Party System

[oldmanpaco]

Will the party system be like BG where people go to their own place when kicked out of the party and some will not come back or like NWN2 where the whole team hangs out at a camp.

 

I hate the camp concept.

 

I also hate it when people not in the active party get XP. Apparently drinking in a bar is just as rewarding as killing the obligatory rats in the basement.

[Nefastus]

Well I hate it when people not in the active party don't get XP, so there! Certainly it's not as "realistic" (although, what's realistic about most XP systems anyways?), but it becomes an unnecessary annoyance when you have to grind for hours to get a new (or old) party member to the point where you can try them out effectively.

[Tigranes]

NWN2 already did the "I level up in the inn getting drunk because you're getting zombied in the face" thing, so I expect to see it here too. In my mind the best explanation for party size limitation is that non-active guys are doing investigation or some other thing anyway.

[LadyCrimson]

I'm with Nefastus - I prefer companions level up at least somewhat even when they're not with you. Maybe not an exact level for your level, but maybe one below, say. I dunno. Anyway, I don't like grinding to make them useful either (I think that can discourage people from trying or going back to them), and my rationalization is that when they're not with you, they're actually doing odd jobs for other people when you're not looking.

 

Have they mentioned how big the party can be, yet? I didn't notice that, but I tend to lose observational skills when distracted, these days.

Edited September 15, 2012 by LadyCrimson

[Humanoid]

I'd lean towards having each of the relevant NPCs having their own hangout, and the subtle suggestion that while not with you, they're doing their own thing and not just standing there. Even if not explored at all, it'd at least avoid the "gaining XP while drinking the house down" issue. Which is to suggest yes, I would hate to have to micromanage companion XP.

 

Hopefully the concept of grinding XP is knocked on the head early too, I'm in favour of mook slaughter awarding no XP. I suppose unique, non-random spawning foes could do so, but for the most part I'd leave it linked to quests.

 

 

Veering off on a tangent though - what I consider more important than any of the above points is party size scaling. Above all I'd love a system where I'm neither be rewarded nor overly punished for carrying a smaller than "standard" party. Not saying the challenge needs to be exactly balanced for each permutation, but at least checked for each size to make sure it's reasonably doable without having to game the mechanics too much.

 

In IWD2 for example, my first and only complete playthrough started with only two characters, which was good for a little over half of the game - at which point the scaling somewhat broke and I ended up adding a third, and later, fourth member to finish the game without having to rely on excessive AI and geometry "exploits". I've no doubt that it wasn't impossible, sure, but what I'm asking for is a relatively steady difficulty curve when attempting to tackle the game in this fashion.

[The Sharmat]

Context sensitive party size would be nice. I hate going into a massive final battle only to find that I'm only allowed to bring two NPCs with me. (I'm talking about you, every game made after the year 2000) It's so arbitrary and gamey. But I'd also like to see situations where you simply weren't allowed to bring six people with you to shake things up and lead to different tactical situations.

[Malcador]

Why not have your neglected NPCs just go out and do sidequests

[WDeranged]

I'm with Nefastus - I prefer companions level up at least somewhat even when they're not with you. Maybe not an exact level for your level, but maybe one below, say. I dunno.

 

I like this, there should be some penalty for letting party members slack off but not enough to essentially take them out of the game.

[Lohi]

These guys should have lives. It shouldn't be up to me the main character to control them, with them hanging out twiddling thumbs when I'm not around. That is, if they leave the party we should not necessarily find them exactly where we left them. Maybe we've completely forgotten about one but then there he is in another town doing his own thing, or locked up in prison asking us to free him, etc.

 

As for them getting XP it depends on the game system. I'd prefer one that's not about grinding XP or getting tons of levels/points with most of the game being about getting more and more powerful. If someone is not powerful enough they should still be able to join in ("Can you hold a gun, kid? Great, then cover this corridor for us.").

[Delterius]

NWN2 already did the "I level up in the inn getting drunk because you're getting zombied in the face" thing, so I expect to see it here too. In my mind the best explanation for party size limitation is that non-active guys are doing investigation or some other thing anyway.

 

If they can actually present things this way instead of just implying (and sometimes not even that) they have lives and their own adventures, then you solve all issues in this thread. Party members have a justification not to follow you they don't grow useless over time.

 

Me? I used to use even underlevelled characters in the IE games without issue. Its not like it took them too long to catch up.