I'd also think (since this has turned into another thread about what people want in BG3) that it would be refreshing to have such a game continue the story from ToB and deal with a character who is a god (or an exceptionally powerful mortal who declined godhood). Imo it would be a much more innovative take on D&D at this point than yet another game where you start at level 1, roam the countryside killing goblins and gnolls and have random cameos of characters from the first two games.
Totally agree with this. Almost any other game in D&D will be like this, start lvl 1, kill goblins, help to save kitys from trees and then become a bit more powerful. A BG3 has the chance to make a difference. If is to be another D&D game with another story or whatever, don't give it the title of BG3, if the devs have the guts to take this level of challenge and change the way of RPGs, as Amnesia for example changed the way of Survival and Horror games, know that i fully support it.
We have many half done examples of potential for this, Black & White is a game about being a god that explored little the many aspects of godhood (and it's not about D&D anyway), Planescape: Torment showed us that gods have challenges too, and they're not unkillable (ask lady of pain about this). Deus Ex that i never played apparently has some kinds of features for example as well.
A BG3 Deity storyline can be totally EPIC or can be totally crap. Potential exist, it's a question of opportunity and talent to make it work. But then, as with many features in this forum, we can only hope...
With greater power will come greater enemies (drizzt says this to you when you meet him in BG/BG:EE), be powerful doesn't limit challenge, just increase it further if a sequel is well done.
The problem, as has been mentioned before, is that the "official" BG story has now been concluded with the most recent D&D release "Murder in Baldur's Gate". While the fate of Bhaal was fairly open-ended with the BG games, it is now established in canon that Bhaal is resurrected and has returned to the pantheon.
That makes BG3 as a direct continuation of ToB problematic. Many fans object to games blatantly ignoring "canon", and I'm sure there would be licensing issues with it as well. They do make these story decisions for a reason...
The problem, as has been mentioned before, is that the "official" BG story has now been concluded with the most recent D&D release "Murder in Baldur's Gate". While the fate of Bhaal was fairly open-ended with the BG games, it is now established in canon that Bhaal is resurrected and has returned to the pantheon.
That makes BG3 as a direct continuation of ToB problematic. Many fans object to games blatantly ignoring "canon", and I'm sure there would be licensing issues with it as well. They do make these story decisions for a reason...
What's canon, the crap story of Abdel? Even if that's taken as Canon, what by itself make the whole BG saga as something that disrupt canon, will not make the game disrupt anymore any official lore more than it's already done.
About Bhaal being ressurected, i looked into it but saw no reference anywhere to this fact, can you point me a source for this @Lord_Tansheron ?
I've got it. After the events of TOB, Charname gets his/her mind wiped and gets reduced back to childhood where you find out that a third child (now the embodiment of Charname) survived the destruction of the cult that had Charname and Saravok originally. This third child grows up in some far off setting away from the Sword Coast (maybe Icewind Dale?) where they live a hard but simple life. After the defeat of Saravok the first time, a tribe of Barbarians threatens the village where the new Charname lives and he is sent out to investigate. he/she starts to uncover several plots being driven by several Bhaalspawn, only to find that Charname is one as well. As the plot unfolds, Charname and their companions get drawn inexorably towards Saradush and some great war brewing in the south.
Hmmm i see, but these are D&D 5°Ed issues, that by the timeline of D&D would happen in 3 or more hundred years after the Bhaalspawn saga. The Sundering is an event that will still be, happening to conclude the. An Deity BG main char doesn't necessary must keep Bhaal Portfolios for all the adventure, BG3 could end before this event, could end during the event or after it and give a different interpretation for Bhaal's ressurection, Portfolios could become something changeable, either by adquiring other gods portfolios, by specialize in aspects of an portfolio or by simply change how to deal with them (as Kelemvor did).
It's not like BG3 would deny an official event, instead it would follow an parallel path only. Normally D&D games must follow the actual events of D&D, but as the enhanced editions proof, if we're working with the events of an old title we can keep working in the timeline of those events.
I don't know about others, but i see this project as viable, either by official lore standards or by game features, will be new and different and it's a question of someone wanting to take the challenge. Let's see what the future reserve us.
Personally I wouldn't mind at all if the BG series just disconnected itself from D&D canon altogether and got extended creative freedom through it.
Much like with George Lucas and Star Wars, Wizards of the Coast have shown time and again that the people who come up (or end up) with a setting aren't necessarily the people who are best suited to looking after it and developing it.
@Shin: in a way, I agree. The problem is that BG is such a tiny part of the entire multiverse, and WotC have to always keep *all of it* in mind - even if that means bending over the BG crowd.
However, while many of the fans certainly wouldn't mind a decoupling, it is very unlikely to happen. IPs like BG are worth a lot to their owners, and licensing and creative control are in the tight grip of the parent company. I doubt they would relinquish that just to please the (comparatively) small group of BG fans.
I reckon the prequel idea is viable. However, I'd prefer a direct sequel, even though I don't think a god-level game would be feasible.
In another thread about the same subject a few months ago, I proposed an outline for a direct sequel which wouldn't be so difficult to make: the basic idea was that instead of continuing as your original protagonist, you now start as a new level 1 character who is a follower of that struggling young deity (i.e. your original protagonist), carrying out a mission on his/her behalf (with some assistance and cameo appearances from the new deity's avatar, etc., so your original protagonist would still be in the game). I also suggested a mission (foiling the plots of rival gods, especially Cyric, to suppress the new deity and his followers), and a location (Baldur's Gate to Waterdeep and the lands between), but I'm not going to repeat the whole plot-summary again here.
I still reckon that'd make a very viable game, and maintain sufficiently direct continuity with BG1+2 so that it'd be justifiable to call it "BG3". In fact, I think there's enough potential in the scenario that it could even be BG3 and BG4.
Well, i always wanted to see the divine abilities and spells (real divine) and deity level features in work onto a D&D PC game, BG3 is almost the only one that give this possibility with an good justify.
Not to mention that playing from being a little punk in Candlekeep to actually becoming a god and going about god business would be a story arc of unprecedented awesomeness.
For me, I don't think it would be the same game if Charname was Divine level (not that they don't get darned close in TOB). As it is in TOB, you get thrown against unreasonably powerful mobs and bosses (not unreasonably for the player, but in relation to the surroundings) and it becomes a significant continuity break. I mean, not long ago, your average guards had non-magical armor and weapons and like 20 hps. Now they have more magic than Monty Haul and could stop a train with their bare hands and not feel it. Your average grunt soldier, even in an army like that one, would not be 15th level plus and would quake in their boots when faced with someone of the power level Charname and party are.
Now, if the adventure was a Plane walk, that "Might" be different, but I think that Charname at the end of TOB is plenty powerful as it stands. All IMHO.
I also feel there are aspects with ToB that are out of joint with the rest of the series (mostly given how short it is and how fast you develop in it, along with the surroundings). However, it doesn't mean that ToB couldn't have come out a lot better if it had been treated as a third game rather than an expansion, and also doesn't mean that a divine level sequel wouldn't be possible to get right.
Also, as said, even if it wouldn't come out all perfect I'd much rather see developers daring to try that path rather than the more obvious "restart from scratch"-approach that is utilized by nearly every game series.
For me, I don't think it would be the same game if Charname was Divine level (not that they don't get darned close in TOB). As it is in TOB, you get thrown against unreasonably powerful mobs and bosses (not unreasonably for the player, but in relation to the surroundings) and it becomes a significant continuity break. I mean, not long ago, your average guards had non-magical armor and weapons and like 20 hps. Now they have more magic than Monty Haul and could stop a train with their bare hands and not feel it. Your average grunt soldier, even in an army like that one, would not be 15th level plus and would quake in their boots when faced with someone of the power level Charname and party are.
Now, if the adventure was a Plane walk, that "Might" be different, but I think that Charname at the end of TOB is plenty powerful as it stands. All IMHO.
@The_spyder, the failure in ToB isn't related with high power level, it's related with a too hurried release of an expansion that wasn't proper done to be release yet. The mistakes with managing the enemies power levels isn't a trademark of overpower adventures, but a failure of script from whoever was the dev responsible for that.
In Saradush for example, the party should face lots of weak orcs with some few groups of very powerful beings that could give the party a challenge. Instead every orc the party found was a lvl 18+ character with +3 equipment set.
Forgotten Realms lore is vast, and become a god isn't the pinacle of power search, because there's no limit on it. In fact, the Dead Tree history is the better example of this. Bhaal, Bane and Myrkul were once mortals, powerful mortals, they become gods but that wasn't suffice, so Bane and myrkul decided to stole the table of fate from AO to rewrite existence putting them (or the one who betray the other first) into AO's position.
The time of troubles sound to me as an awesome story, many works are based on it and often D&D refeer to these events. Time of Troubles wasn't the story of a level 1 party killing goblins, it was about gods walking in the prime.
I love start a level 1 character into an RPG and develop it, so don't take me wrong, but then a D&D lvl 1+ adventure isn't something difficult to be done, Baldur's Gate already worked that path, so why link another lvl 1 adventure to BG title when we can do much, so much more?
I really hope Beamdog to have a chance to use the improved infinite engine to make other D&D adventures, totally non-related with BG, i hope for investment on art graphics, voices, environment and history for those adventures in infinite engine, but for BG3, i hope to conclude the bhaalspawn saga, cos no matter what other ppl says to me, i never had the feeling of conclusion in ToB's end.
Yes i become a god, now i start my first step inside a whole new concept... No, i refused the divine essence, but i'm about the most powerful mortal walking the prime atm and i made powerful allies and enemies (remember that you killed an whole thetyr army), so now...?
@kamuizin - I get what you are saying (sort of) and like I said, if it were a plane walk adventure where the standard creatures were by nature 18+ demons and devils and Gith and Planatars, it "Might" be worth playing. Of course, it might merely be Kratose all over again. And those types of games are fine as well. I totally enjoy God of War series and have played them all. I just find it hard to reconcile that with D&D.
In 1E and Advanced, Druids were capped at 17th level and any level above 14th you could only get there if there was an opening. There was a finite number of them so someone had to step down or die or advance. It made it tough. I think Assassins had the same thing. And most of the high levels were barons or other politically motivated non-adventurers. Basically 'Divine' level play simply didn't exist. Which isn't to say that other editions didn't introduce that, or that it couldn't be fun. Just it wasn't in the edition that I played (yep, I am that old).
As for TOB's "Failure", I think it failed on several levels, but don't necessarily think that was one of them. For me, there were several 'Gimmick' kills where they were immune to damage until you did something special. I personally hate that type of thing. Then it was quite linear where most of the rest of the series at least let you explore to some degree. And finally they threw around power like it was water (ok, maybe that is your point as well). I still play it, but it is by far my least favorite portion of the game.
WAY back in the mists of time when SSI put out the Gold box Pool of Radiance (the one and ONLY), I remember playing Pools of Darkness, the 'High level' equivalent to that series. I got terribly bored with that as well as I got sick of the hours long slugfests of combat and spell casting, and the grind endurance 'dungeons' where you had to micro-manage your supplies to such a degree that an errant hit could adversely impact the whole rest of the dungeon. I would be afraid of that happening with BG3 if it were high level like you suggest. But am willing to at least give it a try either way.
I still think there are an almost limitless number of lower level stories to be told and would be just as happy with that for BG3. But that is personal opinion.
I would love to see a game based on the classic Greyhawk module The lost caverns of Tsojcanth. You actually had to stomp around jungles for hours trying to find the entrance. Explorers heaven.
You know in all seriousness I will say that if BG3 jumps to 5th edition I find it highly probable that will `ruin` the game for me. I'd rather see it stay true to the first two, in both setting and rules. That also eliminates a lot of the concerns here.
That being said, I'm sure I'll give anything they do a go, but it's going to be quite a shocker if they jump to such a different ruleset.
Straight comparisons of PnP D&D with computer game versions of it are always going to be problematic though. One is a social, multi-person game where progress is often slow. You can run campaigns for the better part of a year and still not reach level 10, not to mention that characters can frequently die, or the whole endeavour can run out of steam and be abandoned. A single player CRPG on the other hand is completely controlled by the player, and (in the case of the BG series) you can go from level 1 to level 30 and beyond, accomplishing in mere weeks or even days what most PnP D&D players in all likelihood never got around to at all.
As for God of War I always felt it was more of a traditional approach. You get to spend very little time as a god in the sequel before uncremoniously getting stripped of all your powers and then spending the entire game building them up from scratch again in a manner very similar to the first game. Of course, you arguably end up fighting more epic and lorewise more powerful enemies, but since GoW is a game based on mechanical difficulty rather than stats and abilities like BG it's a bit of a tricky comparison. Still, not saying it's inherently bad, but it would be nice to see a game that dared to push the envelope and raise the in-game bar rather than reset the player.
In the end it's a question of guts too, a new lvl 1 adventure on infinite engine, while i would prefer it to not relate itself with BG title, is almost 100% guaranteed to make success, by another side an divine adventure or/and epic level start adventure doesn't have the same assureance of success, but can reach a higher position in quality and with the critic (they can even make a 2 in 1 game with a sequel for a god main char and a mortal main char).
If a deity-level continuation could actually be done decently, then I'd be delighted.
However, does the AD&D system really incorporate such high level characters? I think Bioware were stretching the system even to implement ToB, reaching level 40 for some classes. Wouldn't Beamdog pretty much need to invent a whole new section of the ruleset to give the characters some development to work towards? And wouldn't WotC immediately object to a third party suddenly reviving development of a ruleset which they own and have deliberately chosen to retire? And even if Beamdog could somehow negotiate a licence from WotC to do this, there's little canon or precedent for how it ought to work, which would make the development much harder work than a lower-level game within the already-established framework of rules. And even then, it'd need additional development of the game engine, to bolt on new god-level abilities/spells/stuff which aren't included in what they've already developed. It'd be a heck of a commercial gamble to embark on such a project, and that's why I reckon it's not really feasible.
If Beamdog can somehow pull all this off, then I'll take my hat off to them ... but I won't hold my breath.
If we ever do get a BG3, some sort of new level 1 adventure is really much more likely. I just hope the story has a good solid link to the existing BG series, to justify using the BG name.
Comments
We have many half done examples of potential for this, Black & White is a game about being a god that explored little the many aspects of godhood (and it's not about D&D anyway), Planescape: Torment showed us that gods have challenges too, and they're not unkillable (ask lady of pain about this). Deus Ex that i never played apparently has some kinds of features for example as well.
A BG3 Deity storyline can be totally EPIC or can be totally crap. Potential exist, it's a question of opportunity and talent to make it work. But then, as with many features in this forum, we can only hope...
With greater power will come greater enemies (drizzt says this to you when you meet him in BG/BG:EE), be powerful doesn't limit challenge, just increase it further if a sequel is well done.
That makes BG3 as a direct continuation of ToB problematic. Many fans object to games blatantly ignoring "canon", and I'm sure there would be licensing issues with it as well. They do make these story decisions for a reason...
You get a different ending depending on the number, but you always end up dead.
Now that's a story.
About Bhaal being ressurected, i looked into it but saw no reference anywhere to this fact, can you point me a source for this @Lord_Tansheron ?
http://forum.baldursgate.com/discussion/20465/murder-in-baldur-s-gate/p1
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndacc/45370000
It's not like BG3 would deny an official event, instead it would follow an parallel path only. Normally D&D games must follow the actual events of D&D, but as the enhanced editions proof, if we're working with the events of an old title we can keep working in the timeline of those events.
I don't know about others, but i see this project as viable, either by official lore standards or by game features, will be new and different and it's a question of someone wanting to take the challenge. Let's see what the future reserve us.
Much like with George Lucas and Star Wars, Wizards of the Coast have shown time and again that the people who come up (or end up) with a setting aren't necessarily the people who are best suited to looking after it and developing it.
However, while many of the fans certainly wouldn't mind a decoupling, it is very unlikely to happen. IPs like BG are worth a lot to their owners, and licensing and creative control are in the tight grip of the parent company. I doubt they would relinquish that just to please the (comparatively) small group of BG fans.
In another thread about the same subject a few months ago, I proposed an outline for a direct sequel which wouldn't be so difficult to make: the basic idea was that instead of continuing as your original protagonist, you now start as a new level 1 character who is a follower of that struggling young deity (i.e. your original protagonist), carrying out a mission on his/her behalf (with some assistance and cameo appearances from the new deity's avatar, etc., so your original protagonist would still be in the game). I also suggested a mission (foiling the plots of rival gods, especially Cyric, to suppress the new deity and his followers), and a location (Baldur's Gate to Waterdeep and the lands between), but I'm not going to repeat the whole plot-summary again here.
I still reckon that'd make a very viable game, and maintain sufficiently direct continuity with BG1+2 so that it'd be justifiable to call it "BG3". In fact, I think there's enough potential in the scenario that it could even be BG3 and BG4.
Now, if the adventure was a Plane walk, that "Might" be different, but I think that Charname at the end of TOB is plenty powerful as it stands. All IMHO.
Also, as said, even if it wouldn't come out all perfect I'd much rather see developers daring to try that path rather than the more obvious "restart from scratch"-approach that is utilized by nearly every game series.
In Saradush for example, the party should face lots of weak orcs with some few groups of very powerful beings that could give the party a challenge. Instead every orc the party found was a lvl 18+ character with +3 equipment set.
Forgotten Realms lore is vast, and become a god isn't the pinacle of power search, because there's no limit on it. In fact, the Dead Tree history is the better example of this. Bhaal, Bane and Myrkul were once mortals, powerful mortals, they become gods but that wasn't suffice, so Bane and myrkul decided to stole the table of fate from AO to rewrite existence putting them (or the one who betray the other first) into AO's position.
The time of troubles sound to me as an awesome story, many works are based on it and often D&D refeer to these events. Time of Troubles wasn't the story of a level 1 party killing goblins, it was about gods walking in the prime.
I love start a level 1 character into an RPG and develop it, so don't take me wrong, but then a D&D lvl 1+ adventure isn't something difficult to be done, Baldur's Gate already worked that path, so why link another lvl 1 adventure to BG title when we can do much, so much more?
I really hope Beamdog to have a chance to use the improved infinite engine to make other D&D adventures, totally non-related with BG, i hope for investment on art graphics, voices, environment and history for those adventures in infinite engine, but for BG3, i hope to conclude the bhaalspawn saga, cos no matter what other ppl says to me, i never had the feeling of conclusion in ToB's end.
Yes i become a god, now i start my first step inside a whole new concept...
No, i refused the divine essence, but i'm about the most powerful mortal walking the prime atm and i made powerful allies and enemies (remember that you killed an whole thetyr army), so now...?
In 1E and Advanced, Druids were capped at 17th level and any level above 14th you could only get there if there was an opening. There was a finite number of them so someone had to step down or die or advance. It made it tough. I think Assassins had the same thing. And most of the high levels were barons or other politically motivated non-adventurers. Basically 'Divine' level play simply didn't exist. Which isn't to say that other editions didn't introduce that, or that it couldn't be fun. Just it wasn't in the edition that I played (yep, I am that old).
As for TOB's "Failure", I think it failed on several levels, but don't necessarily think that was one of them. For me, there were several 'Gimmick' kills where they were immune to damage until you did something special. I personally hate that type of thing. Then it was quite linear where most of the rest of the series at least let you explore to some degree. And finally they threw around power like it was water (ok, maybe that is your point as well). I still play it, but it is by far my least favorite portion of the game.
WAY back in the mists of time when SSI put out the Gold box Pool of Radiance (the one and ONLY), I remember playing Pools of Darkness, the 'High level' equivalent to that series. I got terribly bored with that as well as I got sick of the hours long slugfests of combat and spell casting, and the grind endurance 'dungeons' where you had to micro-manage your supplies to such a degree that an errant hit could adversely impact the whole rest of the dungeon. I would be afraid of that happening with BG3 if it were high level like you suggest. But am willing to at least give it a try either way.
I still think there are an almost limitless number of lower level stories to be told and would be just as happy with that for BG3. But that is personal opinion.
I would love to see a game based on the classic Greyhawk module The lost caverns of Tsojcanth. You actually had to stomp around jungles for hours trying to find the entrance. Explorers heaven.
That being said, I'm sure I'll give anything they do a go, but it's going to be quite a shocker if they jump to such a different ruleset.
As for God of War I always felt it was more of a traditional approach. You get to spend very little time as a god in the sequel before uncremoniously getting stripped of all your powers and then spending the entire game building them up from scratch again in a manner very similar to the first game. Of course, you arguably end up fighting more epic and lorewise more powerful enemies, but since GoW is a game based on mechanical difficulty rather than stats and abilities like BG it's a bit of a tricky comparison. Still, not saying it's inherently bad, but it would be nice to see a game that dared to push the envelope and raise the in-game bar rather than reset the player.
However, does the AD&D system really incorporate such high level characters? I think Bioware were stretching the system even to implement ToB, reaching level 40 for some classes. Wouldn't Beamdog pretty much need to invent a whole new section of the ruleset to give the characters some development to work towards? And wouldn't WotC immediately object to a third party suddenly reviving development of a ruleset which they own and have deliberately chosen to retire? And even if Beamdog could somehow negotiate a licence from WotC to do this, there's little canon or precedent for how it ought to work, which would make the development much harder work than a lower-level game within the already-established framework of rules. And even then, it'd need additional development of the game engine, to bolt on new god-level abilities/spells/stuff which aren't included in what they've already developed. It'd be a heck of a commercial gamble to embark on such a project, and that's why I reckon it's not really feasible.
If Beamdog can somehow pull all this off, then I'll take my hat off to them ... but I won't hold my breath.
If we ever do get a BG3, some sort of new level 1 adventure is really much more likely. I just hope the story has a good solid link to the existing BG series, to justify using the BG name.
Divine Ranks and characteristics and another source
Divine abilities (like feats for deities) and another source
Deity spellcasting list
Avatar table for deities
Here's a menu table of Deities issues:
http://www.d20srd.org/indexes/divineRanksPowers.htm
There are spells for deity only to cast, but i coudn't find it now on internet