Beamdog's hopes of ever making BG3. As for Deadfire itself, it is sad that the game underselled, but I'm not surprised. The marketing for the game was non-existant and the franchise still isn't strong enough to sustain itself by the name alone. From my perspective - and that's only my perspective - the game didn't have a good "hook" to make people interested in it. It maybe wasn't conventional enough for the traditional crowd and at the same time wasn't "weird" enough for the people who liked PS:T. My biggest issue with the game is the underdeveloped story and weak, uninteresting companions - this is what made me completely lose interest in the game. Maybe this fact also had some impact on the game selling poorly. But again, that's just me.

Hey, I do remember an instance in BG2:EE, (or was it Siege of Dragonspear? It was one if the Beamdog additions) when a resident valley girl Neera reacted with a pretty setting inappropriate "Jeeeezuss" out of nowhere. And nobody in the writing or editing team caught on to that, beacuse it's so natural to say so for some people. "Pyrrhic victory" might be so ingrained in the writers dictionary, that similarly nobody caught on that it's pretty setting inapropriate. That, or somebody on the writing team just wanted to show off their purple prose. And it is kind of jarring. Especially when "costly victory" works just as well.

I am giving Baldur's Gate EET with SCS and Ascension installed another go. Half-elf (beacuse Viconia romance) thief/mage. I'm in for the long haul. I literally forgot that Silke is a goddamn 10th lvl bard. It was after she started casting Stoneskin I reminded myself what I've gotten myself into. Also - "Disable EE Companions" mod is a blessing in disguise.

Wasn't Cyric imprisoned and depowered for 1000 years by Lathander and Liiria as per Ao decree for killing Mystra and causing a Spellplague? Not to mention, his portfolio took an enormous hit due to the return of the Dead Three. So he's theoretically a non-issue now. But still, it is 5e we are talking about. And 5e is very 'pick-and-choose' about the canon. In 5e Forgotten Realms official canon and metastory at this point doesn't exist. It's all a mish-mash of diferrent information from both new and old sources - most of them contradictory. We literally don't know what gods are canonically active on Toril now, beacuse ALL of them are back - including the most obscure ones (Keptolo?). So I have no idea how one is going to pull off a "canon" story in BG 3.

I dunno. Make a roll with a disadvantage. 17 and natural 1. As a diviner my portent dice are 2 and 3 respectively. No proficiency bonus. Now what?

To play the devil's advocate for 5 seconds. I am surprised nobody brought up Fallout: New Vegas as an argument. You may have heard about the company that made it. Mechanically, it has nothing to do with FO1 or FO2, but it's very much a proper Fallout 3 game for a lot of fans, myself very much included. And it was a distant sequel to an old franchise. The catch is - New Vegas was a lightning in a bottle. People that made it were extremely passionate about the franchise and wanted to make the best Fallout they can - unlike Bethesda with their Fallout 3. So, theoretically, you can make an awesome BG sequel without any of the 'nostalgic' attachments. You just need right, passionate people for the job. But what are the real chances that you will recieve a cynical, soulless cashgrab instead?

Wouldn't Blizzard be the "Disney" of videogame industry nowadays? Say what you want about their business practices, but they are really trying to be "wholesome" and more-or-less fun for everyone to enjoy. They never get political, they stay out of any controversies and just want to make a quality product that would be enjoyable by masses. They are simply too big now to take any risks. And I actually respect them for that in a weird sense. As for BG3 itself - I'm not saying "don't do it" - far from it, I am just very aware that it will most likely not be a game for me. Therefore, my disinterest. I can see - and maybe even prefer - it working as a sequel in a way of "The Force Awakens" - a fun, safe nostalgia trip down the memory lane and nothing else. Don't take unnecessary risks. Make something that both new and old fans - and pretty much everyone - can enjoy. Pulling it off is actually harder than one may think. And yes, as a fan of OT, I did enjoy TFA. TLJ... not really. SoD was arguably trying to be that escapist nostalgia trip in high concept - too bad the narrative lead had some other ideas, which didn't work out in the end.

Were Baldur's Gate books actually canon? I do recall, that due to fan demand WotC quietly retconned them out of the "official" canon. They were just *that* bad. Case in point - Minsc in "Legends" is not a ginger. I am also reminded of a talk somewhere - probably by Perkins - that Abdel Adrian in "Murder in Baldur's Gate" was a Bhaalspawn, but not *the* Bhaalspawn, AKA CHARNAME. Nobody knows who Gorion's Ward was. And Adrian gets murdered as a final "screw you" to the books. Although, don't quote me on any of that. And WotC seems to change their minds nowadays at least once per month.

Oh, trust me - BG2 and *especially BG1* had a LOT of problems, you don't have to tell me that. But that's the thing about nostalgia - you are biased in favour. PS:T had much better story, IWD may have had a better encounter design. But BG series for me is like a worn childhood teddy-bear. It's beat-up, ugly and there are other out there - but this is the one I am fond of. I am not religiously attached to any of the game mechanics, or a given type of play. BG 3 can be turn based, RTWP, third-person or isometric, with full motion capture, full or partial VO or anything in between and I won't care. I would actually kill to play the X-COM: Enemy Unknown-style 5e turn-based BG3 with some nice QoL attachements. I don't think 5e would work particularly well with RTWP. You can throw in Dragon Age type third-person camera if it won't make the gameplay too cluttered. What I would care about is whether the "feel" of the story fits the BG series. Meaning the adventurous atmosphere, funny, charming characters and quirky, lighthearted story - that's all I ask.. I simply want to have fun in Faerun again. And romance elven/drow maidens - and I won't budge on that particular part. And I do realise that capturing the elusive, fun "feel" of BG games is much harder than just making an isometric game on D&D licence and calling it BG3. ...By the way I absolutely adored Witcher 3. I legitimately did feel like a teenager playing BG 2 again, incidentally. Don't ask me why. Maybe it's the "adventurous" feel that this game nailed.