Why 9 Charakters only?

[Muschas1]

Hi! im from germany sorry for my bad english

Today i red an article about the eternity Game in the web and i was like: OMFG YEAHHH!!!!

 

Im a big fan of BG 1,2 Icewinddale 1,2  this is the best news since a longe longe time!!

 

BUT: In Baldursgate there are more than 16 charakters who can join my party. In the Article i red you guys plan only 8.

 

The maximum Partysice is 6 ofcause so there are only 2 chars left.

 

It was one of the best feelings in BG to choose the charakter, bad or god, thief or Paladin, i only wanted a female wizard in my group because i felt sorry for her....

 

So please obsidian think about more charakters in the game!

 

Thanks!!

 

PS: after the eternety thing you guys could think about putting your hand on the Lands of Lore Series. Its a Serie of great RPG and i think someone with experience should do that!!

Edited June 28, 2013 by Muschas1

[Prometheus]

Because writing companions costs a lof of money and time.

They said that they will add a companion if they have enough time for it.

 

The maximum Partysice is 6 ofcause so there are only 2 chars left.

 

There will be three characters left. the main character is included in the partysize (MC + 5 companions). 

[Tsuga C]

I anticipate that Obsidian will substitute quality and depth for quantity when it comes to the number of companions available for our party.  They'll cover the Core Four classes (cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard), to be certain, and then they'll add the monk (already confirmed) and perhaps one other companion outside of the Core Four for flavor.  The remaining 3 or 4 companions will probably drawn from the Core Four as they are near essential when recruiting a party.

 

Also, wasn't there an extra companion being created?  This is why I wrote "3 or 4" in the previous sentence.

[Amentep]

BG had 25 characters, BGII 16 +1 for TOB.

 

PST had 7.  From what I gather, they're wanting more PST like companions for this.

[GrayAngel]

I say this i prefer the 6 they made in Neverwinter Nights 2: Mask of the Betrayer the the 12 they made in original NVN2 i prefer quality then number.

[Gfted1]

What happens if a couple characters get chunked? I guess you just have to roll with an undermanned party or go make a few non-reactive NPC's in the Adventurers Hall.

 

Of course, I will just reload.

[Prometheus]

They'll cover the Core Four classes (cleric, fighter, rogue, wizard), to be certain, and then they'll add the monk (already confirmed) and perhaps one other companion outside of the Core Four for flavor.  The remaining 3 or 4 companions will probably drawn from the Core Four as they are near essential when recruiting a party.

Where did they say that there will be a monk companion?

If you go by concept arts we have a fighter, priest, mage, monk, ranger and (cipher).

I think they should only make one or less companions for each class. If you want to have a class and you don't like the companion you should just go to the adventure hall.

[Lephys]

^ I don't know for sure that they've specifically confirmed his companion-ness, but...

 

http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Forton

[bonarbill]

BG had 25 characters, BGII 16 +1 for TOB.

 

PST had 7.  From what I gather, they're wanting more PST like companions for this.

 

And weird enough, I liked BG2 cast of companions the more than Mask of the Betrayer or PS:T.

 

They should probably stick with a low number if they want to make these companions deep, but I honestly hope there is a little more than 9 in the future at least.   l know there is going to be a few companions out of the 9 that I won't like.  I wouldn't mind having a extra few companions they are less developed than the main 9 just for a little more variety.

Edited June 28, 2013 by bonarbill

[Ffordesoon]

Given the money and time it takes to create companions that aren't simply pack mules with a few stock lines, and given how many people playing this game would want those sorts of companions, I have no doubt Obsidian will go for quality rather than quantity.

 

That said, the Adventurer's Hall is a good compromise for people who don't want to use the ready-made companions. With that, you can create whatever companions you'd like, and Obsidian doesn't have to spread its resources thin making extra companions with less reactivity built into them.

 

I agree that it would be neat to have like thirty companions with the same depth as the eight (or whatever the number is) we will get, but that requires far more money and time than Obsidian has.

[Micamo]

What happens if a couple characters get chunked? I guess you just have to roll with an undermanned party or go make a few non-reactive NPC's in the Adventurers Hall.

 

Of course, I will just reload.

By default, characters get back up after they die with one hit point left, like in NWN2. You can turn on permanent companion death though (not much point in that I think if you're just gonna reload, but whatever floats your boat).

[Gfted1]

Oh yeah, good point. That probably rules out any form of chunking too, like from a crit.

[Iron_JG]

Like others, I would rather have a few interesting, dynamic companions than a lot of boring ones. But more companions allow more class combinations and play styles. I would hope Obsidian makes it easy to respec companions and/or diversify their class roles. Dragon Age 2, which I liked overall, is an example of what not to do. Don't lock us out of certain builds and itemizations. Sooner or later, the player is going to want the make the support mage companion a nuker, or the melee assassin a sniper, or the tank an all-out berserker. At some point, the player is willing to overlook any narrative inconsistency that causes, and you should allow them to do so. Note that I'm not calling for you to let people reassign party members' classes, just let them decide their role to the extent the class allows. Multi-classing would be cool, honestly, but I understand PE isn't going that route.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

What happens if a couple characters get chunked? I guess you just have to roll with an undermanned party or go make a few non-reactive NPC's in the Adventurers Hall.Of course, I will just reload.

You degenerate.

[Gfted1]

And then some.

[Ffordesoon]

Like others, I would rather have a few interesting, dynamic companions than a lot of boring ones. But more companions allow more class combinations and play styles. I would hope Obsidian makes it easy to respec companions and/or diversify their class roles. Dragon Age 2, which I liked overall, is an example of what not to do. Don't lock us out of certain builds and itemizations. Sooner or later, the player is going to want the make the support mage companion a nuker, or the melee assassin a sniper, or the tank an all-out berserker. At some point, the player is willing to overlook any narrative inconsistency that causes, and you should allow them to do so. Note that I'm not calling for you to let people reassign party members' classes, just let them decide their role to the extent the class allows. Multi-classing would be cool, honestly, but I understand PE isn't going that route.

I would assume you can mix and match "real" companions and Adventurer's Hall ones.

[Lephys]

By default, characters get back up after they die with one hit point left, like in NWN2. You can turn on permanent companion death though (not much point in that I think if you're just gonna reload, but whatever floats your boat).

Yeah, I think the whole "there's no resurrection!" thing got confusingly tossed around throughout the boards. I'm pretty sure that's just for combat, by default. Err... to clarify, there's no mid-combat resurrection. From Health-death, I think. Stamina-"death," as we already know, can be undone via, at the very least, that Paladin ability. I think it's called something like "WHAT ARE YOU DOING... SLEEPING?! GET YOUR ASS BACK IN THE FIGHT BEFORE I BREAK YOUR KNEECAPS!".

[Sensuki]

They've also said they will write more if it makes sense.

 

I am fine with 8 companions. Depth not breadth.

[Bartimaeus]

The MotB companions were leagues better than most of the OC's. Likewise, I found the PS:T characters to also be way better than BG2's. Actually, nowadays, BG2's companions annoy me too much to use most of them, (with a few exceptions), so I usually end up rolling my own party. I think a more focused approach is better.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I'm currently replaying BGT and you know, the companions are not very deep. Impressive for including 25 of them of various alignments definitely, but PST companions were vastly superior even if there are only 7 of them. I just hope that the companions' classes are varied enough.

 

And then some.

I bet you grind before tough battles and save scum too heathen! If you will excuse me, I must now scream at the wall because somewhere, someone is playing a game WRONG.

Edited June 29, 2013 by KaineParker

[Prometheus]

^ I don't know for sure that they've specifically confirmed his companion-ness, but...

 

http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Forton

Like I said we have three concept arts from classes outside of the core four(sagani, Forton and the orlan cipher detective). I wanted to know if they said that we will have a monk companion.

We don't know if all of the characters they introduced will be recruitable:

Do you know if the revealed characters (Cadegund, Edair etc) are recruitable NPCs ?

At least some of them will probably be recruitable companions, but we haven't finalized the list yet.

[Sacred_Path]

You'll be able to roll up your own characters instead.

[Kjaamor]

I appreciate that quality is preferential to quantity, but nonetheless it would be nice if the importance of recruitable npcs was recognised to the extent where they tried to bring in some quantity as well as quality. Eight extras for a party of six looks to be fairly stingy.

 

Being able to create extra party members is a potential solution, but a somewhat inelegant one. If nothing else, it removes the party setup process somewhat by allowing all gaps to be easily plugged. I've mentioned before that one of my favourite rpg features is where choice of party based on personality inhibits functionality and vice-versa.

 

The more I think about it, if the npc pool is so small, then use of player-created npcs becomes almost inevitable, and once a player creates one extra npc the temptation to create a second, then third, and so on, increases. If the system encourages a high percentage of players to use party creation rather than party recruitment then the quality that goes into those npcs becomes wasted.

 

So, with my understanding of the mechanics at present, I feel that eight is too small a number, and P:E should really be looking to provide somewhere in the region of 12+, even if some of those contain substantially less dialogue and effort than others.

[Sacred_Path]

I appreciate that quality is preferential to quantity, but nonetheless it would be nice if the importance of recruitable npcs was recognised to the extent where they tried to bring in some quantity as well as quality. Eight extras for a party of six looks to be fairly stingy.

 

Being able to create extra party members is a potential solution, but a somewhat inelegant one.

I can't agree there. Reactive NPC's take time and ressources to do well. With a party of 6, if you wanted to offer the same possibilities for party building without user created characters, you're looking at 60 characters; and that's without taking races into account. Considering the alternative, giving the player the option to create own characters doesn't seem inelegant.

 

 

If nothing else, it removes the party setup process somewhat by allowing all gaps to be easily plugged.

Not from the beginning though, as you'll start with one character and gradually recruit more. Also P:E won't be a herp-a-derp DnD "take one of every class" game. You can make a party with 6 paladins and roll with it.

 

I've mentioned before that one of my favourite rpg features is where choice of party based on personality inhibits functionality and vice-versa.

Personally, I find it pretty horrible if these two things are mixed up; for example, having to sweet talk a character because he's the most effective fighter is p. awful, both roleplaying-wise and as an exercise in self-restraint for the player. Not being able to recruit the most effective mage in the game because your reputation is too good is also pretty bad because it limits your party building options even more, but at least that doesn't require you to do anything.

[Prometheus]

So, with my understanding of the mechanics at present, I feel that eight is too small a number, and P:E should really be looking to provide somewhere in the region of 12+, even if some of those contain substantially less dialogue and effort than others.

12+ companions is unrealistic. If you have so many companion they will just arcanum level companions. They won't react to any quest or dialouge options. For this type of companion is the adventure hall.

I don't like it if some companions are well developed and others are not. I think It's wasted time and money to make this companions.