The 8 Companions

[Luckmann]

 

Well technically Cadegund is now Durance. Meadow Human Priest of Magran. I don't know why they changed it. That information is still 'unofficial' as well. It's official in the game files, but it has not been spoken about publicly at all yet.

Seems like a terrible shame to me. She was such a unique character concept. Now, instead of a strong, armored priestess with a blunderbuss, we get a wild-eyed loon in a dirty robe carrying around a stick.

 

In fact, it seems like there's very few female companions right now: just the eskimo dwarf, the feathered paladin and a potentially dead or insane woman.

 

Please bring back Cadegund.

 

 

Cadegund always seemed awesome, and I can't help but to hope that she's added as a proper CNPC at some point, even though I know it's very unlikely we'll ever get two CNPC:s that share both class, deity, and at least to some extent weaponry.

 

But I can hope.

[Gfted1]

They must have removed her due to the boobplate.

[Bill Gates' Son]

 

Well technically Cadegund is now Durance. Meadow Human Priest of Magran. I don't know why they changed it. That information is still 'unofficial' as well. It's official in the game files, but it has not been spoken about publicly at all yet.

Seems like a terrible shame to me. She was such a unique character concept. Now, instead of a strong, armored priestess with a blunderbuss, we get a wild-eyed loon in a dirty robe carrying around a stick.

 

In fact, it seems like there's very few female companions right now: just the eskimo dwarf, the feathered paladin and a potentially dead or insane woman.

 

Please bring back Cadegund.

 

 

Having neither Cadegund or Forton is a disappointment. I really hope they appear in the games as NPCs or perhaps NPCs in the expansion or sequel. As fur Durance, we know he's going to be "insane" and he's being written by Chris Avellone. No doubt he's going to be an interesting character.

[Luckmann]

 

 

Well technically Cadegund is now Durance. Meadow Human Priest of Magran. I don't know why they changed it. That information is still 'unofficial' as well. It's official in the game files, but it has not been spoken about publicly at all yet.

Seems like a terrible shame to me. She was such a unique character concept. Now, instead of a strong, armored priestess with a blunderbuss, we get a wild-eyed loon in a dirty robe carrying around a stick.

 

In fact, it seems like there's very few female companions right now: just the eskimo dwarf, the feathered paladin and a potentially dead or insane woman.

 

Please bring back Cadegund.

 

 

Having neither Cadegund or Forton is a disappointment. I really hope they appear in the games as NPCs or perhaps NPCs in the expansion or sequel. As fur Durance, we know he's going to be "insane" and he's being written by Chris Avellone. No doubt he's going to be an interesting character.

 

They should've had Avellone write the entire setting.

[charms]

Avellone's good at what he does, but if that happened, then the Eastern Reach would be a wasteland consisting of forsaken sites of battles that were fought in the past, and it would be populated mainly by elderly crones with a monomaniacal, explicitly non-romantic obsession with the PC.

[Luckmann]

Avellone's good at what he does, but if that happened, then the Eastern Reach would be a wasteland consisting of forsaken sites of battles that were fought in the past, and it would be populated mainly by elderly crones with a monomaniacal, explicitly non-romantic obsession with the PC.

I would be fine with this.

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

Well technically Cadegund is now Durance. Meadow Human Priest of Magran. I don't know why they changed it. That information is still 'unofficial' as well. It's official in the game files, but it has not been spoken about publicly at all yet.

Seems like a terrible shame to me. She was such a unique character concept. Now, instead of a strong, armored priestess with a blunderbuss, we get a wild-eyed loon in a dirty robe carrying around a stick.

 

In fact, it seems like there's very few female companions right now: just the eskimo dwarf, the feathered paladin and a potentially dead or insane woman.

 

Please bring back Cadegund.

 

 

Having neither Cadegund or Forton is a disappointment. I really hope they appear in the games as NPCs or perhaps NPCs in the expansion or sequel. As fur Durance, we know he's going to be "insane" and he's being written by Chris Avellone. No doubt he's going to be an interesting character.

 

They should've had Avellone write the entire setting.

 

am not quite sure what you mean. do all the writing in the game says something different to us than "write the entire setting." did you want chrisA to do all character dialogues and narration for game as well as developing setting and plot? is that what you meant? we expect that doing so would be extreme burdensome, but am guessing it would be possible to do so... though am doubting kickstarter backers would want a decade development akin to age o' decadence.

 

chrisA gets loads o' credit for being a fantabulous writer.  am kinda ambivalent, though we does applaud his efforts on characters such as dak'kon, ravel, kreia (at least up to malachor v) and morte.

 

'course even in ps:t, chrisA didn't do all the writing. many ps:t groupies were big fans o' the Brothel for Slaking Intellectual Lusts and that were largely dave maldonado's work. anybody who were familiar with the tsr planescape setting likely recognized that colin mccomb deserved far more credit for the game setting than he ever got. etc.

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Messier-31]

Seems like a terrible shame to me. She was such a unique character concept. Now, instead of a strong, armored priestess with a blunderbuss, we get a wild-eyed loon in a dirty robe carrying around a stick.

In fact, it seems like there's very few female companions right now: just the eskimo dwarf, the feathered paladin and a potentially dead or insane woman.

Please bring back Cadegund.

 

that being said, am actual kinda finding it refreshing to have a priest that ISN'T a magic knight. d&d gave us a kinda wacky notion o' priest and cleric that has managed to keep its gameplay hooks firmly sunk into fantasy rpgs and crpgs alike. the proselytizing, wild-eyed zealot wearing a dirty smock, sandals and carrying a sheperd's crook is, ironically, the exception in fantasy gaming. what should be cliché is actual rare and approaching unique. 

 

This is rather unusual but I agree with both of you guys. Both concepts for a priest (at least what we know today) sound interesting to me.

 

What is really strange is that there will be no rogue companion in the game - at least for now, maybe expansion will change it? Yeah, you can play it yourself, or add it up through AdvHall, but still. Rogues been a big deal in all fantasy RPG settings since forever. I think the devs are really trying to say you don't need to be Jack-of-all-Trades to play the game.

[Zwiebelchen]

11 companions on the game files? Makes sense, considering there are temporary companions at certain points. In fact, 2 of them will be part of the prologue already (there's been plenty of vids on that already that state that both companions you have at the prologue will leave the party later on).

That leaves us with 9 companions ... of which 1 more might be temporary aswell. Maybe a companion only available for a certain quest? The ominous "Mother" npc might be this.

 

But yeah, I agree that it was a bad decision to take Cadegund out of the game. I liked the concept of her. Wonder why they thought it wasn't a good addition to the game? Maybe because they needed another "evil" spellcaster to balance things out?

Edited March 6, 2015 by Zwiebelchen

[Luckmann]

 

11 companions on the game files? Makes sense, considering there are temporary companions at certain points. In fact, 2 of them will be part of the prologue already (there's been plenty of vids on that already that state that both companions you have at the prologue will leave the party later on).

That leaves us with 9 companions ... of which 1 more might be temporary aswell. Maybe a companion only available for a certain quest? The ominous "Mother" npc might be this.

 

But yeah, I agree that it was a bad decision to take Cadegund out of the game. I liked the concept of her. Wonder why they thought it wasn't a good addition to the game? Maybe because they needed another "evil" spellcaster to balance things out?

 

 

Unless there's some surprise they've kept secret, we know that there's 8 full companions in the game and Grieving Mother is one of them. The other 3 are no doubt temporary NPC:s (like the two in the prologue) or just scrap.

[Chilloutman]

Sensuki cant you post what you know here into spoiler tag? we know you are going through  game data files

[Karkarov]

I wonder why you guys don't just start a new thread with an updated OP that has the correct, or at least, mostly correct info.

 

We mostly all know who the 8 are at this point, the question is just who are these other three and are they just the temp companions like Calisca?

[Voss]

 

In fact, it seems like there's very few female companions right now: just the eskimo dwarf, the feathered paladin and a potentially dead or insane woman.

 

 

And by virtue of class issues, one of those probably isn't worth taking, though admittedly is another is almost an auto-include for the same reason.

[Sensuki]

There are only 8 companions. There are not more.

[Lephys]

What is really strange is that there will be no rogue companion in the game - at least for now, maybe expansion will change it?

Maybe there is... but they're SO sneaky that even Obsidian doesn't know they're there. O_O

[Suhiir]

 

What is really strange is that there will be no rogue companion in the game - at least for now, maybe expansion will change it?

Maybe there is... but they're SO sneaky that even Obsidian doesn't know they're there. O_O

 

Since rogues are primarily a melee DPS class (tho of course given they way the game works you could build them into anything) as are barbarians (single-target vice AoE), and  monks/fighters (tho both are likly to be more tanky) and there are no class restricted abilities (i.e. picking locks and disarming traps) I don't think the lack of a rogue companion will be much of an issue.

Besises, I plan to play a rogue as my character so I like the idea of being the class not otherwise covered by a companion!

Edited March 7, 2015 by Suhiir

[Voss]

It does seem odd that three melee dps classes have been dumped (as a group) as companions.  Really limits party composition if you want to experiment with different things while keeping the (at least theoretical) depth of fleshed out companions.

[Sensuki]

Probably because noobs will die without a Fighter I guess, if they don't play a Fighter.

[Karkarov]

It does seem odd that three melee dps classes have been dumped (as a group) as companions.

Rogues can be very effective at range, Monks are actually tanks primarily not DPS, and Barbarians were never being touted as one of the companion classes and are the only class that has never had their companion status change this whole time.

[Luckmann]

I'm still hoping that Edér will alternate between Fighter and Rogue based on your choices.

 

Mostly because I think Edér seems cool, but Fighters? Meh.

[Suhiir]

Probably because noobs will die without a Fighter I guess, if they don't play a Fighter.

Probably.

 

That and fighter is the one almost mandatory class to have in your party, and since it's said he has some significant dialog concerning the main quest line this makes good sense as they can be pretty sure most players will use him.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Suhiir

[Abel]

 

It does seem odd that three melee dps classes have been dumped (as a group) as companions.

Rogues can be very effective at range, Monks are actually tanks primarily not DPS, and Barbarians were never being touted as one of the companion classes and are the only class that has never had their companion status change this whole time.

 

 

I never liked barbarians and monks, wichever game i played, and it's not a matter of gameplay. So, i'm ok not having such companions. Still, if the expansion add some NPC, it would be cool to add in them as barb or monks for whoever like them.

 

I've always liked the concept of the armored priest. And Cadegund seemed to be a good idea, even if it was strange to mix guns and heavy armor (maybe it's what was the most interesting in fact). However, i may be the only one like this here, but i miss Calisca much more than Cadegund. For various reasons, i just fell in love with this NPC while watching some videos. I've always loved the concept of female warriors. I often play female warriors myself. I wanted to see her plated blonde avatar, discover what the problem with her sister was, and keep her by my side from the start to the end. I think i feel the same toward Calisca than many of you toward Cadegund. Exotic NPCs are cool, but sometimes, some more regular ones (e.g human/plain fighter/not crazy or anything weird) are deeply needed. My prefered NPCs of BG1 were Branwen and Yeslick, and i don't really like exotic things (that should be the exception rather than the rule).

 

Agree that the 3 other NPCs may be temporary companions. Like Luckman, i feel that 8 companions is painfully not enough. But thanks to you, KS backers, we have 8, not just 5. Thx for this.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Abel

[Ted Striker]

Probably because noobs will die without a Fighter I guess, if they don't play a Fighter.

 

Oh a bowl of cheer. 

 

I thought you create your own companions at some point? 

[Valmy]

Yeah the ability to create our soulful NPCs solves any problems created by the classes of the Companions.

[Ted Striker]

Yeah the ability to create our soulful NPCs solves any problems created by the classes of the Companions.

I only saw it briefly in a video... is there more information on creating custom companions during the gameplay?