Just throwing my two cents in. I like a lot of the creative ideas here. For me (and a few others have noted this same feeling), I would just like to see another game created using the Infinity Engine with D&D 2e (or 3e) rules. I am a contributor to Pillars of Eternity and sadly do not think that this game will live up to the spiritual-successor hype that it was lauded for.
With all of the assets made in house, a new game could be done in HD, much like Beamdog had wanted to do with the Enhanced Editions of Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale. Whether the plot is a continuation from Baldur's Gate or not is less important to me than having a fun, interesting story line. And, if using the Baldur's Gate name as a marketing tactic helps to ship more copies and get this game made, I'm all for it.
Yes, I know why they did it, but that doesn't mean I think it was a good idea. They didn't need to make a 'canon' PC for Baldur's Gate any more than they did for the Protagonists of any of the Neverwinter games-none of them had a canon protagonist despite having the potential for some incredibly widespread consequences in many of the endings. I can't imagine Mephistopheles emerging from beneath Waterdeep and killing half the city could conceivably be a historical non-issue in the scheme of things, but there you have it. Likewise, in the Dark Alliance games you have the Onyx tower arriving to Baldur's Gate *twice* and laying waste to the city, with nary a mention in the lore.
Point being, there's a fine precedent for Forgotten Realms games 'branching off' from the chronology of the setting, so I don't think it was in any way necessary to capstone the series with another generic designed-by-committee hero character that likely doesn't represent the vast majority of player experiences. But here we are, stuck with Abdel, and WotC *really* knows how to dig their heels in on issues like these.
I am sorry, but have you ever watched classic Dr Who? Daleks invading London. Followed by Cybermen, followed by Dinosaurs, not to mention the Earth cracking open like an egg (oh, sorry that was an alternate reality) or a Giant Robot terrorizing Kent. And all the while, no one believes in Aliens. And that is Just the Pertwee era.
And let's not talk about all of the funny business that took place in the Xmen comic books in the 80s. Writers were falling all over themselves to explain why someone who was formerly dead is now alive and back for vengeance.
Fantasy worlds are always full of 'Retcon' opportunities where potentially cataclysmic seeming events happen with no long term consequences (unless they were written to explain such consequences). It is the nature of fantasy writers to not worry about the future, because another writer is merely going to come along and rewrite it anyway. And no, the Forgotten Realms are not 'the exception'.
My personal opinion as to why they wrote the BG novels was someone saw an opportunity to make money off of an existing franchise. The reason why they didn't write one for Neverwinter nights was because they saw that the BG ones didn't make a lot of money. Simple as that.
@the_spyder Again, not something I'm arguing against. The books were pretty clearly rushed out to cash in on the success of the games.
But were they (and the recent Murder in Baldur's Gate) good for the integrity of the series as a video game? I don't think so.
I also don't see it likely that any retcons will roll back the 'lore' of the Forgotten Realms in relation to the BG games, *particularly* because of the fact that they just released more material on the matter that reinforces the events of the book, including bringing back Bhaal himself. That's a pretty hefty anchor there attaching the events of the books to the setting in a big way.
While I'd love for them to just mulligan the whole affair, we have to keep in mind that WoTC can be rather slow to respond to that sort of thing. It's taken them all this time to respond to outcry against the spellplague/5e changes to the realms with the Sundering, and the Sundering is far from a panacea for the matter. Also the MiBG thing is *part* of that attempt to heal things that Ed Greenwood and Salvatore didn't like with the Sundering. In this case, bringing back another one of the many gods that got killed off between the Time of Troubles and the events of 5e.
So it's not so much a matter of waiting for a retcon-bringing Bhaal back in 5e *was* the retcon-the issue is that it was done in a way that only serves to reinforce the 'canon' status of those awful, awful novels.
In short-WoTC is unlikely to commit to changing their stance on the matter-much less one of such importance to the 'modern' Realms (bringing Bhaal back) anytime soon. Particularly considering bringing Bhaal back was part of Greenwood and Salvatore's grand scheme of 'fixing' the Realms. I wouldn't expect the issue to be re-examined at least until 6e hits, personally.
Yup, that's the crux of the problem with any future FR games if you want them to tie in with the Baldur's Gate series. He was awful before, but easy to ignore, because he wasn't mentioned outside of the drivel that was the books.
But now we have the MiBG adventure arriving with the Sundering, and Abdel is pretty much a fixed point in regards to the 5e setting since they brought back Bhaal. MiBG and Tyranny of Dragons are pretty much their 'introduction to 5e Forgotten Realms'. It's part of the Vanguard of 5e, out even before the core books. Which is why I find it highly doubtful that WoTC would discard it so quickly.
So we are left in a situation where any tie-in with the Bhaalspawn saga is almost certainly going to involve Abdel-which is one of the reasons I'd rather have a game set elsewhere, not connected to the Bhaalspawn saga in any way.
If that's the case, @Catoblepas, then I'm with you. However, if a potential new game has no connection to the Bhaalspawn saga, then I'd much prefer that they simply sell a new game under a new name, rather than pretending that it's "BG3".
Of course, we could avoid this difficulty if WotC could be persuaded to licence a sequel set in the old FR for consistency with what we already have, rather than insisting upon a transition to current FR. Whether that's possible, I don't know. I realise that it might at least be an uphill struggle ... but "consistency with the existing games would sell much better" might be a weighty argument. Hasbro do prefer it when a product sells!
Yeah, Wizards 'doubled down' on the already poor investment of Abdel as Gorion's Ward. (There was a period after the release of the games during which the canon reference to the character who defeated Sarevok, Irenicus, and Amelyssan in the Bhaalspwan saga is simply "Gorion's Ward.") There's a kind of redemption theme to how Abdel is developed post-Bhaalspawn saga. In the following years he remains Chaotic but seems clearly to become more CG than CN or CE as he is depicted in the novels. (I have all the novels but ToB as reference sources but have never found the time or inclination to read them. From skimming the first novel in the series it looks like Athans runs with Abdel's personality being strongly influenced by having the Lord of Murder's essence in him.) He becomes a beloved heroic figure for the people of the city of Baldur's Gate for being instrumental in rescuing the city from a Flaming Fist coup; and actually uncomfortable with his rock star status.
One way of looking at this is that the Bhaalspawn saga is essentially ended with Murder in Baldur's Gate. There may still be some Bhaalspawn roaming around out there, one never knows. But I really doubt that they're going to bring back Abdel. The question now is what were the things that the Bhaalspawn saga set in motion that the protagonist of BG3 will have to save the world from? As @Catobeplas mentioned, Bhaal is slated for a return to the Realms. The catapult is loaded for that plot element to be at the core of BG3.
But despite the fact that Abdel as Gorion's Ward evokes such bitter associations among the fan base, the new story that BG3 will tell can really be just about anything that WotC's writers dream up. I do expect it to have tie-ins to the Sundering, though.
But were they (and the recent Murder in Baldur's Gate) good for the integrity of the series as a video game? I don't think so.
Cross media tie-ins very rarely are good for the integrity of the series. It's the nature of the business that the creative team responsible for one media is rarely even consulted when dealing with another media. Books are ground out as Movie Tie-in's that show little or no resemblance to the source material, all the time with the expectation that they will be 'Good' and make money. And just look at the Resident Evil games/movies.
As far as what WoTC does, I don't keep up with them and haven't read a book of theirs in years. But wasn't the Spell Plague supposed to 'Retcon' a bunch of stuff and align it with 4e? And didn't they further 'Retcon' the situation with some cataclysm or another for 5e? I really don't know. But bringing back Bhaal only effects the broad strokes unless they say something very specific indeed. And then who is to say they won't do what DC did for years with their "Infinite Universe" theory of story telling?
Not to mention the fact that, more often than not, video games are not considered Canon anyway and so therefore can go completely off the reservation. It is my hope that any future installments of the BG series will be given the creative freedom (within limits) to not be tied to the books in any material way. It might be a vein hope.
@Gallowglass Yeah, consistency with the old BG games is key for me, at least. Otherwise I'd just rather the next FR game go under a different name, and not touch on the Bhaalspawn Saga.
@Lemernis Unfortunately, the plot of MiBG doesn't give much wiggle room. Viekang (yes, that Viekang) and Abdel are *the* last Bhaalspawn, and one of them kills the other, before being subsumed by the newly risen Bhaal, going nuts & turning into the Slayer (before getting killed by a low-level party of PCs). So MiBG is basically the capstone on the Bhaalspawn Saga.
@the_spyder The Spellplague and the Sundering (and the Time of Troubles itself) as well as some other events are what WoTC calls 'Realm Shattering Events'. And yeah...usually screw up the Realms in some major way or another.
Unfortunately, the 'Return of Bhaal' retcon isn't so much done in broad strokes. Either Abdel or Viekang kills the other, and is in return killed by the PC party that runs MiBG.
Video games are in an interesting situation. They are allowed to deviate from 'core' FR to a degree, but WoTC seems pretty strict on making sure that the only 'canon' material that can change what the 'core' is-is the written material. This is why Obsidian wasn't allowed to add an ending to 'Mask of the Betrayer' where you got to fight Kelemvor and/or tear down the wall of the faithless. Why there will never be a Dark Alliance 3 (because the third game was going to go to Mulhorand, which was removed in 4e) And likely why Beamdog was kept from making any drastic changes in the EE, like adding an option to rescue Montaron and Xzar, etc.
Still, I hope that games in the future will be given more freedom, perhaps as you called it- an 'infinite universe'.
@Catobeplas I guess there's no way to discuss it without sharing spoilers for Murder in Baldur's Gate...
The way I read the synopsis of Murder in Baldur's Gate is that is that Viekang and Abdel fight to the death; and one of them dies, and the other becomes the Slayer or Ravager, whichever. And that creature is killed by the adventurers for that adventure module.
Now presumably that's the end of the last two known Bhaalspawn. But I didn't interpret either Viekang or Abdel (whoever won the fight) morphing into the Slayer to mark the return of Bhaal. The Slayer form was basically an innate condition of being a Bhaalspawn, I thought.
Does the adventure book (or some other canon source) definitively state that this Slayer creature was Bhaal? Because if so, Bhaal is dead, i.e., was killed by the adventuring party for that adventure module. (Who I guess will eventually be written into canon with names and backstories one day by WotC.
Or is the MiBG book saying that the appearance of the Slayer form somehow signifies that Bhaal was able to assemble his essence again and materialize (in a plane elsewhere?), even though the Slayer form of the last Bhaalspawn was destroyed (in the Prime Material Plane)?
Okay, MiBG is apparently available as a free download from WotC (best I can tell from the link URL). In reading through it I do see that the Bhaalspawn Slayer form's appearance in that battle (even though it was killed) does signify the return of Bhaal in a weakened form. It could well be that the death of the final Bhaalspawn is what made Bhaal's resurrection possible. It will be interesting to see if that is the explanation, as the story is developed more.
Okay, so none of the Bhaalspawn are alive anymore (that's conjecture, but seems likely to me), and Bhaal has arisen. But for me it's fine if the Bhaalspawn saga, per se, ends with this. The new BG3 tale could be about what the Bhaalspawn saga has set in motion--not the least of which is the resurrection of Bhaal! Again, that is a blank page to fill.
It's arguably a good thing that the tale of Bhaal sowing his mortal progeny in an effort to resurrect himself is finished. It worked! But now there is a new story to be told about what grows out of all that... And, for the purposes of continuity both as in terms of storytelling in the Forgotten Realms canon and a sequel CRPG, it is a tale that also has ties-in to the now completed Bhaalspawn saga. At least that's what I'm hoping for, personally.
If the game takes too far to the future, how would we have our favorite NPCs come back? Maybe dwarves like Kagain and Korgan (Yeslick is kinda old) and certainly elves would survive, possibly gnomes as well... but everyone else? There certainly were tons of humans.
I had thought that irenicus (or was it one of the dreams in your own private shadow dimension??) stated that the Slayer was the Bhaalspawn taint, effectively that bit of your soul that is Bhaal's essence. The life or death of which shouldn't "Necessarily" mean anything to Bhaal himself (living or dead) other than another piece of his divine essence is gone (or do I mean free to go elsewhere?).
Various Gods in D&D lore have "Died" and come back to life (as the God formerly known as something unpronounceable). In that, the D&D universe is kind of like the Xmen. No one dies 'For good'. They always come back.
Now presumably that's the end of the last two known Bhaalspawn.
I think that opens up some doors. Everyone assumes that the last "Known" descendant of Bhaal, is in fact THE LAST one. Well, we went through the latter half of BG1 thinking that it was only Charname, only to find that Saravok was also one. Then we go through most of SoA thinking that we are one of only two remaining, only to find in ToB that there are yet more. Even the final ToB ending only has to mean that you are the majority share holder in his essence, not that you have every last drop of it. Just sayin...
If the game takes too far to the future, how would we have our favorite NPCs come back? Maybe dwarves like Kagain and Korgan (Yeslick is kinda old) and certainly elves would survive, possibly gnomes as well... but everyone else? There certainly were tons of humans.
Yeah, the humans are dead by then, presumably (unless there's some magic at work to extend lifespan). half-elves too (IIRC, lifepsan of around 125 years). Half-orcs usually don't make it past 75. Gnomes, dwarves, and elves will still be around, though.
Now presumably that's the end of the last two known Bhaalspawn.
I think that opens up some doors. Everyone assumes that the last "Known" descendant of Bhaal, is in fact THE LAST one. Well, we went through the latter half of BG1 thinking that it was only Charname, only to find that Saravok was also one. Then we go through most of SoA thinking that we are one of only two remaining, only to find in ToB that there are yet more. Even the final ToB ending only has to mean that you are the majority share holder in his essence, not that you have every last drop of it. Just sayin...
Yeah, I agree that any existing Bhaalspawn still alive is a wild card. But per MiBG Bhaal is back with the event of the deaths of the two last known Bhaalspawn, and/or because of the appearance or destruction of the Slayer form of the victor of the battle between the final two. We don't know if the resurrection of Bhaal is because all the Bhaalspawn have died, or whether it is in same way caused by the appearance or destruction of the Slayer. But if I were a betting man, my guess would be it is because all of the mortal progeny that Bhaal had sewn are finally dead.
Yeah, MiBG's resurrection of Bhaal seems to hinge on *all* the Bhaalspawn being dead.
I'd definitely put my money on all the Bhaalspawn being dead.
@Lemernis I can't agree with you that the Bhaalspawn Saga coming to a close in such a way is a good thing. After all, it pretty much invalidates everything in the Bhaalspawn Saga up to that point-all the events in the games are for nought as the Player character dies in the end and their soul is absorbed by Bhaal, who resurrects. Not a pretty ending, IMO. The player character, at least is dead-and not in a pretty way.
I just want another Infinity Engine adventure module. I don't care if we're stuck on the Darksun world (although playing a Thri-kreen would be fun) or if we're supposed to accept Dragonborn as interesting creatures, just give the engine a good sendoff game... EE everything if you can, but a good original adventure wouldn't hurt.
Ya know what? Everything is getting too complicated. Just create a brand new IE swansong game.
@Catoblepas Glass half empty or half full, I guess. Players will have their own individual reactions if this is indeed the end of the Bhaalspawn saga. I guess all I'm saying is that, as for me personally, I'm not particularly troubled by it. If the new story about Bhaal's return forms the spine of BG3's story, the main question I see is how prominently the Bhaalspawn saga history figures into it.
But honestly, if the death of the last Bhaalspawn forms the basis for the new story, then in all fairness I think it can be called Baldur's Gate 3. The new story grows directly out of the previous one. And Bhaal (though weakened) is literally beginning his return in the city of Baldur's Gate.
Then we go through most of SoA thinking that we are one of only two remaining, only to find in ToB that there are yet more. Even the final ToB ending only has to mean that you are the majority share holder in his essence, not that you have every last drop of it. Just sayin...
Indeed your protagonist is not necessarily the last. Depending upon how you played it, Imoen might still be around and might still be a Bhaalspawn, and you might have helped Viekang to escape, although Imoen and Viekang might both count as "minor" Bhaalspawn who don't hold much of the dead god's essence.
However, BG never quite said "There can be only one!" or "To the last shall go the Prize!" ... that was a Highlander meme, not BG.
The idea of the all the Bhaalspawn needing to die in order for Bhaal to be resurrected is conjecture for sure. But tbh BG is pretty derivative to begin with. There are some parallels with Star Wars for example.
According to the study of mythology the same basic stories are constantly being retold over and over anyway. ;-)
If you choose to ascend to godhood in TOB, you just had a bad time. Because lord Ao is the only one who can decide who is god and who not.
So you tried to ascend, Ao declined, you went back to BG because they love you for their freedom (or they fear you). You become duke, you become old (but very slow, because you have power). *MIBG starts here* There will be a annual celebration, and during one of these Viekang shows up and attacks you. You to fight till one of you die, the other gets it's divine essence. The living one turns into the ravager It's weakend and exhausted A party off adventurers comes in and saves the day. Bhaal revives
So here's a thought. If killing off the "Last" (always assuming that is the case) of Bhaal's little kiddies brings Him back to life, was the point ever to have them fight "to the last?" or was it merely to kill each other off? If the latter, then it's his cosmic reset button and he has every reason to do it again.
But here's another question for the group at large. The Pantheon is not small. Who is to say that another God might not have tried or tries something similar? That could make for a whole new cycle "In the vein of" the Bhaalspawn saga.
The Pantheon is not small. Who is to say that another God might not have tried or tries something similar? That could make for a whole new cycle "In the vein of" the Bhaalspawn saga.
It's well-established canon that Bhaal did so, but no other FR god is known to have done anything of the sort. However, yes, I suppose it could turn out that one of the others did something similar in secret. Interesting idea. It'd take some careful writing to avoid looking too much like a boringly mechanical re-cycling of the Bhaalspawn plotline, but I'm sure a good writer could do that.
Certainly a different God would have a different "Flavor". His or her champions or emissaries would, by their nature, be different kinds of challenge. Of course the ultimate "reveal" wouldn't have quite the impact since the majority of the player base would already suspect something of the kind, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be done.
Comments
With all of the assets made in house, a new game could be done in HD, much like Beamdog had wanted to do with the Enhanced Editions of Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale. Whether the plot is a continuation from Baldur's Gate or not is less important to me than having a fun, interesting story line. And, if using the Baldur's Gate name as a marketing tactic helps to ship more copies and get this game made, I'm all for it.
And let's not talk about all of the funny business that took place in the Xmen comic books in the 80s. Writers were falling all over themselves to explain why someone who was formerly dead is now alive and back for vengeance.
Fantasy worlds are always full of 'Retcon' opportunities where potentially cataclysmic seeming events happen with no long term consequences (unless they were written to explain such consequences). It is the nature of fantasy writers to not worry about the future, because another writer is merely going to come along and rewrite it anyway. And no, the Forgotten Realms are not 'the exception'.
My personal opinion as to why they wrote the BG novels was someone saw an opportunity to make money off of an existing franchise. The reason why they didn't write one for Neverwinter nights was because they saw that the BG ones didn't make a lot of money. Simple as that.
Again, not something I'm arguing against. The books were pretty clearly rushed out to cash in on the success of the games.
But were they (and the recent Murder in Baldur's Gate) good for the integrity of the series as a video game? I don't think so.
I also don't see it likely that any retcons will roll back the 'lore' of the Forgotten Realms in relation to the BG games, *particularly* because of the fact that they just released more material on the matter that reinforces the events of the book, including bringing back Bhaal himself. That's a pretty hefty anchor there attaching the events of the books to the setting in a big way.
While I'd love for them to just mulligan the whole affair, we have to keep in mind that WoTC can be rather slow to respond to that sort of thing. It's taken them all this time to respond to outcry against the spellplague/5e changes to the realms with the Sundering, and the Sundering is far from a panacea for the matter. Also the MiBG thing is *part* of that attempt to heal things that Ed Greenwood and Salvatore didn't like with the Sundering. In this case, bringing back another one of the many gods that got killed off between the Time of Troubles and the events of 5e.
So it's not so much a matter of waiting for a retcon-bringing Bhaal back in 5e *was* the retcon-the issue is that it was done in a way that only serves to reinforce the 'canon' status of those awful, awful novels.
In short-WoTC is unlikely to commit to changing their stance on the matter-much less one of such importance to the 'modern' Realms (bringing Bhaal back) anytime soon. Particularly considering bringing Bhaal back was part of Greenwood and Salvatore's grand scheme of 'fixing' the Realms. I wouldn't expect the issue to be re-examined at least until 6e hits, personally.
I'm sorry, that was an unintentional insult to weasels. I'd call him a slime, but Ghaunadar's children are far superior to him.
But now we have the MiBG adventure arriving with the Sundering, and Abdel is pretty much a fixed point in regards to the 5e setting since they brought back Bhaal. MiBG and Tyranny of Dragons are pretty much their 'introduction to 5e Forgotten Realms'. It's part of the Vanguard of 5e, out even before the core books. Which is why I find it highly doubtful that WoTC would discard it so quickly.
So we are left in a situation where any tie-in with the Bhaalspawn saga is almost certainly going to involve Abdel-which is one of the reasons I'd rather have a game set elsewhere, not connected to the Bhaalspawn saga in any way.
Of course, we could avoid this difficulty if WotC could be persuaded to licence a sequel set in the old FR for consistency with what we already have, rather than insisting upon a transition to current FR. Whether that's possible, I don't know. I realise that it might at least be an uphill struggle ... but "consistency with the existing games would sell much better" might be a weighty argument. Hasbro do prefer it when a product sells!
One way of looking at this is that the Bhaalspawn saga is essentially ended with Murder in Baldur's Gate. There may still be some Bhaalspawn roaming around out there, one never knows. But I really doubt that they're going to bring back Abdel. The question now is what were the things that the Bhaalspawn saga set in motion that the protagonist of BG3 will have to save the world from? As @Catobeplas mentioned, Bhaal is slated for a return to the Realms. The catapult is loaded for that plot element to be at the core of BG3.
But despite the fact that Abdel as Gorion's Ward evokes such bitter associations among the fan base, the new story that BG3 will tell can really be just about anything that WotC's writers dream up. I do expect it to have tie-ins to the Sundering, though.
As far as what WoTC does, I don't keep up with them and haven't read a book of theirs in years. But wasn't the Spell Plague supposed to 'Retcon' a bunch of stuff and align it with 4e? And didn't they further 'Retcon' the situation with some cataclysm or another for 5e? I really don't know. But bringing back Bhaal only effects the broad strokes unless they say something very specific indeed. And then who is to say they won't do what DC did for years with their "Infinite Universe" theory of story telling?
Not to mention the fact that, more often than not, video games are not considered Canon anyway and so therefore can go completely off the reservation. It is my hope that any future installments of the BG series will be given the creative freedom (within limits) to not be tied to the books in any material way. It might be a vein hope.
@Lemernis Unfortunately, the plot of MiBG doesn't give much wiggle room. Viekang (yes, that Viekang) and Abdel are *the* last Bhaalspawn, and one of them kills the other, before being subsumed by the newly risen Bhaal, going nuts & turning into the Slayer (before getting killed by a low-level party of PCs). So MiBG is basically the capstone on the Bhaalspawn Saga.
@the_spyder The Spellplague and the Sundering (and the Time of Troubles itself) as well as some other events are what WoTC calls 'Realm Shattering Events'. And yeah...usually screw up the Realms in some major way or another.
Unfortunately, the 'Return of Bhaal' retcon isn't so much done in broad strokes. Either Abdel or Viekang kills the other, and is in return killed by the PC party that runs MiBG.
Video games are in an interesting situation. They are allowed to deviate from 'core' FR to a degree, but WoTC seems pretty strict on making sure that the only 'canon' material that can change what the 'core' is-is the written material. This is why Obsidian wasn't allowed to add an ending to 'Mask of the Betrayer' where you got to fight Kelemvor and/or tear down the wall of the faithless. Why there will never be a Dark Alliance 3 (because the third game was going to go to Mulhorand, which was removed in 4e) And likely why Beamdog was kept from making any drastic changes in the EE, like adding an option to rescue Montaron and Xzar, etc.
Still, I hope that games in the future will be given more freedom, perhaps as you called it- an 'infinite universe'.
The way I read the synopsis of Murder in Baldur's Gate is that is that Viekang and Abdel fight to the death; and one of them dies, and the other becomes the Slayer or Ravager, whichever. And that creature is killed by the adventurers for that adventure module.
Now presumably that's the end of the last two known Bhaalspawn. But I didn't interpret either Viekang or Abdel (whoever won the fight) morphing into the Slayer to mark the return of Bhaal. The Slayer form was basically an innate condition of being a Bhaalspawn, I thought.
Does the adventure book (or some other canon source) definitively state that this Slayer creature was Bhaal? Because if so, Bhaal is dead, i.e., was killed by the adventuring party for that adventure module. (Who I guess will eventually be written into canon with names and backstories one day by WotC.
Or is the MiBG book saying that the appearance of the Slayer form somehow signifies that Bhaal was able to assemble his essence again and materialize (in a plane elsewhere?), even though the Slayer form of the last Bhaalspawn was destroyed (in the Prime Material Plane)?
Okay, so none of the Bhaalspawn are alive anymore (that's conjecture, but seems likely to me), and Bhaal has arisen. But for me it's fine if the Bhaalspawn saga, per se, ends with this. The new BG3 tale could be about what the Bhaalspawn saga has set in motion--not the least of which is the resurrection of Bhaal! Again, that is a blank page to fill.
It's arguably a good thing that the tale of Bhaal sowing his mortal progeny in an effort to resurrect himself is finished. It worked! But now there is a new story to be told about what grows out of all that... And, for the purposes of continuity both as in terms of storytelling in the Forgotten Realms canon and a sequel CRPG, it is a tale that also has ties-in to the now completed Bhaalspawn saga. At least that's what I'm hoping for, personally.
Various Gods in D&D lore have "Died" and come back to life (as the God formerly known as something unpronounceable). In that, the D&D universe is kind of like the Xmen. No one dies 'For good'. They always come back.
I'd also call notice to this: I think that opens up some doors. Everyone assumes that the last "Known" descendant of Bhaal, is in fact THE LAST one. Well, we went through the latter half of BG1 thinking that it was only Charname, only to find that Saravok was also one. Then we go through most of SoA thinking that we are one of only two remaining, only to find in ToB that there are yet more. Even the final ToB ending only has to mean that you are the majority share holder in his essence, not that you have every last drop of it. Just sayin...
I'd definitely put my money on all the Bhaalspawn being dead.
@Lemernis I can't agree with you that the Bhaalspawn Saga coming to a close in such a way is a good thing. After all, it pretty much invalidates everything in the Bhaalspawn Saga up to that point-all the events in the games are for nought as the Player character dies in the end and their soul is absorbed by Bhaal, who resurrects. Not a pretty ending, IMO. The player character, at least is dead-and not in a pretty way.
But honestly, if the death of the last Bhaalspawn forms the basis for the new story, then in all fairness I think it can be called Baldur's Gate 3. The new story grows directly out of the previous one. And Bhaal (though weakened) is literally beginning his return in the city of Baldur's Gate.
However, BG never quite said "There can be only one!" or "To the last shall go the Prize!" ... that was a Highlander meme, not BG.
According to the study of mythology the same basic stories are constantly being retold over and over anyway. ;-)
So you tried to ascend, Ao declined,
you went back to BG because they love you for their freedom (or they fear you).
You become duke, you become old (but very slow, because you have power).
*MIBG starts here*
There will be a annual celebration, and during one of these Viekang shows up and attacks you.
You to fight till one of you die, the other gets it's divine essence.
The living one turns into the ravager
It's weakend and exhausted
A party off adventurers comes in and saves the day.
Bhaal revives
But here's another question for the group at large. The Pantheon is not small. Who is to say that another God might not have tried or tries something similar? That could make for a whole new cycle "In the vein of" the Bhaalspawn saga.
Just an idea.