forced party member poll

[Michael_Galt]

Okay, so I'm not sure offhand what the developers have said about this, but figured I would make a quick poll, to gather people's imput. Hopefully I don't miss anything.

 

Personally, I hate forced party members. I recognize there are some developments in the plot where they "make sense" or can be justified, but also feel that there should always be a way to avoid it if you really don't want to take them (because you personally hate them, don't trust them, or someone in your party feels that way).

 

So, please click away.

[quechn1tlan]

You forgot one option: I really don't care one way or the other.

 

By the way, I think I read somewhere(and I might be wrong), that devs stated there won't be forced party members.

[Tsuga C]

I don't mind them, so long as they're temporary additions to the party--a guide, a translator, etc. If they displace one or more of the companions I've chosen, then I'd hope that they have generally similar classes and skills/feats to those of the displaced companion(s). It'd be highly aggravating to lose my best healer or trap handler for an extended period of time. When I build a party, I'm not doing so at random. Every person is there for a reason, so let's not upset things, hmm?

[WorstUsernameEver]

Party members are optional in the game.

[80Maxwell08]

Obsidian has mentioned that none of the companions will be forced on to the player and it's fully possible to beat the game solo if you desire. Though after actually reading you weren't even asking about that. Personally I just don't care too much unless the character is really annoying.

Edited November 4, 2012 by 80Maxwell08

[Tychoxi]

They said you can solo the game if it fits your fancy. So...

[Crusader_bin]

Soloing is one thing, temporary party member as a part of a quest is other. I think whatever makes the quests more interesting is always a good thing. I don't see how it should make anyone upset, unless the forced party member ate your companions brains at the campsite that is...

[Michael_Galt]

Hmm, good. I had thought I had read something to that affect at some point, just wasn't sure. That makes me happy. I suppose the poll isn't necessary then, besides idle curiosity.

[Drakxii]

I don't mind that I can't do side quest X because companion Y anit in my party. I hate when I meeting character Y and now I have to imminently do a quest with them, so that I can continue the game.

[ComMcNeil]

hate it, and I very much liked the BG (2) way on this, you could even dump imoen after rescuing her for crying out loud :D

[JFSOCC]

**** you G0-T0, I was onto you from day one. but I couldn't prevent myself from accepting you on my ship.

[Jarmo]

Goto, yeah. Well at least he threatened me with a nuke, so it kind of makes sense to accept him, grudgingly.

 

That ***** ranger dude in NWN2, I'd have stabbed him in the face right away, only I couldn't for some reason.

At least I didn't need to take him along except that one time, but still, there was no reason whatsoever to not just boot him the heck away.

[Osvir]

I don't mind it, but would rather not have to remove an existing party member.

 

I voted this. Temporary additions following their own AI (following Generic Side-Kick Hero 1 on a Quest). Escorts. Military War battles (if there are going to be any) etc. etc.