Seelah marks an interesting female NPC in these games, in that I cannot romance her, and do not wish to.
But HOLY SH*T is she my bestest best buddy ever. Like, of all the characters in the game, she's the one I'd like to go drinking with the most. I would literally die for her, in a completely platonic way.
Yeah, Seelah is wonderful. She's one of the best-portrayed paladins in anything I've ever played in that she's how you would want them to be. She's kind, humble, and has an actual sense of humor.
I really enjoyed the Half Orc paladin NPC. I had to look her up but Irabeth would have been an outstanding party companion.
Yeah, she was also good. Queen Galfrey too, come to think of it.
I genuinely like all of them!
Like, not necessarily in a "I want to be their friend," way, but in a "this character is interesting and reasonably well-written and I want to find out what happens to them" way.
it's one of the major reasons I'm continuing this game, despite nearly having a meltdown when I got to the Xanthir Vang fight (see my previous opinions about swarms in WotR).
Also, one more thing from last night, but the Ember/Nenio team I had going last night, now that they're Level 13, was just wrecking shop.
Ember spams Evil Eye, Nenio hits the Mind Fog, and then we literally just cast metamagic'd Phantasmal Killers at everyone.
Demons were dropping like FLIES. Xanathir Vang lasted two turns.
And then he turned into like 10 swarms of locusts and I had to restart the entire goddamn level so I could go back and buy out every vendor I could find of every chain lightning spell available because those things took no/reduced damage from anything else (including a bunch of AoE spells) and all have 150 HP. There was a lot of cursing.
But it's super-nice to turn the game's mechanics against the AI, seeing enemies with Will Saves of +11 trying to overcome a spell with a DC of 34 to resist. I may have yelled "EAT IT" at several Minotaurs.
Yeah, she was also good. Queen Galfrey too, come to think of it.
There is a way of getting Galfrey to join your party as a companion, but it's somewhat convoluted.
Spoiler:Put Camellia down.
I'm genuinely kind of sad about it, which is weird, because she's been an asshole the whole time! But that's because every RPG up until now would've given me the chance to redeem her somehow. To make her "better."
So I do appreciate that the game makes clear, no, she's a stone-cold, remorseless psychopath. She kills purely for the pleasure of hurting others. There is no redemption, there is no path to her being an anti-hero. She's the worst kind of murderer, and either you keep her around, or you don't.
But yeah, genuinely kinda sad about it, but that's because literally every other CRPG up to this point would've made the character somehow redeemable. How many other RPGs have a companion who is an irredeemable, violent sh*thead? And not even in a Dexter way, in a "your party member is Ted Bundy" way.
Honestly, credit to Owlcat for making this choice, it goes against everything I expect in games.
I had the same feelings!
Usually I tend to 'collect' all the companions and try to keep them in the party no matter what. But this time, my LG Paladin could not stand for vicious murder.
When I finally did put her down (after giving her quite a few chances) I felt that I should have done it earlier. I respected the game so much more for providing genuine RP choices.
Sidenote:
All of my pissing and moaning and griping about the combat, and I've caught myself, TWICE now, thinking "Huh... wonder what a run-through as one of the other classes would be like?"
Like, the ONLY thing I am frustrated with om this game is the combat mechanics. Everything else is a B+, at worst.
I gotta say, coming off of this, BG3's gonna have a LOT to live up to. Because there are huge chunks of this game that piss me off and I'd still say it's awesome.
EDIT: Oh wait, so basically, this game is yet another Cyberpunk 2077 for me. A game where there's a bunch of stuff I'd happily criticize and yet I fully enjoyed my playthrough and likely will play through again.
Can’t say my main character ever bonded with Seelah. From what I recall she was the only one unable to accept me going full Lich. Well, you can join me in death then…
I HATE SWARMS IN THIS GAME SO GODDAMN MUCH
At least you can literally join them this time!
Playful Darkness has an AC of 66.
SIXTY. SIX.
Into Act 4, and the whole "the geometry of the level changes based on where you rotate the camera" thing is perfect for some games, but definitely ends up being really annoying for this kind of game.
That’s the part that puts me off another playthrough, tbh.
You won’t appreciate this Pred but I’m kinda enjoying seeing someone else having a mild breakdown over playing a Pathfinder game. I think you’re more or less where I was in Kingmaker now before I got to the House at the Edge of Time
Into Act 4, and the whole "the geometry of the level changes based on where you rotate the camera" thing is perfect for some games, but definitely ends up being really annoying for this kind of game.
Once you get enough portal coins, it becomes slightly less annoying, but it was definitely the most off putting experience in early play throughs.
Boy howdy, am I ever glad I'm reading a walkthrough for this part. I cannot imagine how annoying Act 4 would be without one. Hell, it's still quite annoying, but manageable.
Like, I can not get over how GREAT this would be... in a DIFFERENT GAME. This mechanic would be totally cool (but still kinda annoying) in a game like Assassin's Creed, and I can see what they wanted to do, but in an isometric CRPG, it's just unnecessary excess.
The combat is hard enough as-is, plus you don't label sh*t on the map so I have no idea where my next quest is half the time, like, you should've limited this to maybe just bridges.
Yes, the abyss, to mortals, is a plane of madness, but the thing is, I'm not actually there, I'm playing a video game I expect to entertain me.
FOR THE LOVE OF DESNA, GROW A SPINE ARUESHALAE
I don't get you Pathfinder. What is fun about enemies with ACs that are more than twice my best melee character's to-hit bonus?
Spells?
I kid. I kid 
Once again, cannot express how much I adore everything in this game EXCEPT for the combat. I am having a very good bad time. 
For a minute there, would've sworn that the voice of Seelah is the voice of Captain Carol Freeman on The Lower Decks, but apparently not!
Shockingly similar though.
The spinny map is gone! We are back to the Crusade Map and Act 5!
So, I have no idea how things will go, but my current plan, as an Azata, is to tell Nocticula and Iomedae to piss off and do whatever I wanna do. Which will invariably involve Areelu heavily, i'm sure.
Felt bad turning down Lann though, he's such a goofy, Golden Retriever of a dude.
I don't get you Pathfinder. What is fun about enemies with ACs that are more than twice my best melee character's to-hit bonus?
THE SECOND MEPHISTOPHELES FIGHT IF YOU'RE AN AZATA.
AC 76.
WHY. WHAT IS THE POINT.
Very, very close to the finish line now, just wrapping up stuff in Act 5.
Oh my Lord, am I ever THRILLED that I'm reading a guide now that I'm doing Nenio's quest. This level would've taken me days otherwise. Possibly weeks.
UPDATE:
We are down to the final mission. However, due to the fact that I had ZERO interest in the Campaign map and mega-cheated my way through it, the crusade is...... slightly ahead of schedule.
By 6 months.
The good news, however, is that I believe I am on track to get the "secret ending" despite not being aware of such a thing until Act 3!
So I just need to skip roughly......... 180 days, and then we can finish the game!
Pred, you're a far stronger gamer than I to get that far. Level 13/14 was all I had in the tank for WOTR. BG3 is far less aggravating re combat, might be due to being designed specifically for turn based combat. Definitely doesn't feel like you have to cast every buff and opponents don't have ridiculous AC requiring ridiculous gish builds to try and beat.
If anything the only complaint I have is that everyone (playable and non playable characters) keep trying to get into my MC's pants. I'm here for the combat and story, not the Mass Effect/Witcher romance shenanigans!
Pred, you're a far stronger gamer than I to get that far. Level 13/14 was all I had in the tank for WOTR. BG3 is far less aggravating re combat, might be due to being designed specifically for turn based combat. Definitely doesn't feel like you have to cast every buff and opponents don't have ridiculous AC requiring ridiculous gish builds to try and beat.
If anything the only complaint I have is that everyone (playable and non playable characters) keep trying to get into my MC's pants. I'm here for the combat and story, not the Mass Effect/Witcher romance shenanigans! :)
No - it's the design choice at Owlcat to make their combat encounters all about the min/max and understanding of how to build Characters. You know those gamers who are all about the stats? It's an RPG for them.
I assume (given the character creation system) that's inherent in the Pathfinder system, so it's actually fine the game is like that. I also had to bulldoze my way through Kingmaker to finish it, I got to the Islands in WotR and that was enough for me.
I have said this before - Owlcat made a Pathfinder tabletop experience that runs on a computer. Larian made a video game that uses the D&D 5E ruleset as far as is practicable for a video game. There is a massive difference between these approaches.
I also hasten to add that there is nothing wrong with that, but just know what you are getting into before you start. I admire the scope of what Owlcat created, but I hated playing it after a while. It probably speaks volumes to the fact that in the end Kingmaker is a good enough game that got me to finish it.
I am looking at what they are doing with RogueTrader with interest though. I think think there's less scope for Min/Maxing in the RogueTrader system, it'll be interesting to see how it plays.
Hmm, I mean, I enjoy some min maxing but even for me it's way too much in Pathfinder.
Like in BG3 I'm enjoying the process of a cheap respec whenever I feel like tweaking a build or straight up mucking around with a different class (there's plenty of gold so experimenting is accessible) but it's strictly unnecessary. A pure class kit of anything will work effectively in its role; I feel that's how the mechanics should work where min max is just icing on the cake. But Pathfinder it was all about squeezing min max builds just to get by and that's wrong because it punishes players for not optimising to the nth degree. But yeah it might be a byproduct of the systems and rule design more than anything else.
Hmm, I mean, I enjoy some min maxing but even for me it's way too much in Pathfinder.
Like in BG3 I'm enjoying the process of a cheap respec whenever I feel like tweaking a build or straight up mucking around with a different class (there's plenty of gold so experimenting is accessible) but it's strictly unnecessary. A pure class kit of anything will work effectively in its role; I feel that's how the mechanics should work where min max is just icing on the cake. But Pathfinder it was all about squeezing min max builds just to get by and that's wrong because it punishes players for not optimising to the nth degree. But yeah it might be a byproduct of the systems and rule design more than anything else.
While I agree that Pathfinder requires decent builds and punishes average builds, I'd argue BG3 rewards multiclassing moreso than Pathfinder. I've done several Wrath of the Righteous playthroughs and have mostly used single class builds (lvl 20 Angel Oracle is just plain OP), except for Regill who I multiclass into cavalier. Whereas with BG3, I have almost always multiclassed every build e.g Bard 6/Rogue4/Fighter2 or some such.
Pathfinder probably was made for me.
Personally enjoy Pathfinder combat, and character building, more than BG3s. More satisfying to execute your plan during combat. More options, and each one matters more for the outcome.
My biggest issue with Pathfinder combat is the buffing. I am quite fine with buff-stacking being a thing, trying to cover all your bases with the various buffs is part of what I like in the character, and by extension team, building. While the inability to stack many of the buffs in BG3, and how easy it is to lose concentration, often made them feel week compared to just focusing on raw damage (or rather, more attacks per round).
Having to recast all those buffs over and over... now that is not fun. A build in auto-cast system or similar could be nice (I know there is a mod for that however, but never tried it, seemed cumbersome to set up). And maybe add some kind of system to make the choice between more vs. less buffs more balanced.
Another huge thing I like about Pathfinder is 6 party members. Always felt much better than 4 or less. 5 would have been okay too, but when you get lower, party compositions start to become very locked into making sure you cover the main archetypes. 4 team members was probably my biggest issue with BG3 overall.
As for the game being designed for minmaxing, I assume you can do just fine without it on the easiest difficulties? While the highest difficulties are extremely brutal. On the other hand, one issue in BG3 is that there is nothing for the minmaxers, as highest difficulty is still going to melt with optimized builds.
I do find both Pathfinder and DnD fairly confusing to get into however, as someone who has never played either outside of video games. BG3s much more streamlined DnD was nice in many ways. But also felt like something was lost. And some things were gained for sure, short rests were great.
My favorite CRPG combat system is still Pillars of Eternity. It felt like well-balanced systems designed for a video game, where the various parts just made more sense, instead of trying to shoehorn existing systems into a video game. Of course at the cost of losing a lot of options in classes and builds, with the limited resources of a small studio having to reinvent the wheel.
Pages