My favorite Character is a fighter/cleric. I like being just downright cruel in games as well as the fact that the Evil Clerics have a better version of Turn undead in my mind. All that said,
If you try to apply all the lore of D&D official lore in Baldur's Gate, you gonna perceive that everyone, including the devs that made the original game are lying to you, the game has far more break points than timelines. Besides, i can't confirm your source.
@Gilgalahad i made reference to this line of your previous post:
"I assumed when i was playing ToB that solar was lying to try and manipulate me into making a decision she wanted and would be to her advantage."
If that was sarcasm, then yes, i need learn something of this new way of make sarcasm. By the way you could have fooled me cos i never thought that those lines were a joke!
That wasn't the part that was sarcastic so you missed it pppp. :-)
I haven't seen anybody say this in this thread, so I will.
The game writers just messed up with the story. It's a continuity error.
This is a well-known plothole. People bring it up frequently when they are explaining why they don't like Throne of Bhaal and think that it is the weakest of the three games.
Why inconsistency with Irenicus? There's a half-shifted woman in one of the Cloakwood forest parts, that if asked the right questions, will say that her curse was made by Jon Irenicus, but what has there in terms of inconsistency?
"But I only had eyes for one man, Jon Icarus. He was a great and powerful wizard, the only man worthy of my affections, or so I thought. Though I lusted for Jon, he cared little for me, for he had another to whom he was married, lady Tanova."
Notice the name change from Icarus to Irenicus, also mentioning him being married to Tanova?
It's just inconsistant writing, Jon Ircanicus was mentioned in Baldurs Gate 1 as well, they contradicted what was said about him in BG2.
They didn't even get his name right. They gave him as Jon Icarus or something, in addition to telling a story about him which bears no resemblance to anything we know about Irenicus.
Why do you presume i base my doubts in fan patches/mods? I'm playing a vannila BG game, except for BGT. Besides, if the mistake is just in the misuse of words (they just spelled wrong Jon's name when they wrote that string), then there's no inconsistency to be aknowledge.
"But I only had eyes for one man, Jon Icarus. He was a great and powerful wizard, the only man worthy of my affections, or so I thought. Though I lusted for Jon, he cared little for me, for he had another to whom he was married, lady Tanova."
Notice the name change from Icarus to Irenicus, also mentioning him being married to Tanova?
Maybe the fat spider women just pronounced it wrong? :-P
The Centeol's phrase is exactly (just stepped in her hideout a while ago):
"I am curssssed. The archmage Jon Irenicus, cursed me for indignities done for him and his wife by me. I loved jon, but now i hate him, as i hate you and everything. Spiderssss... kill them all."
So as you can see, Centeol spell Jon's name correctly and what we have there is just a lack of continuation for this content in BGII.
Comments
Sorry, I play a villain!
Some of us don't play heroes!
That wasn't the part that was sarcastic so you missed it pppp. :-)
The game writers just messed up with the story. It's a continuity error.
This is a well-known plothole. People bring it up frequently when they are explaining why they don't like Throne of Bhaal and think that it is the weakest of the three games.
Notice the name change from Icarus to Irenicus, also mentioning him being married to Tanova?
"I am curssssed. The archmage Jon Irenicus, cursed me for indignities done for him and his wife by me. I loved jon, but now i hate him, as i hate you and everything. Spiderssss... kill them all."
So as you can see, Centeol spell Jon's name correctly and what we have there is just a lack of continuation for this content in BGII.