I choose this because I honestly have no idea how the original PC could continue the story... unless the PC had all his memory erased and was sent to a new land without his companions. I would rather have a prequel story or a completely original BG story personally.
The first idea that ever crossed my mind when I've heard about the continuation of Baldur's Gate series was that no matter the protagonist it would simply be great to come back to this old memorable places like the Friendly Arm Inn, Durlag's Tower, or de'Arnise Hold, to travel once again through the Cloakwood Forest, Windpear Hills or Marching Mountains and to observe how they changed and shaped within a couple of decades. I'd love to see the old walls of the Friendly Arm just to find out that Bentley sold his interest, Trademeet was destroyed by the remnants of Sythillis army (maybe even to find the battle field where Yaga Shura defeated him), and Durlag's Tower has been reinstated as a watchtower or even a keep next to some new human/dwarven settlement.
It would be marvelous to travel once again to Baldur's Gate city to find out the people heard about the history of Gorion's Ward and created dozens of myths and legends concerning that, maybe even to make arguments with the commoners how they remember him/her and what is the truth behind their fables (quite a similar idea appears shortly in KotOR 2 concerning the character of Revan). And furthermore the new character could have been directly interested in such a story, as a, let's say, champion of some temple concerned with rise of the cult of "a new Bhaal", or a Red Wizard seeking for the Odesseiron's family heir, or a Harper's agent who has to find the former operative, Jaheira, or maybe the child of Imoen, Sarevok, charname, etc, or their young apprentice, or a retired Bhaalspawn hunter, whatsoever.
What I would really despise to find is the continuation is a game which only has in common the brand name, mechanics, and eventually system, as it... the experience would simply not be the same. I think I would have to think all the time about the old (and idealised) parts of the series and unwillingly compare each element of the new story to the old storyline and characters.
I know it's highly implausible, but I do want to see what happens next, and not just from those silly ending screens. I'm sure my character's adventuring career wouldn't just up and end there.
Aside from that, a prequel would be pretty awesome too. Especially if Gorion is playable.
I would like to continue playing as my current party (not just my PC). It doesn't matter if it continues the story past ToB or if it is unrelated adventures. If its the same PC and party than it will be acceptable and I would certainly play it.
If its neither than it doesn't deserve to be called BG3. It could still be a perfectly good game, it just wouldn't be BG3, since that name implies a connection to the other games. Regardless, I would still try to import my party into it anyway possibly by re-creating them via Shadowkeeper or equivalent. If this were not possible I would be much less likely to play it just like I don't play Icewind Dale for that very reason.
Edit: I've read some of the other comments on here and it sounds like many people don't want the story to keep going simply because they can't think of how the story could continue. I have several ideas about the direction that an interesting and balanced game/story could take after ToB. I think that any of my ideas would be fun to play and that there are probably many other directions the game could go that I have not thought of. If I can come up with so many ideas I think it likely that the game designers can too, so I have no doubts whatsoever that the story can and will continue in an interesting direction if that is what the game designers decide to do.
What if charname chose mortality but mortality didn't like it? Baldur's gate 3: Torment
That could be an interesting plot. If charname didn't like being mortal and then had to either steal Bhaal's essence from Mount Celestial or become immortal in some other fashion.
As a fairly new roleplayer (started when 3.5 came out) I find that I am being pushed away from newer editions of D&D and have to look for variety or something new in AD&D 1st and 2nd edition. To me at least Baldur's gate=AD&D 2nd edition.
If BG3 were to change story AND the rules it would not be Baldur's Gate. If BG3 were to only change the rules and try to extend the story, it would be a pathertic attempt to cash in on Baldur's gate.
BG3 must be like BG2 which must be like BG.
What part of "it makes sense for a company to promote the latest incarnation of their ruleset and you can't really expect them to do otherwise," is unclear?
It's probably unclear why a Baldur's Gate fan would even consider buying something that is portrayed as Baldur's Gate when it isn't. I couldn't care less what the company feels it should promote. If they can't sell a quality product than I won't buy it.
I made the mistake of buying Icewind Dale 2. I will not repeat that mistake by buying some other knockoff version of the infinity engine.
@ARKdeEREH Eh. I'm okay with 3rd ed rules. They're sure not 2nd ed, but they're still nice. Honestly as long as BG3 isn't in 4th ed I will be fine. 4th ed is just ridiculous.
In my opinion, if the plot is an entirely unrelated story from Throne of Bhaal...the game must not be called Baldurs Gate 3. And I think most of the people want a Baldurs Gate 3.
If its neither than it doesn't deserve to be called BG3. It could still be a perfectly good game, it just wouldn't be BG3, since that name implies a connection to the other games.
No, the name implies a geographical area in the sword coast - Baldur's Gate.
BTW, Baldur's Gate 3: The Black Hound ( though was never released ) didn't continue from TOB and had a completely new story. Also as other people already said, IWD2 took place over 30 years after IWD1, wasn't related to IWD1 other than some similar areas - And still was called 'Icewind Dale 2'
Personally I'd be interested in the sequel happening in the wider Western Heartlands area (which contains not just Baldur's Gate and much of the classic BG locations, but also Evereska, the Dragon Coast, Darkhold, and other neat new areas that haven't been touched on in most of the computer games).
Whilst it might be interesting to see 5th edition rules coming in (and would be a big catch for Beamdog if they swung being the first to nab a license of such), so long as the game is D&D, I'd even be willing to go with 4th Edition (which would be quite fitting for a computer game, though the endlessly increasing +X gear is rather obnoxious), and fit the "hundred years later" conceit that's being suggested.
Being in the same general area, it's not out of the question that the player encounter old favourites in the appropriate areas, whilst still opening things up to a much broader scope for new adventures than just putting up and down the Sword Coast for all time.
It doesn't have to follow on with the same character, though if a BG2 save was present I'd very much expect your epilogue state to apply certain features, a temple of CHARNAME, coloured by your alignment, or something similar, some holy artifacts (the equipment CHARNAME was wielding when he ascended, for example), and other bonuses and benefits for owning BG2:EE (sorry original game holders!).
BG3 needn't be a one-off adventure, BG is all about following the adventures of your CHARNAME; if it followed 4e patterns (if someone actually plays it and I'm wrong, feel free to correct me) then BG3A would be 1-10, "Heroic", then BG3B would be 11-20 "Epic", and BG3C would be 21-30 "Legendary" campaigns, a readily settable "scale" which would also go hand in hand with modders campaign creation by supplying the resources required in each standalone "expansion".
I think the story is done, and the realms moved far ahead without us, a century.
But, I'd feel excited about revisiting the Sword Coast, to see what has changed in that much time. Educate myself about things that has happened, if anything. Should be a lot really, but I don't really read. I mean, in my life anyway so many things have changed in just a decade. Malls are 10 times bigger, some buildings aren't there anymore, new traditions becoming popular.
I wouldn't mind current D&D rules. I'd adapt. Just give me the good story and the interesting characters.
Can't decide yet. Over a century means almost no old characters, maybe Sarevok if you became a deity and him your right hand and some elves and Edwin, we know he could make it happen. But I'd prefer the artistic freedom of the devlopers.
Edit: After giving a second thought, I decided it is the time to retake the Throne Of Bhaal and overthrow this disgrace Abdel was. A new canon Lord of Murder, make it happen.
Can't decide yet. Over a century means almost no old characters, maybe Sarevok if you became a deity and him your right hand and some elves and Edwin, we know he could make it happen. But I'd prefer the artistic freedom of the devlopers.
Edit: After giving a second thought, I decided it is the time to retake the Throne Of Bhaal and overthrow this disgrace Abdel was. A new canon Lord of Murder, make it happen.
Ooo, that would be an awesome "punishment" for not owning BG2:EE. If you don't have an ascension save, then the god of murder is *Abdel*...
I should have chosen 1 instead of 4. because thinking about it I realized there hasn't been RPG game where you play as a god or some very-extremly-high level character.
I should have chosen 1 instead of 4. because thinking about it I realized there hasn't been RPG game where you play as a god or some very-extremly-high level character.
Try Mask of the Betrayer, you're not quite deity level, but it's definitely one of the best Epic campaigns I've come across in a good long while, and really does feel like you're not just punching over your metaphysical weight but hitting pretty hard when you do so.
If its neither than it doesn't deserve to be called BG3. It could still be a perfectly good game, it just wouldn't be BG3, since that name implies a connection to the other games.
No, the name implies a geographical area in the sword coast - Baldur's Gate.
BTW, Baldur's Gate 3: The Black Hound ( though was never released ) didn't continue from TOB and had a completely new story. Also as other people already said, IWD2 took place over 30 years after IWD1, wasn't related to IWD1 other than some similar areas - And still was called 'Icewind Dale 2'
Yes, and I regarded IWD2 as a scam and didn't play it. I tried to in spite of its flaws since I'd already bought it, but could never get into it because it had nothing to do with the earlier game, not in terms of rules or in terms of characters. I played IWD1 under the assumption that I could continue my game in IWD2 and when that not only turned out to be untrue, but it became clear that the game designers also went out of their way to make it impossible to re-create IWD1 characters by using 3rd edition rules. I decided not to waste anymore time on it so its been collecting dust ever since.
BG2 had no relation to BG1 except the storyline. BG2 TOB continued this tradition. It would seem very strange if BG3 suddenly had no plausible link to the earlier games. This is similar to how Warcraft II follows Warcraft I in terms of story, how the various Forgotten Realms book series all follow their characters in some way and don't randomly start revolving around different ones. I would think it very odd, if for instance, R.A. Salvatore wrote another book in his "Dark Elf Trilogy" and had it revolve around a completely different drow elf than Drizzt. Sure, he could claim that the title "Dark Elf" could be any drow, but realistically the assumption is made that the books will continue to be about Drizzt unless he makes a clear distinction.
While I really want BG3 to continue the story, realistically I will play it regardless as long as I am able to import my BG2 characters into it and the rule set isn't hopelessly garbled. If I can't then there really isn't a point. I haven't bought any computer games that were made more recently than 2006 because from what I have seen they all suck. I am hoping that the BG enhanced editions change this trend, but if they do not than I will simply not buy them and wait for something better.
If there is a new BG game, I'd actually like it to have *some* loose relation to the main story, but not a direct follow-on, perhaps a prequel? I also think it would *have* to start with a new player character, preferably quite low level, even level 1.
Comments
It would be marvelous to travel once again to Baldur's Gate city to find out the people heard about the history of Gorion's Ward and created dozens of myths and legends concerning that, maybe even to make arguments with the commoners how they remember him/her and what is the truth behind their fables (quite a similar idea appears shortly in KotOR 2 concerning the character of Revan). And furthermore the new character could have been directly interested in such a story, as a, let's say, champion of some temple concerned with rise of the cult of "a new Bhaal", or a Red Wizard seeking for the Odesseiron's family heir, or a Harper's agent who has to find the former operative, Jaheira, or maybe the child of Imoen, Sarevok, charname, etc, or their young apprentice, or a retired Bhaalspawn hunter, whatsoever.
What I would really despise to find is the continuation is a game which only has in common the brand name, mechanics, and eventually system, as it... the experience would simply not be the same. I think I would have to think all the time about the old (and idealised) parts of the series and unwillingly compare each element of the new story to the old storyline and characters.
Aside from that, a prequel would be pretty awesome too. Especially if Gorion is playable.
If its neither than it doesn't deserve to be called BG3. It could still be a perfectly good game, it just wouldn't be BG3, since that name implies a connection to the other games. Regardless, I would still try to import my party into it anyway possibly by re-creating them via Shadowkeeper or equivalent. If this were not possible I would be much less likely to play it just like I don't play Icewind Dale for that very reason.
Edit: I've read some of the other comments on here and it sounds like many people don't want the story to keep going simply because they can't think of how the story could continue. I have several ideas about the direction that an interesting and balanced game/story could take after ToB. I think that any of my ideas would be fun to play and that there are probably many other directions the game could go that I have not thought of. If I can come up with so many ideas I think it likely that the game designers can too, so I have no doubts whatsoever that the story can and will continue in an interesting direction if that is what the game designers decide to do.
I made the mistake of buying Icewind Dale 2. I will not repeat that mistake by buying some other knockoff version of the infinity engine.
Huh? What was wrong with Icewind Dale II?
Eh. I'm okay with 3rd ed rules. They're sure not 2nd ed, but they're still nice. Honestly as long as BG3 isn't in 4th ed I will be fine. 4th ed is just ridiculous.
BTW, Baldur's Gate 3: The Black Hound ( though was never released ) didn't continue from TOB and had a completely new story. Also as other people already said, IWD2 took place over 30 years after IWD1, wasn't related to IWD1 other than some similar areas - And still was called 'Icewind Dale 2'
Whilst it might be interesting to see 5th edition rules coming in (and would be a big catch for Beamdog if they swung being the first to nab a license of such), so long as the game is D&D, I'd even be willing to go with 4th Edition (which would be quite fitting for a computer game, though the endlessly increasing +X gear is rather obnoxious), and fit the "hundred years later" conceit that's being suggested.
Being in the same general area, it's not out of the question that the player encounter old favourites in the appropriate areas, whilst still opening things up to a much broader scope for new adventures than just putting up and down the Sword Coast for all time.
It doesn't have to follow on with the same character, though if a BG2 save was present I'd very much expect your epilogue state to apply certain features, a temple of CHARNAME, coloured by your alignment, or something similar, some holy artifacts (the equipment CHARNAME was wielding when he ascended, for example), and other bonuses and benefits for owning BG2:EE (sorry original game holders!).
BG3 needn't be a one-off adventure, BG is all about following the adventures of your CHARNAME; if it followed 4e patterns (if someone actually plays it and I'm wrong, feel free to correct me) then BG3A would be 1-10, "Heroic", then BG3B would be 11-20 "Epic", and BG3C would be 21-30 "Legendary" campaigns, a readily settable "scale" which would also go hand in hand with modders campaign creation by supplying the resources required in each standalone "expansion".
But, I'd feel excited about revisiting the Sword Coast, to see what has changed in that much time.
Educate myself about things that has happened, if anything. Should be a lot really, but I don't really read. I mean, in my life anyway so many things have changed in just a decade. Malls are 10 times bigger, some buildings aren't there anymore, new traditions becoming popular.
I wouldn't mind current D&D rules. I'd adapt. Just give me the good story and the interesting characters.
But I'd prefer the artistic freedom of the devlopers.
Edit: After giving a second thought, I decided it is the time to retake the Throne Of Bhaal and overthrow this disgrace Abdel was. A new canon Lord of Murder, make it happen.
BG2 had no relation to BG1 except the storyline. BG2 TOB continued this tradition. It would seem very strange if BG3 suddenly had no plausible link to the earlier games. This is similar to how Warcraft II follows Warcraft I in terms of story, how the various Forgotten Realms book series all follow their characters in some way and don't randomly start revolving around different ones. I would think it very odd, if for instance, R.A. Salvatore wrote another book in his "Dark Elf Trilogy" and had it revolve around a completely different drow elf than Drizzt. Sure, he could claim that the title "Dark Elf" could be any drow, but realistically the assumption is made that the books will continue to be about Drizzt unless he makes a clear distinction.
While I really want BG3 to continue the story, realistically I will play it regardless as long as I am able to import my BG2 characters into it and the rule set isn't hopelessly garbled. If I can't then there really isn't a point. I haven't bought any computer games that were made more recently than 2006 because from what I have seen they all suck. I am hoping that the BG enhanced editions change this trend, but if they do not than I will simply not buy them and wait for something better.